Historic Look: What were the polls saying about previous challengers

[TheDonkey]

before the incumbents convention.

I think all this bad news about Kerry in the polls might be over-blown. He still seems strong, only trailing by a few points in battleground states/overall and sometimes still leading by a slim margin.

Does anyone have the historic numbers of others in Kerry's place?

[chookie]

1. PsyOps?

I question these polls too.

Maybe some of it is real -- because vicious propaganda works.

Just like ALL George needed to do was to get his foot in the door of Iraq, to ensure a long term presence there plus the inevitability of a regional middle east war -- all they have to do is get one of these well-produced bits of Nazi propaganda on tv to get the meme out to the brainwashed.

Maybe these lies WILL cause certain "undecideds" (aka Idiots who Don't Pay Attention) to stay with Bush.

The aim of a lot of Bush events is to "show" unanimity. There is no dissension. There is no disagreement. All are breathless with worship of Decisive MBA Popular War PresidentTM Bush. Then we are told this is the Mainstream. Which means that if you aren't on the bandwagon, you aren't.

I suspect at least some of these polls are meant to get people to conform to the propaganda that a Bush victory is inevitable. It is also to demoralize those among the Undecideds to not to bother, to not get involved, because it's all determined.

[jburton]

2. Perot was #1 in Summer of 1992

Perot was ahead of Clinton AND Poppy Bush.

And don't forget how in 2000 Bush* was supposed to win California by double digits, according to his campaign.

:eyes: