Clark gets beat by Bush 53 to 28 in latest NBC/WSJ Poll

[unfrigginreal]

Should we ignore this?

[arcos]

1. Thanks! n/t

[Zynx]

2. Yeah. How about it?

What say you Clarkies?

[pmbryant]

3. That is hardly plausible

I think that poll can be safely discounted. It is simply not plausible that the Dem nominee would get only 28%, no matter who he or she may be.

--Peter

[Kool Kitty]

25. Right.

What pmbryant said.

[VOX]

4. Only in that there are 11 months until the election...

And the numbers could be the other way around by then -- :evilgrin:

[kentuck]

5. Bush is not going ot beat anybody 53% to 28%...

You or I could get more than 28% of the vote. Bush is not that popular. It's so unbelievable it's ridiculous.

[jpgpenn]

6. Why not? the media ignores all things positive...

about Clark anyway, why not this? OOHH right, this is negative , so they must now use it to show America their plan is working.

[jmaier]

7. I ignore

all the pseudo-GE poll matchups at this point in the process. I think only the early(ish) state primary polls have any meaning and even those might see some surprises by polling day. Bush matchups won't have any meaning until we have a nominee.

[Jerseycoa]

8. Link? (eom)

[kentuck]

9. No matter what any poll says, the Democrat will get @ 50% of vote...

Democrats are not that turned off that there will be millions less voting this time around than last time. No matter if the candidate is Joe Lieberman or Howard Dean, he will get close to 50% of the vote. If the polls do not reflect that, I cannot give them any credibility.

[Bombtrack]

13. No, it's 40 percent

head to head polls like this are extremely tenuous, particularly because Bush probably has about 10 times the name recognition that Clark has

[ozone_man]

10. Bush is now the undisputed military leader.

Clark's credentials are less important now.

Time to define the debates in terms of mounting domestic problems at home, I hope.

Of course we have to keep hammering Bush on the lack of WMDs, prior 911 knowledge, world diplomacy failures, etc., but let's bring the debate focus back to the important domestic issues.

[jpgray]

11. Tit for tat poll comparison

What a great way to spend time at DU. It goes without saying that commenting upon the Dean supporter version isn't the point, it's the concept itself that is silly, not whose supporters are currently making petty use of it.

[unfrigginreal]

17. Thanks dad

nt

[_Jumper_]

12. Clark has 90% of the support Dean has...

...despite having received only a fraction of the media coverage Dean has received...

[Lefty48197]

14. The Wall Street Journal says the Republican will win?

Geez, next thing you know, FOX "news" will tell us that Bush is unbeatable too.

[IranianDemocrat]

15. What's the point of this?

?

[Renew Deal]

16. This sounds like BS.

Everyone in the Dean thread says that Clark wasn't even mentioned. Where are you getting this or are they all deaf?

[librechik]

18. at this point the only result worth anything is Bush v ANYBODY

just stop the immature gloating and whining and competitiveness and work together please.

[mikehiggins]

19. Pretty much

The only polls that count are the ones that people vote in.

[Ilsa]

20. Polling report has them at

49% for Shrub vs 43% for Clark in early December. This is a close one. Today's polling reflects a temporary blip over SH's capture. One I bet will die down pretty quickly.

[nn2004]

21. Ignore it and vote Dean and/or Kucinich

The sooner we back away from Clark the better. I refuse to slag the man but we can do much better.

[Spirochete]

22. Who did they poll?

The RNC? Bush is not beating any Democrat by that kind of a margin, I wouldn't think.

[ecstatic]

23. Now that Saddam has been found, Clark's military background is obsolete

Nobody cares about the war nor the military anymore. Saddam has been found. Woo hoo! People are now interested in things like the economy.

[Tom Rinaldo]

26. Too simplistic

Peoples emotions rise and fall immediately after good or bad news. After good news grows stale the elation fades. After bad news grows stale resignation or denial sets in. Wait untill another Embassy gets bombed, or a couple of helicopters get shot down.

The point though is not just Iraq. Foreign Affairs in total are on the map now for the Electorate i a way they simply haven't been for the last three Presidential Elections.

[Mz Pip]

24. Clinton was polling

at about 4% this time in 1991.

Yes, we should ignore it.

MzPip
:dem:

[TrueAmerican]

27. Dean's support dropped more

Dean support dropped by 8 points. Clark's only dropped 6 points. So actually the gap between Dean and Clark has narrowed.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20031216-122357-3571r.htm
The Saturday numbers pitting Bush against Dean, "if the election were held today," Bush at 51 percent, Dean at 39 percent. On Sunday, after events in Iraq were dominating the news cycle, Bush's lead increased to 52 percent while support for Dean dropped to 31 percent.

Bush led Clark, 50 percent to 34 percent in the Saturday numbers. By Sunday, support for the president had risen to 53 percent while Clark's dropped to 28 percent..

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20031216-122357-3571r.htm

[ecstatic]

28. The media engineered Dean's demise

Notice how they talked Dean down in the polls immediately after Saddam was found. Immediately after the news broke, all I heard were journalists talking about "how this can't be good for Dean"--and thats BEFORE any public polls had been given!


Not only that, but they had the nerve to say that the Dem candidates have nothing to bark about anymore since Saddam was found--that all the Dem candidates had going for them was their opposition to the war. WRONG AGAIN!! It was the dishonest media that only focused on the discussions about war, leaving all discussions about the economy and jobs uncovered.

[unfrigginreal]

29. LOL

Yeah, that's one way to look at it. :think: