• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What everyone was saying in 2004

If you wish to be seen an illustration of the point of the thread, then by all means. :shrug:

Ah, so the thread does have a point! Good to know.
 
Is nearly a mirror-perfect flip of what's being said today.

To wit, this liberal blogger sounds very, very much like many conservatives today:

Political Strategy - Politics, Strategies, Tactics, News and Opinion

In which he analyzes all the reasons why Kerry was going to win, whatever the polls said. Oct 20, 2004. He gives a rather well-documented case for a Kerry victory, which if you changed the names would fit neatly into today.

Here's a little bit of it, but you need to read the whole thing.



Additionally, Media Matters and Salon were both attempting to make hay about polls oversampling Republicans:

Media relying on flawed polls: Gallup and CBS/NYT skewed toward Republicans | Research | Media Matters for America



Deep breathing over Gallup - Salon.com



Now, does this mean the election will go the same, and the challenger will lose? No. It's not a perfect match, and many other things about the election are different, not least being the difference between the incumbent in 2004 having just gained in the previous midterm, vs. the incumbent in 2012 having suffered an historic "shellacking." The state of the nation, the economy, and many other things are entirely different.

But it's interesting nonetheless to see the sharp, near-perfect reversal of rhetoric.

There was plenty of basis for predicting a Kerry victory. The electoral college was 285 to 251, with 120,000 votes separating him from Bush in Ohio (with the polls saying it would be a Kerry win in Ohio.) Ohio's voter suppression efforts were in full force: 6 hour waits in Urban Cleveland; walk and and walk out voting in all suburban and rural areas.

United States presidential election, 2004 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Was the 2004 Election Stolen?

Allegations of wrong-doing notwithstanding, the Kerry-Bush race in Ohio was completely inside the margin of error of the polls, so either outcome was essentially predicted. The polls said slight Kerry win; the reality was a slight Bush win. All of it operated within the margin of error.... the polls were essentially correct in 2004.
 
There was plenty of basis for predicting a Kerry victory. The electoral college was 285 to 251, with 120,000 votes separating him from Bush in Ohio (with the polls saying it would be a Kerry win in Ohio.) Ohio's voter suppression efforts were in full force: 6 hour waits in Urban Cleveland; walk and and walk out voting in all suburban and rural areas.

United States presidential election, 2004 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Was the 2004 Election Stolen?

Allegations of wrong-doing notwithstanding, the Kerry-Bush race in Ohio was completely inside the margin of error of the polls, so either outcome was essentially predicted. The polls said slight Kerry win; the reality was a slight Bush win. All of it operated within the margin of error.... the polls were essentially correct in 2004.

:shrug: OK.
 
Back
Top Bottom