Majority of Americans are Democrats

[Bronco Bob]

According to Rasmussen.

Democrats 38.7%
Republicans 33.1%

A net advantage of 5.6%

Also meaning 28.2 percent are Independents

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...artisan_trends

So lets pretend. All the Democrats go out and vote for Obama or Hillary.
All the Republicans go out to vote against either of them.
That means over 60% of the Independents would have to vote
Republican to keep either Obama or Hillary out of the White House.
You know that isn't going to happen for Obama, and I doubt there
are 60% of the Independents that hate Hillary that much either.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

[24champ]

Interesting, probably will need a higher number of Independents for McCain because I KNOW there will be a high number of republican people sitting home.

[W*GS]

71.8% of Americans are suckers.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

What a coincidence that W*GS should say that.

That's pretty close to the percentage of Americans who don't approve of his boy Dubya.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

What a coincidence that W*GS should say that.

That's pretty close to the percentage of Americans who don't approve of his boy Dubya.

Yeah, but I am reasonably sure he meant that it was the number of
Democrats and Republicans, it you add the numbers up. Doesn't
he sort of pride himself on being a Libertarian? I used the 28.2%
number for Independents as more or less a generic number for
people who weren't Democrats or Republicans - the Libertarians,
the Greens, Communists, Reform party, Constitution party,
Natural Law Party, and what the hell ever else someone is,
as well as people who actually don't belong to any party.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Majority of Americans are Democrats
According to Rasmussen.

Democrats 38.7%
Republicans 33.1%

This news can't be good for W*GS' blood pressure.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

Yeah, but I am reasonably sure he meant that it was the number of
Democrats and Republicans, it you add the numbers up. Doesn't
he sort of pride himself on being a Libertarian? I used the 28.2%
number for Independents as more or less a generic number for
people who weren't Democrats or Republicans - the Libertarians,
the Greens, Communists, Reform party, Constitution party,
Natural Law Party, and what the hell ever else someone is,
as well as people who actually don't belong to any party.

I know - I just couldn't help but note the irony/coincidence.

[Bronco Bob]

I guess the point I was getting at is that in November 2004
the ratio was 38.6 Democrats to 37.1 Republicans,
with 24.3 as Independents. So with only a 1.5 point
difference, the Independents mattered more.
Only 53% of the Independents had to vote
Republican to give Bush the White House.

So the Democrats have to screw up big time
to lose the 2008 election. The knock against
Hillary is she would rally the conservative base.
But there aren't enough Republicans to matter
this time around and assuming that things
don't get so bitter that she can't keep all
the Democrats, she only has to win over
40% of the Independents and she is POTUS.

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

What a coincidence that W*GS should say that.

Only an idiot like you can't figure out that 38.7 + 33.1 = 78.1.

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

That's pretty close to the percentage of Americans who don't approve of his boy Dubya.

It's also pretty close (tho' still too high) to your IQ, dipwad.

[Crushaholic]

The wildcard is that we don't know how many people will actually vote. Getting all the people in that Rasmussen poll to the voting booth in November could prove problematic. On paper, your theory doesn't look good for the Republicans. However, on paper, Ron Paul should be running away with the nomination with all the internet support he has...

[SoCalBronco]

Now get to the part where 38% equals a majority of Americans.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

The wildcard is that we don't know how many people will actually vote. Getting all the people in that Rasmussen poll to the voting booth in November could prove problematic. On paper, your theory doesn't look good for the Republicans. However, on paper, Ron Paul should be running away with the nomination with all the internet support he has...

But we are talking about a real pollster, Rasmussen.
Not some internet geek's fantasy poll where every
Paulista rushes in to stuff the ballot box for Ron Paul.
Now for the major candidates the polling firms
are screwing the pooch big time. But for Ron
Paul most have been fairly accurate.

Take the Super Tuesday projected and actuals for Ron Paul
from the Real Clear Politics averages for state primaries.

State - projected - actual
Alabama 5.3 - 2.7
Arizona 4.0 - 4.2
California 4.5 - 4.2
Connecticut 4.0 - 4.0
Georgia 4.5 - 2.9
Illinois 7.3 - 5.0
Massachusetts 2.7 - 2.7
Missouri 4.0 - 4.5
New Jersey 4.5 - 4.8
New York 4.0 - 6.4
Tennessee 6.0 - 5.6

Nowhere in any primary was Ron Paul predicted to be in double digits
and nowhere in any primary states did Ron Paul break double digits.

*Ron Paul did pull double digits in some caucuses, but a caucus
is much harder to poll so most polling organizations skipped them.
And caucuses tend to attract more of the fanatics, so they
don't really reflect the mood of the average voter who will
vote in a general election. Even primaries are somewhat
biased because the voters in a primary are more dedicated.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by SoCalBronco

Now get to the part where 38% equals a majority of Americans.

38.7% > 33.1% > 28.2%

[Bronco Bob]

Another bad sign for Republicans.

Democrats Hugely Outvoting GOP

After Super Tuesday, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) has every right to declare
himself the Republican presidential frontrunner, but he has miles to go in
getting himself and his party in shape to face his Democratic opponent.
One measure of his task is that more than 14.6 million Democrats went
to the polls on Tuesday and only 9 million Republicans -- indicating a vast
enthusiasm gap between the parties.

McCain polls reasonably well against both Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton
(D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), but they have a sagging economy
and a massive national desire for change going for them in addition to
the energetic desire among Democrats to get the White House back.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ocrats_hu.html

[Kaylore]

McCain polls reasonably well against both Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton

Reasonably is an understatement. That said, it will be funny when 20% of Republicans don't vote for McCain in the general.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Reasonably is an understatement. That said, it will be funny when 20% of Republicans don't vote for McCain in the general.

Mort Kondracke is one of the Fox News talking heads. Still it was interesting
that the ratio of Dem to GOP voters got even his attention.

[24champ]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Reasonably is an understatement. That said, it will be funny when 20% of Republicans don't vote for McCain in the general.

There's so much material for the Dems to run on against McCain...

Too Old
Dems will thank McCain for siding with them on key issues, further alienating the base.

Will Goldwater'd McCain by overplaying the 100 years in Iraq comment among other comments about the situation.

McCain is not presidential.


A whole host of ideas the Dems can destroy McCain on...

[24champ]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

Mort Kondracke is one of the Fox News talking heads. Still it was interesting
that the ratio of Dem to GOP voters got even his attention.

For the record Mort is an idiot. One of the few I hate on the all-star panel.

[baja]

Your right McCain does not look presidential.

[24champ]

Originally Posted by baja

Gollum/Huck 08. PRICELESS.


Hell that's a funny ad in the making, just make a 3D Ad on McCain as Gollum running around telling Congress to go F themselves.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LMFAO!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Let's see W*gs try to spin it so that 23 million American were working for dot.com companies.

[W*GS]

Presidents don't create jobs.

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by W*GS

Presidents don't create jobs.

What about when they create new positions?