Fwd: Latest Presidential Election Numbers from www.gallup.com

[/ dave /]

Doug Henwood wrote:

> michael at ecst.csuchico.edu wrote:
> 
> > On Democracy Now, Michael Moore says that probable voters does not include
> > many young people -- because they did not vote before.  As a result, Nader
> > is seriously undercounted.
>
> may well be undercounting him. On the other hand, third party
> candidates tend to fade as election day nears.

Except in Ventura's case. The Nader situation feels much the same to me - a relatively broad
base of support, a strong "common sense" factor, considerable wavering between the two top
candidates owing to voter indifference, and the potential for an eleventh-hour groundswell
of younger voters.

I see a fairly sizeable Bush win with an unexpected surge in Nader support underneath, far
outstripping the estimates of most of the pundits - followed by an unremarkable and
strangely inhibited Bush administration owing to a somewhat more vigorous electorate still
energized by the unexpected surprise of the Nader percentages. A contentious debate on
social security in year one will be interrupted by a major foreign policy crisis for Bush a
few months into year two. An inept and largely disjointed Bush administration will be seen
as bungling the situation, with potential catastrophic results, until the unforseen
emergence into the spotlight of an as-yet unnamed personage from the right who manages to
take the reins and exert enough influence at the right moment to extricate Bush from his dilemma.

I see this dark horse running on the Republican ticket against Nader and a lame, last-ditch
Democratic candidate in 2004.

--

/  dave  /