Still Undecided?
 

I saw a news item today to the effect that there is still a sizable number of undecided voter's for Tuesday's upcoming election. What's up with that? They've been subjected to months of campaign ads, endless newspaper and magazine articles, countless radio and TV shows and commentaries, God knows how many discussions on the Internet and it's only 5 days away and they STILL don't know? What? Are they hoping Hillary Clinton will enter the race at the last moment and save us all? :eyebrow:

Eenie, Meenie, Miney, Moe.

They're waiting for a real scandal, like Bush flipping the bird or having some photoshopped soldiers in an ad, or Kerry mentioning Cheney's daughter.

I really hate the media. Of all the things to pick up and run with, the photoshopped ad is what catches their fancy? That's worth a humorous aside, at most, but they have campaign officials on to promise to reedit the ad. I mean, I'm glad something's finally sticking, but this?

:rant:

Kerry.

The guy from Zogby International, the polling place, called it pretty confidently for Kerry on the Daily Show tonight. He said that the majority of undecided voters usually break from the incumbent and are, essentially, waiting to make sure John Kerry doesn't have anything groundbreakingly wrong with him or isn't a dangerous minority. Sounds kinda similar to what went on in 2000, with Gore essentially being a third Clinton term, and the election being tight, a lot of the undecided voters went Bush and made it just close enough that the election could be decided by other means.

It's also worth noting that the Zogby guy said that if the election were simply between Bush and Not-Bush, Not-Bush would win in a landslide. You people don't like your President, and are essentially just worried about whether you think Kerry is gonna be worse.

One of the more interesting things, though, is that he said that, no matter what happens, with last-year's scandal, new paperless voting machines, all the ripping up of registrations this year and all the other assorted bullshit, odds are good that the winner's authority will take a while to be recognized. Personally, I still haven't recognized Bush's authority from the last election (though he did get a majority of the vote: he got 5, and Gore only got 4), so this doesn't change much for me, but it'll be interesting to see how the country reacts to yet another tight race under even more fishy conditions. That is, of course, if GW lets the election happen. PATRIOT says he can delay the election if there is a "threat". For as long as he wants.

Edit: This is quite fitting. Apparently, 1/3 of the voters *already* call bullshit.

It's not that difficult to anticipate. All the speeches and rhetoric and mudslinging is being consumed and digested by the public as they try to sort out for themselves what's what. Push all that through the sphincter that is our current election standards and on Nov. 3 what have you got? Really...

If you haven't been able to decide who to vote for by now, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. I can understand if people were undecided in 2000...after all, the choices were so great! But we've known who the candidates would be for several months and there's more than enough information out there on these guys (all of them) to make an educated decision. The debates should have settled things once and for all, if you couldn't make up your mind before then.

Alph that's weird because Zogby told Novak on Monday that Bush would win.
I saw the Daily Show interview and I think he was being coy, but here you have the nation's premier pollster...

Wasn't Zogby the one that had Ohio ahead for Bush by some ridiculous figure early in the week, while everyone else had it close?

Yeah, I'm done with polls. I'm gonna stick with my own predictions...my main one is that Kerry is going to get 300 electoral votes.

It is both a great thing and a tragic thing that education in any form is not a prerequisite for voting in this country. The biggest blithering idiot's vote counts exactly the same as the most savvy political analyst's vote.

Scientists refer to this as "chaos theory".

No kidding. I hate to say this because it smacks of elitism, but sometimes I think voter's should have to pass some sort of simple quiz to be allowed into the polls. Stuff like:

1) Please locate the continent of North America on a world map.

2) Who was the first president of the United States?
a) George Bush Sr.
b) George Washington
c) George Bush Jr.
d) King George III

3) Which side won the Civil War?
a) The Confederate States
b) The Iran Contra's
c) The Northern States
d) North Vietnam

4) What is the supreme court?
a) A Motown group featuring Diana Ross
b) The highest judicial court in the US
c) The place where they hold the Wimbleton tennis match

5) What was the civil rights movement?
a) An attempt by teachers to make students learn better manners
b) An attempt by civil service workers to get paid more for doing even less
than they already did before.
c) A movement mostly led by black Americans to ensure that people of all
ethnic backgrounds and race were given equal rights as guaranteed by
the constitution.

You'd have to answer all 5 questions correctly before being allowed into the polls. That would probably weed out a good 50% of the voters! :D

They just like to be courted! Attention-whores! :D

I'm still waiting for the Washington Redskins game this weekend. I saw some commentary that indicates that if they win, the incumbent wins, and if they lose the incumbent loses.

I read about that on LD. Here's how I see it...Brett Favre is hurting physically and mentally. The Washington NFL team just sucks. Packers by 10 points.

The skins sometimes rise to the occasion, surprising everyone, even in suck ass seasons.

Washington by 3.