Why do we hype two-party GE polls when Bloomberg is almost certain to run

antiimperialist

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jan-12-08 04:44 PM
Original message

Why do we hype two-party GE polls when Bloomberg is almost certain to run

Edited on Sat Jan-12-08 04:45 PM by antiimperialist

commenting on General Election polls analyzing how a Democrat would fare against a Republican is fine...but as long as we bear in mind that Mike Bloomberg is almost certainly going to run for the presidency, and with him in the mix, the dynamics change a lot. How do they change? Beats me. But You bet they will.

So let's not overestimate the validity of a 2 party matchup at this point in time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TwilightGardener

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jan-12-08 04:48 PM
Response to Original message

1. I think they'd have to wait until he actually runs and campaigns--

most of America probably doesn't even know him yet, except for hearing his name attached to the financial news reports.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

OHdem10

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jan-12-08 04:57 PM
Response to Original message

2. On C-Span day before yesterday, a presentation by Campaign

Consultants from the two parties. Chuck Todd, NBC, led the discussion.

During Q&A Bloomberg came up. The GOP strategists freely gave
their approach. If he enters the Race, Frame in such a way
that Public is very clear--Bloomberg is not a Republican--He
is a L I B E R A L. They believe they can kill two birs with
one stone so to speak. Really bore in and paint him the Liberal.

As a Liberal this splits the Democratic Voters. Some will go
for Bloomberg -- some for our Candidate. Guess what the GOP
Wins.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jan-12-08 04:57 PM
Response to Original message

3. where did you hear that from, the media? The same media which told us

there is no inflation, no unemployment, the economy is doing well, there was a connection between Iraq and 9/11, Iraq had WMDs in 2003, Hillary was a shoe-in, guiliani was a shoe-in, thompson was a shoe in, etc. etc. etc.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

aquart

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jan-12-08 05:15 PM
Response to Original message

4. Because it's NOT "almost certain."

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 16th 2024, 10:12 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.