America, The 50/50 Voting Nation

Everyone remembers the Gore v. Bush campaign, right? Well remember how it was like a "tie". This "tie" election, or AKA 50/50 voting is sweeping the US this year. News sources such as Reuters and The Economist both had studies showing it will be a close race for democratic nominee; John Kerry and the current president; George W. Bush. Every day the polls shift saying 46% for Bush and then next 57% for Bush. All I can say is that this race will be a close sweep. Yet again, I presume the Electoral College will have some say in the outcome. As the pressure builds on who will be America's next president, all we can do is wait.

~This article was MY actual WRITING. Facts are from the following sources: Zogby, Reuters, AP, and The Economist.~

Those news polls arent accurate at all. No one ever asked anyone I know who they were going to vote for this year. So I guess we're just going to have to wait and see whats going to happen during this election.

First, I think this belongs in the mud pit, it's not really a scandal.

It's too early to tell. What I find interesting is that while Bush's numbers have been droping amid all of these attacks against him these past two months, Kerry's have been steady.

Why is this, you ask? Well, since you asked, I'll tell ya The entire Kerry campaign so far has been a smear campaign against Bush. Bush's has been the same, but we all know where Bush stands. Kerry hasn't taken a stand on a thing. He hasn't said how he will be better at the war on terror, the economy, education, etc. He's just been attacking Bush. So people aren't going to him as he attacks Bush, they're suddenly undecided or moving towards a third party.

This speaks wonders for that 12% to 17% of the population who is doing this, because it means they care about the issue, not the party. As soon as, if ever, Kerry defines how he will be better, we will see a shift in poll numbers and most of those undecided people will move to one candidate or the other. At that point, we can decide if it will be a close race or not. After all, it's only June (about). The election doesn't come until November.

I know, in a sence. But also, anylists studied the patterns of the campaigns and sometimes you have to follow some sources. I used factual ones myself. It is quite interesting how history repeats itlesf in nearly every aspect in the US.

Originally posted by cma
I know, in a sence. But also, anylists studied the patterns of the campaigns and sometimes you have to follow some sources. I used factual ones myself. It is quite interesting how history repeats itlesf in nearly every aspect in the US.

It would be really great if you started posting your sources. It would add a lot of credibility to your arguements. I know I'm interested in these sources, and if you look at the views to replies ratio on most threads, more people then myself are interested in the source. Let us know!

Is that good? So you mean I am getting better at this forum thing? Anyways you can see a good source at www.economist.com and do a search for 50/50.

FYI: I wrote this article on MY own. All sources are direct but not plajurized from.

Yeah, Kerry REALLY needs to get on top of his GAME. He needs to start being MORE aggressive and really letting people know where he stands! Come to think of it, this election I don't know where Kerry stands on hardly anything, other than his opinion of bush. However, form the polls I have seen, the undecided/3rd party falls at about 9 percent. But I have only seen a few recent polls. What I do know, however, is that hsitory has shown that when an incumbent's ratings begin falling not too long before the election, the challenger usually wins. However, to be honest, I can't see Kerry winning this one. From what I have seen, he doesn't say anything about any of the issues besides the Iraq war, Bush's incompetence, etc. Another thing that worries me is the implementation of electronic voting machines...

Zogby has just completed a poll which focus is on the Battleground states.

This was reported on Hardball tonight.

Zogby says if election was held today Kerry wins by landslide in Electoral College by 320-218.

It is very early for this to mean much but Zogby says the edge is with Kerry because of the unusually low number of "undecided's".

The popular vote will be still close to 50-50 but in the E.C. It's Kerry by a mile.

Here are some early news links to story.........a quick read seems they do not have the survey's charts yet.

Originally posted by cma
Is that good? So you mean I am getting better at this forum thing? Anyways you can see a good source at www.economist.com and do a search for 50/50.

FYI: I wrote this article on MY own. All sources are direct but not plajurized from.

No, I mean give us your sources for coming to the conclusions you came to. If you read any scientific book, they end with all their sources. Often times 3 or 4 pages of them. Though they may present a phenomenal take on an issue I already know, I still like to check their sources. If their sources are dubious or not even there, I question the results no matter how much I want to believe them.

I'm asking you to do the same. Though I may agree or disagree with your take on an issue, it would be very helpful if you stated the sources where you came to the conclusion you came to. ATS has some very educated people reading it. If you read through sources and come to an opinion, no one will believe you until you state where the information came from that caused you to come to the conclusion you did. That was why Banshee closed the thread you started about a corporate republic being developed (which I believe is taking place). You wouldn't disclose where you got the information that caused you to believe what you do.

The post I made that you percieved as a threat was made to make you aware of this in a round-a-bout way. You need to present to the ATS crew corroborating evidence that your opinion is based on fact, not paranoia, or no one will believe you. We don't know you, so therefore we don't trust you. If you give us evidence to trust you, it might be easier to present a viewpoint in the future. TheNeo and Pupp just expected us to believe them at their word, and they got banned because of this.

To put it in a real world perspective, if Robert Byrd, the guy who was in the KKK and then became the main guy for the democratic party, were to tell you that african-americans were descendants to neandrathols(sp?) not cromagnun(sp?), with no evidence or other sources corroborating him, would you believe him? You don't know him personally, so you have no reason to trust him. The same situation is here. We don't know you, so why should we trust your ideas. You need to give corroborating evidence. As I stated in my scientific theories becoming law thread, I was going to find a .gov site that corroborated my claim. I didn't say website, I said a .gov site to prove my law claim. Any other site will be in question. And I'm a person who has been here a while. I'm a person, at least in my mind, whose opinion is fairly respected. I still need to present evidence. No one will take my take on the law at face value, and rightly so. If a moderator came and said "this is the fact, and there's no refuting it" with no evidence, I would question them, too. As many here at ATS would. That's what makes ATS so great, you need evidence to back up every claim.

So no, that wasn't good, because you didn't present any sources. If you give us reason to believe where you're coming from, it changes from an emotional issue to a factual issue. And that kind of issue is where you get people changing their minds.

Pay no mind to that pompus ass............

Say it any damned way you like..........Let Mr. Perfect Format stew in his juices.............this is America, the last time I looked, so speak your mind.

some people...............

Originally posted by gmcnulty
Pay no mind to that pompus ass............

boy if i was a mod i'd ban you for that, he wasnt being rude to cma, he was just stating we need sources to confirm what cma stated, relax a bit...