« Battleground States Results | Main | Democracy Corps Post-Debate Panel Survey Gives Kerry Solid Win »

Kerry Edges Bush in ABC News, Gallup Post-Debate Polls; Wins Independents Easily

John Kerry beat George Bush 44-41 percent of RV viewers of the 2nd presidential debate, with 13 percent undecided in an ABC News Poll. But Kerry beat Bush among self-identified independents 44-34 percent. (The respondents were self-identified 35 percent Democrats, 32 percent Republicans and 29 percent Independents.)

Kerry beat Bush 47-45 percent of RV debate-viewers in a CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. But Kerry beat Bush among self-identified independents 53-37 percent. (The respondents were self identified 38 percent Republicans, 32 percent Democrats and 30 percent Independents.)

Comments

way to go, kerry.

why won't the main stream media report these internals?

I am sure that Kerry beat Bush by 10 to 1 among people who only watched the first half hour of the debate. What did his people tell him --"George, if you say it loud enough, people will believe you." My favorite line was Jeff Greenfield "Mr. Bush, two words -- 'anger management.'

Thanks for the news on independents.

Bush did much better this time than last, but I still think that the main dynamic of the debates is to demolish the straw man that the Republicans have constructed. Kerry comes across as reasonable and presidential. Which he is. That completely undermines the Republican attacks. In contrast, there's not a lot that Bush can do to undermine the Democratic attacks.

Paul C. is right. Bush came off like a raving lunatic for the first 45 minutes. However, I thought Bush got the better of JK on the domestic issues, where his folksy, simple-minded stuff came across more succinctly than Kerry's thoughtful, but long-winded responses.

Most people aren't smart enough to follow along with complex lines of political reasoning, so I hope Kerry can sort of sharpen his domestic stuff before next Wed.

Bush gave tired excuses for poor performances. He did not appear to have a real grasp of either Foreign Policy or Domestic issues.

Lookin' good for K/E, but I'm still waiting for an Oct surprise(s). Read the Atlantic Monthly essay on Karl Rove if you don't understand my anxieties.

It is disappointing that with such a strong performance by Kerry (better than the first debate, although the improvement in Bush was enormous), the polls wouldn't show Kerry with a stronger win. The press will insist that it was a draw.

Kerry FINALLY introduced the point that the whole 'wishy-washy' (but he was talking about flipflops) issue was a mere spin. He needs to explain that more clearly.

The questions were also really favorable to Kerry. I really admired Kerry's frankness with his "it's not a matter of if but when" response to the question about another 9-11, but he should also have been more specific about the history (unsure when the 1993 attack and the following attack in E Africa he alluded to was? -- chalk that up to tiredness). In my own mind, Kerry's substantive forthrightness in answering that question contrasts with Bush's "And he put a trial lawyer on the ticket" line. The irony of the latter is that trial lawyers are often resented as people who profit by demagogically appealing to juries in an emotional manipulative way -- just like Bush was doing in his approach.
KERRY HAS GOT TO STOP USING THE WORD "PLAN" SO OFTEN. He needs to sharpen his attacks on Bush's policies on health care as for the corporate interests.. He could have left Bush looking like an ogre in response to the environment question. He should take the opportunity as he lays into Bush in the last debate on either tax policy for the wealthy and/or pro-corporate health care policy to give a good NICE AND ACCURATELY HARSH picture of Bush the worst kind of stereotypical big business Republican and go into at least three or four specific environmental policies. Kyoto ISN'T winning him any points with the mainstream, although I support it. How he has made backroom deals with corporations that even the Republicans wouldn't pass thru Congress and then name SEVERAL NEW ones: mercury policy should be specifically described, as well as one or two other horror stories like that.
On jobs, Bush keeps citing the 1.9 million figure. That is his BEST(and only) year of job growth, after massive declines, and it's worse than the AVERAGE year of 8 years of Clinton. That punches Bush down at his main point on that issue.
It doesn't even keep up with the growth of the potential job market.
He was a little confusing at the key point on how he had been consistent on the Patriot Act -- the issue of being a flipflopper and explaining how he isn't is probably more important than the issues of the Patriot Act as far as winning the elections. Kerry focuses on the issues -- Bush on winning the election. But still, Kerry had a slightly better demeanor than Bush and was MUCH stronger on the substance. He answered the questions and devastated Bush's arguments. The polls should (have) reflected that -- though perhaps the talking heads (with the conservatives insisting it was a big win for Bush and the liberals taking a balanced approach of a narrow win for Kerry) have an impact.

Concerning last night’s debate, I think George Bush proved once again that he is an angry man, and his performance made me wonder if he has the emotion wherewithal to continue in his high office. I wholeheartedly endorse Dick Meyer’s observation at cbsnews.com, " . . . If a master political scientist had been released tonight from a cryogenic time warp and watched the debate in a current events vacuum, he would have thought John Kerry was the incumbent president."

What I think are really interesting about the immediate response to the debate are the polls. Look at ABC's and CNN's internals. CNN's poll was 38 percent Republican, 32 percent Democratic, and 30 percent independent. ABC's internals showed 35 percent Democrats and 32 percent Republicans. It doesn't matter whether the polls had more Republicans or Democrats. In both polls, Kerry had the edge.

That fact suggests to me that the independents went strongly, strongly for Kerry. Indeed, while Gallup had Kerry winning 47-45, among independents, he won 53-37 and among women, 51-40. Bush may have further solidified his base, but that was something that was already solid. Kerry reassured all those who first swung his way in the earlier debate, and he brought some new independents his way. Where it really matters, Kerry won the thing walking away.

Two points.
1. Bush and Cheney are increasingly desperate. So their rhetoric will be increasingly shrill and over-the-top. They have painted themselves in a corner with their scare campaign.

2. In each debate there was an initial effort in the media to prop up Bush and Cheney's performances. They quickly abandoned the effort in the first debate in the face of Bush's obvious stumbling. With Cheney/Edwards and last night the effort is more resilient, but has weakened after time as the consensus pointed out reality. They are the incumbents defending a sorry record. They are defensive and angry. They insist they are right and their defense consists of outright lies or distortions or browbeating. All Kerry has to do is sound reasonable and truthful.

Expect them to now go back to the August formula - attack Kerry with lies and slander. But now people have seen and heard Kerry. That swiftboatliar won't hunt.

RE: Angry Man

Between the blatant lies and the anger Bush's public persona is morphing from "Someone you would like to have a beer with"* to Richard Nixon.

*I am only quoting the spin, I always thought that line was a load of nonsense

I think that Bush really damaged himself with undecided women in the second debate. His demeanor in the first half was the sort of swaggering, cocksure braggart that most women detest. He was rude to many of the questioners, particularly the older man who asked about drug reimportation and the last woman, who asked about his mistakes. Women tend to be more attuned to social niceties. Third, the abortion question. Of course rabid pro-life women would go for Bush. But his refusal to understand any nuances to that issue, and his favoring the fetus at the expense of the mother's health or even her life, had to make many women cringe. Expect to see Kerry rise a few points in the next polls because of this.

Mimikatz, you wrote:

I think that Bush really damaged himself with undecided women in the second debate. His demeanor in the first half was the sort of swaggering, cocksure braggart that most women detest. He was rude to many of the questioners, particularly the older man who asked about drug reimportation and the last woman, who asked about his mistakes. Women tend to be more attuned to social niceties. Third, the abortion question. Of course rabid pro-life women would go for Bush. But his refusal to understand any nuances to that issue, and his favoring the fetus at the expense of the mother's health or even her life, had to make many women cringe. Expect to see Kerry rise a few points in the next polls because of this.

Posted by Mimikatz at October 9, 2004 05:22 PM
===========================

I absolutely agree.

All the talking heads need to pull their HEADS out of their collective ass and look around. The ONLY voters who matter are those in the middle who are undecided or persuadeable. If oozing faux machismo would have won them, they wouldn't be persuadeable now.

Many woman respond very negatively to men to exhibit the behaviors of Bush, mainly because most have been bullied by some similiar sounding male all too often. They know it instantly as the boyfriend or husband who was always going to have things his way, and wanted to shout down opposition. Or the boss, or the co-worker, or the husband of a friend.

Bush had to have lost all women who were anywhere near the fence.

I am predicting that Kerry will gain the lead from the second debate and not lose it again.

We should begin to see evidence of it tomorrow or Tuesday.

> Bush and Cheney are increasingly desperate. So their
> rhetoric will be increasingly shrill and over-the-top.
> They have painted themselves in a corner with their
> scare campaign.


I think the Kerry camp needs to be careful in the final debate. They're saying the subject (domestic issues) should favor the Dems, but a *lot* of observers are saying "Shrub" actually fared better in debate#2 than when he had to defend his failed Iraq strategy.
---
My fear is "Shrub" and the GOP will try to exploit the usual cultural wedge issues in the final debate, and Kerry will give some vague Dukakis-esque responses. Maybe they will accuse the Democrats of banning the bible and requiring men to marry other men... It's what they do when their Iraq policy is in shambles, there are fewer jobs than four years ago and the federal government is drowning in red ink thanks to the tax cuts.


MARCU$