Kerry Holds 3-point Lead in Rasmussen 3-day Rolling Poll Today

[flpoljunkie]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

Kerry 46% Bush 43%

Election 2004 Presidential Ballot

Bush
43%

Kerry
46%

Other
5%

Not Sure
5%

RasmussenReports.com

Tuesday May 04, 2004--For the second straight day, the Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll shows Senator John F. Kerry with 46% of the vote and  President George W. Bush with 43%.

This is the first time Kerry has held a three point edge in nearly a month (since April 7 and 8). He has not held a three point advantage for three consecutive days since March.

[Larkspur]

1. That's it? A 3-pt lead? Whoopee doopee do

Considering the hammering Bush is taking, Kerry should be up by 23. He needs to get off his behind and campaign harder.

[mistertrickster]

3. Well, I think you're misunderestimating the power of the incumbency

Coupled with the view of a lot of misguided folks that "we have to support the president while we're in a war."

Plus, Kerry hasn't really begun to fight in the battle ground states. Bush spent 50 million to slander the man, and he's still looking strong.

I see this poll as good news at this point in time.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

8. Yes. Bush spent 50 million and he got shit for it.

It looks good for Kerry.

[trogdor]

11. Well, we've heard all Bush's BS before.

It plays like Gilligan's Island reruns. Hackneyed and tired.

[glarius]

4. If you don't mind a word from a non-American

Watching the TV coverage he's getting (NOT) down there, it's amazing that he's leading at all...CNN breaks in to cover Bush every time he moves, and cover his whole speech....Kerry is rarely covered, and never in total, so far as I have seen....I think I see more about Kerry here on Canadian television than I do on American....He's really fighting Bush AND the media, it seems to me.

[qazplm]

6. Thats the power of the presidency though

its always been that way, not just with Bush.

Having said that, the press I think hasnt decided whether they want to treat Kerry like Gore or treat him like Clinton in 92, but I suspect they are leaning towards treating him like Gore.

For whatever reason, I think the press is as enamored of Bush as they were of Clinton.

[glarius]

7. You're not speaking to an ignoramus here

"the press is as enamored of Bush as they were of Clinton."...Are you kidding!....Clinton got no favouritism from the media...He survived in spite of the media also....

[flpoljunkie]

9. Glarius, your observations are right on...

Our feckless press cannot be bother to do their jobs as jouralists--which is to monitor the sources of power, namely the Bush administration. Instead, they chase after and mindlessly repeat every piece of crap faxed to them by the Rove smear machine.

Our press corps is an embarrassment to the profession; they are spineless, as well--refusing to question the most inept and corrupt administation in my lifetime. They have allowed Dick Cheney, of the five deferments, to trash John Kerry for wanting to "kill cold-war weapons" that Dick Cheney himself tried to kill in 1989 as Secretary of Defense! They can't be bothered to take time to investigate these GOP smears and tell the American public the truth.

We need the media to wake up and finally do their jobs. If they do, Kerry will be elected handily. If not, heaven help us all.

[glarius]

10. Read the response of #6 and see what you think

Sounds like a Bush sympathiser to me....I could be wrong, but...

[ACK]

5. He is campaigning hard

The media is not listening.

They are bought by the corporations.

He is ahead in April! That is tremendous against an incumbent. Clinton was not ahead yet.

People hardly know the man because its not like they hear him on tv except for the CSPAN fans.

Kerry is ahead of Bush who is an incumbent president during a time of war before the damn convention!!!

This is all in a country split hard idealogically right down the middle.

He ain't doing bad at all.

+

[mistertrickster]

2. Woohoo! Looking good for now . . .

Wonder how this is going to translate into electoral college votes, though . . .