So you were against the war. Fine. Do you have to be against reality? Kos comes back from a couple day vacation/business trip/hiatus and unloads with this multiple column-inch sneer:
So Bush “won” the war. At least that’s the spin from the White House and its allied Mighty Wurlitzer.
Actually, Kos- it is quite clear to everyone that the war has been won. Even Dan Rather has come to his senses, albeit belatedly. That does not mean the violence, mayhem, and confusion is over. The rebuilding will take a while, and I am sure that you will be along for the ride, with Mr. Chriac and Mr. Schoreder, doing everything you can to hamper success so that your candidate (is it Dean? Kucinich? Hart? Kerry?) has a better chance in 2004.
The last time a Bush won a war against Iraq, his approval ratings were in the 90s. This time, Bush can barely break the 70s. CBS has him at 73. NBC at 71. Newsweek at 71. Fox at 71. ABC is the most generous to Bush at 77.
So what’s going on? To hear the media talk, this was a crushing, easy, absolute, unconditional, bloodless victory. We’re told, over and over again, that they’re cheering us on the streets of Baghdad. We’re told order is being restored. We’re repeatedly told we found WMDs, quietly retracting all such statements days later.
So, what’s going on? Why aren’t Bush’s numbers higher than common sense might dictate?
Only in the fantasyland that is the core of Democrat support could 75% approval ratings be spun negatively. But, since Kos is curious, I will answer his question- why aren’t Bush’s numbers higher?
Because about 20% of the population would be incapable of saying anything good about Bush if he was able to turn water into wine, if his sweat could be used as a cure for cancer, and if he was able to solve aids, racism, give white people rhythym, provide universal health care and child support, all while balancing the budget solely on the taxes of the rich and corrupt robber barons like Enron. Then and only then, might Kos utter something nice aboutBush- but he still wouldn’t vote for him (Dean’s so much smarter- I mean- Bush just doesn’t speak very well and isn’t very smart).
That is why- 20% of the population is composed of ultra-partisan jerks who simply hate everything about Bush, and there is nothing he can do about it. And guess what, Bush and Rove know that- so I watch with joy as you and your issues get ignored- because you have made yourself IRRELEVANT. When the man does the right thing, you oppose him, shit on him, and try to marginalize his victories. Why the hell would he pay attention to you? And then you get shriller, and less appealing to the general public, and you lose another election. Your solution? Go farther left, and become more obnoxious. It’s really quite beautiful to watch. If the Democrat party was Ben Sanderson (Nick Cage) in Leaving Las Vegas, the only thing they would be pissed about is that they only had two hands and one mouth to get the vodka in. The self-destruction is impressive.
Before you know it, the base of the Democrat party is going to be voting for this guy, with the broad theme of “12 Galaxies Guiltied to A Zegnatronic Rocket Society.” Hell- that makes as much sense as everything else the Donks have been pitching at us.
*** Update ***
Larry Maggiti (who has a new blog you should bookmark and visit) suggests that I wrote this in an attempt to be over the top. IN part, I did. But for the most part, I did not.
Larry states:
You hear this a lot from Bush supporters. Those of us who don
Ricky
I liked the part where everyone who is paying taxes are sending their money to the top 1%. You know, how somehow your withholding magically appears in the net income of another taxpayer.
And we wonder why the US lags behind other industrial nations in math?
KevinA
I wondered if you would make the same disingenuous comments on your own site that you did on Kos, and sure enough you did.
I like that little gibe about “is it Dean? Kucinich? Hart? Kerry?” That’s a knee-slapper. Imagine us Democrats, not knowing who our candidate will be. Wow. And here we are a mere nine months before the first primary. Silly Democrats.
But enough of that. To your main point. You know perfectly well that Kos was comparing Dubya’s approval rating not to his usual rating, or any president’s usual rating, but to the approval rating his father got after winning Gulf War I, and the one he himself enjoyed after 9-11. And Bush’s approval rating right now, in the immediate aftermath of his victory in Iraq, is indeed 15-20% less than his father’s after winning his victory in Iraq. And it’s 15-20% less than his own approval rating in September 2001. And it’s perfectly obvious that that was what Kos meant, so your derisive tone is strange indeed.
Funny how I see blog entries about Daily Kos on Tacitus and here, but I never see Kos saying “You won’t believe what John Cole said today…”
QP
Bush.
This is a president that doesn’t have a bad press day. He speaks in front of military people, old and new. Or a school ( where he might be able to read “The Very Hungry Caterpillar.” Or at Camp David. Or in Crawford, Texas. Or somewhere within the confines of the White House.
The man doesn’t venture anywhere where there might be a hostile audience. Doesn’t that bother some of you?
The man can’t put two words together without tele-prompting.
This is the man who’s the leader of the the U.S.
He’s an incredible embarrassment.
KevinA
And this comment, and the weird paragraph that follows it, is pretty funny as well.
20% of the population is composed of ultra-partisan jerks who simply hate everything about Bush
That darn 20%, refusing to surrender to the genius that is Dubya.
Here’s a question, though…name me the president from either party that enjoyed sustained support from >80% of the population. Ever.
John Cole
KevinA- I was referring to Kos’s personal candidate, not yours, or the Democrat party as a whole. Thanks for being condescending, but I understand the primary process.
And Bush’s approval rating right now, in the immediate aftermath of his victory in Iraq, is indeed 15-20% less than his father’s after winning his victory in Iraq. And it’s 15-20% less than his own approval rating in September 2001. And it’s perfectly obvious that that was what Kos meant, so your derisive tone is strange indeed.
I thought the Democrats were the ones who were smart enough to not compare apples and oranges. BTW- IF you claim this is a victory, you must be part of the mighty ‘wurlitzer’ that Kos mentions. As far as he is concerned there has been no victory.
These poll numbers are useless- what is amusing is that there is 20% of the population will do anything to hate Bush. Period.
KevinA
To which, I repeat, name me the president who didn’t have at least 20% of the public opposed to him no matter what.
John Cole
Umm- George Bush the 1st after the Gulf War.
KevinA
And regarding victory…victory has many facets. Yes, we conquered a country that utterly lacked any means to resist us. That’s victory, I guess, although when the most powerful military machine ever to exist on the planet defeats a nation with an army as weak as Iraq’s, it doesn’t really get my patriotic pulse pounding, at least not the way that accounts of Washington crossing the Delaware do.
However, there’s victory, and then there’s victory, and one could make a case that this will not be a “victory” unless and until Iraq has a government that is both democratic and friendly to the United States. Which may happen, to be sure. But if five years down the road Iraq is being run by a theocratic Muslim government, with millions of citizens screeching “Death to America” (think Tehran 1979), then I don’t think we’ll be looking back on Gulf War II as a victory.
However, in the short term and in the military sense, a victory it is.
John Cole
It is really quite simple, KevinA. I have watched the base of the Democrat party shift from the merely benign Lieberman/Gephardt crowd to the overtly offensive conspiracy-theorists/ lunatic fringe best represented by a Berkely peace rally.
There is simply nothing Bush can do that will change his ratings with this 10-20% of the nation. Period. Saying things like:
‘Yeah, sure. He won the war I was/am opposed to- but, sheesh- why can’t his poll numbers be 10 points higher?’
is simply high comedy in the RNC headquarters.
KevinA
Well, if we’re talking about Bush 41 after Gulf War I, we’ve come completely full circle, back to the original Kos point that Dubya’s bounce isn’t as big as his dad’s was. But even Bush 41’s 91% wasn’t real, as you know. It came down quite rapidly, to the point that within a year of his victory Bush Sr. was fighting off a challenger from within his party. Heck, in less than two years we Democrats managed to knock Bush 41’s numbers low enough to defeat him. We have 20% less work to do with Bush 43.
Mason
We conquered a country that utterly lacked any means to resist us, KevinA? Just a few weeks ago, lefties were pointing to the thousands of US soldiers that would be killed.
KevinA
And the Berkelely leftist crowd isn’t the Dem base, they’re the Green base. People like me who hold jobs, pay taxes, and think Bush 43 is the worst president since Warren G. Harding, constitute the Democratic base.
John Cole
KevinA-
You may not have thought there would be any chance of defeat in this war- and if I remember your comments correctly over at Kos’s site, you always thought we would win handily, but you are not fooling me if you try to dimiinish this victory by stating “we faced no real opposition.”
There were plenty of people on Kos’s site, all Democrats, I would presume, who were convinced we were not only losing the war, but losing it soundly. Rumsfeld is an idiot, Cheney and the neo-cons have created a disaster, there aren’t enough men. Hell, read everyone of Billmon’s breathless posts. People were not only predicting huge losses, they were poised to gain politically on those losses.
Another thing- has victory really been declared? I have not seen Bush declare victory. THis is not like the first Gulf War, the war itself was not the same, and the American populatiuon is not the same.
All Kos is trying to do is to keep attacking- when he is really out of ammunition at this point. His real message is that Bush sucks- his ratings aren’t 90% instead of 75%. What a loser.
John Cole
And the Berkelely leftist crowd isn’t the Dem base
Yeah- The Dem Base is the coal miners, manual laborers, and people who all live around me in the hills of WV. And they voted for Bush in 2002, there kids are fighting in this war, and they don’t like being told they are undertaxed, rich at 60k, a bad people for ignoring the French, or stupid for thinking Bush is ok. Some of them don’t give speeches as well as Clinton either.
You Democrats should probably pay attention to that…
Terry
Re the issue if the so-called Democratic base…the latest polls strongly suggest that idiots like Kos and Kevin are WAY, WAY out of step with the great majority of Dems. Sure the leftie loons are the most active and loudly obnoxious, but they don’t come close to a majority. Karl Rove and his buddies are smacking there lips at the prospect of the loony Left nominating the next Democratic candidate for President.
By definition, it has to be someone so weak on defense and security issues that Bush can probably win reelection even if the economy doesn’t improve, and other than Paul Krugman, no respectable economist would bet the farm against improvements.
Dean
KevinA:
I don
doe
How can you call this a victory when we have yet to disarm Iraq or even find any of the terrible WMD? Sure, the press and the right have been all over declaring victory by smoking gun, but none have been found. Even if a smoking gun were found, that does not lead to the conclusion that Iraq has been disarmed! Our administration insisted that it knew for a fact that Iraq had a large chemical and biological weapons program. This will not be a “victory” in any sense of the word until *ALL* of those weapons have been found and disarmed. It is not the responsibility of UNMOVIC anymore to certify and prove that Iraq has been disarmed. It is now the US responsibility to cooperate and prove that Iraq has been disarmed.
Regarding your other rational for “victory”: how can you claim victory when crowds as large as 20,000 all over Iraq are calling for the US to leave and equating the US administration with Saddam? How can you claim victory when marines are actively trying to keep the media from reporting on the large protest (larger than the crowd who cheered the statue toppling) taking place in the same square? How can you claim victory when marines in mosul fired and killed 10 and wounded ~100 just yesterday? How can you claim victory when those same WMD are now reportedly traveling into Syria or who knows where else? How can you claim victory when Iraqs treasures have been ransacked and some of the Baathists are being placed in power? The food and water is still not there… hospitals have been decimated and the civilian death toll is a huge unknown… rape and looting are common in the streets of baghdad… Sadr City is now controlled by Shia militants… We haven’t found Saddam or the majority of the people responsible for the horrendous crimes against the Iraqi people… How can you declare “victory”?
Sure, I’ll grant that our military has roundly defeated the conventional arms of the Iraqi army. We’ve taken over control of the country and the oil fields. Real victories. However, that doesn’t mean that this invasion has been “successful”. I’ve pointed out all kinds of problems and clear failures. The real “victory” is neither black or white and that probably is the reason all of the right wingers just can’t grasp. Bush and company has taught you to think in stark black and white and in the absence of such conditions you just close your eyes and cheer.
doe
How can you call this a victory when we have yet to disarm Iraq or even find any of the terrible WMD? Sure, the press and the right have been all over declaring victory by smoking gun, but none have been found. Even if a smoking gun were found, that does not lead to the conclusion that Iraq has been disarmed! Our administration insisted that it knew for a fact that Iraq had a large chemical and biological weapons program. This will not be a “victory” in any sense of the word until *ALL* of those weapons have been found and disarmed. It is not the responsibility of UNMOVIC anymore to certify and prove that Iraq has been disarmed. It is now the US responsibility to cooperate and prove that Iraq has been disarmed.
Regarding your other rational for “victory”: how can you claim victory when crowds as large as 20,000 all over Iraq are calling for the US to leave and equating the US administration with Saddam? How can you claim victory when marines are actively trying to keep the media from reporting on the large protest (larger than the crowd who cheered the statue toppling) taking place in the same square? How can you claim victory when marines in mosul fired and killed 10 and wounded ~100 just yesterday? How can you claim victory when those same WMD are now reportedly traveling into Syria or who knows where else? How can you claim victory when Iraqs treasures have been ransacked and some of the Baathists are being placed in power? The food and water is still not there… hospitals have been decimated and the civilian death toll is a huge unknown… rape and looting are common in the streets of baghdad… Sadr City is now controlled by Shia militants… We haven’t found Saddam or the majority of the people responsible for the horrendous crimes against the Iraqi people… How can you declare “victory”?
Sure, I’ll grant that our military has roundly defeated the conventional arms of the Iraqi army. We’ve taken over control of the country and the oil fields. Real victories. However, that doesn’t mean that this invasion has been “successful”. I’ve pointed out all kinds of problems and clear failures. The real “victory” is neither black or white and that probably is the reason all of the right wingers just can’t grasp. Bush and company has taught you to think in stark black and white and in the absence of such conditions you just close your eyes and cheer.
Flavius Claudius Julianus
The real “victory” is neither black or white and that probably is the reason all of the right wingers just can’t grasp.
Silly, Doe, you’re assuming they want to grasp that concept. Of course they don’t. Remember, the Republicans govern by the “I tell you three times” school of politics and what they tell us three times must be true. They don’t govern, they advertise. Why make things hard for yourself by–in this case–saying exactly what constitutes victory when you get more bang for your buck by just repeating it over and over again? After all, you’ll just have to change your story in the future anyway. Never be too precise and always attack, attack, attack! That’s the Republican definition of “news.” Mr. Cole is a very adept student of this. Watch him and learn.
Airmon
John Cols says:” When the man does the right thing, you oppose him, shit on him, and try to marginalize his victories. ”
What “good thing” are you talking about?
Perhaps the reason 30% oppose Dubya is for legitimate issues. The fact that our well-trained, supported, equipped military could beat the Iraqis does not mean that it’s a “good thing”. I havn’t forgotten the bald-faced lies that the Bush Junta told the US and the world ( who apparently saw through it) to get this done.
It’s not intellectually dishonest to see that they’re pissing on us and telling us it’s raining.
Meanwhile, here at home, the economy is in the toilet and what does the chimp trot out as the solution? Disproven budgetary policy. The same Reagan-era economists that thought this silly tax cuts = stimulus = more money for the government idea up has since recanted. Didn’t you get the memo?
For “homeland” security Bush pays lip service to effective changes and $$ for local security. At the same time he creates the largest agency in US history that appears to do nothing but spit uselessly on the US constituion.
Captain AWOL does nearly everything in his power to prevent investigation into 9/11 so we won’t know what to fix. Meanwhile our war-mongering and failed diplomacy are a recruiting bonanza for terrorists. Which side is this MORON on?
Bush 41 got told some whoppers too ( 250K Iraqis massing to invade Saudi Arabia?NOT!) he just told them better and stayed within international law while using DIPLOMACY ( a foreign concept to BushCo) to form a REAL coalition. A more just war, an elected president, international legal procedures followed.
90% support.
I suspect you’ll now bust on me for not forgiving and forgetting election 2000. Well, it’s now a proven fact that ELECTION FRAUD is the only reason Bush did as well as he did in Florida. We should NEVER forget.
This isn’t some knee-jerk reaction to W, it’s REASONED opposition. Dubyas actions are shameful, and 30% of us see it and won’t look away.
I can only hope that the rest of the country soon sees that the emperor has no clothes.
John Cole
It all really boils down to election 2000, doesn’t it?
Hey guys- that didn’t even work as an effective rallying cry in 2002, in Florida. With BLACK voters. Ever hear of Gov. Jeb Bush?
ErolOtis
John- you sure are a chip off the old block to copy and paste your haranguing of kos for his comparison of father/son approval ratings during a war in Iraq. I think his point is well taken- his father experienced a 20% higher approval rating after Gulf War I and still lost the general election.
What surprises me is neither of you comment on these poll numbers:
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm
52% is the current Administrations highewater mark for the next election? Three years of war and tax cuts and the prez has only gained a “measly” 2-3% on his general election numbers from 2000?
Or is that 48% that plans on ‘playing the field’ in 2004 also part of the “population”, “composed of ultra-partisan jerks who simply hate everything about Bush”?
doe
Airmon said, after giving a busload of legitimate grievances with BushCO, “I suspect you’ll now bust on me for not forgiving and forgetting election 2000.”
To which John happily replied, “It all really boils down to election 2000, doesn’t it?”
heh heh. so damn typical. the right have such narrow well trained minds. quick airmon, tell us what the monkey will do next?
John Cole
EROL-OTIS- ask any candidate if they will take 52% of the votes and tell me what the response is…
Doe- frothing at the mouth about the Bush ‘junta’ is principled opposition? Hardly. It really does boil down to election 2000 and an irrational hatred of Bush. I daresay the left hates Bush more than they hated Reagan, and easily as much as some on the right hated Clinton.
jack
hey erolotis,
I posted about that site over on Kos–and it amazes me that any of you would put that forth as support
It shows, quite clearly, that the left–in all its many forms can’t seem to muster more than 38%
That’s 38% divided over the dems, the greens, the socialists–let’s not forget the Sharpton faction–AND the far right anti-war crew. Do you really think that, after that split, you have anything like a chance? Particularly considering that you didn’t have a majority to begin with?
And look at the alienation index. People just seem to feel more at home with W in the driver’s seat
Guys, you’re just laughable.
jack
“I suspect you’ll now bust on me for not forgiving and forgetting election 2000. Well, it’s now a proven fact that ELECTION FRAUD is the only reason Bush did as well as he did in Florida. We should NEVER forget.”
When people say things like this I like to call attention to the fact that Miami had a Republican mayor at the time of the 2000 election–that’s right a Republican. Know how he got to be mayor? Seems that his opposition was convicted of widespread voter-fraud just prior to the 2000 election. Voter fraud that was so pervasive that it altered the outcome of the election to such an extent that the populace was outraged. Fortunately justice was done and the criminal was unseated.
And can you guess which party was found guilty of this? In Florida?
Democrats.
It’s a matter of public record.
Election dishonesty? You decide.
Mike the Analyst
The comments on Daily Kos make perfect sense. As I posted there:
Welcome to the world of Daily Kos where:
– 21 days is a “endless quagmire”
– Congress approving $350B in tax cuts is a “legislative victory defeating tax cuts”
– Less than 2000 Iraqi civilian deaths in a war to liberate Iraq is “slaughter of hundreds of thousands and destruction of the country to get its oil”
– 18% against a war is “major anti-war dissent”
– victories by Senate INCUMBENTS by 52-48(La.) and 500 votes(S.D.) are “signs of a Democratic tidal wave”
So, I guess, against this backdrop, a Republican president with an approval rating of 71-77% should be “worried that it’s too low.”
It’s just a matter of altering what you believe reality is.
Regan
Be gentle, I’m a newbie.
I disagree with Cole’s assessment that everyone who dislikes Bush are ignorant idiots, mostly because I don’t think of myself as an ignorant idiot.
Bush won this war. Good for him. A lot of the images and news coming from Iraq is great, and it’s nice to think that we’ve removed one threat, while reminding other nations just what we’re capable of militarily.
But the economy still sucks. It’s hard to get a job. I know that the president doesn’t have any direct control over this, but he should at least look like he’s trying to fix it. Certainly, if the situation was reversed, he’d be taking credit for it.
Like most Americans, I didn’t vote for Bush. Yes, it comes down to the 2000 election, which was my first voting experience. Call me bitter if you’d like, you’re probably not far off. Bush isn’t a complete idiot, but unless Iraq comes around to be a strong pro-America country, he’ll go down in the history books as a fairly ineffective president.
Regan
ErolOtis
John- I used the ‘highwater’ number of 52% in my post. The low end number was 36% (USA Today) taken barely 6 weeks ago (fickle public, huh?).
Bush doesn’t have a mandate- as much as you and your fellow travelers would like to think it is so. Bush acts like he does have a mandate much to the chargrin of the majority of American voters who did not elect the man. No president in history has won a second term when losing the popular vote.
Jack- what is the alienation index? How does it show “more people are comfortable with W in the drivers seat”?
Just the facts, Jack.
HH
Thank you very much for bringing up poll numbers.. let’s look, shall we?
– 61% approval for Bush… from Democrats
– Indeed 52% for Bush… vs. 24% for “Unnamed Democrat”… when you name them, the person with the best shot STILL loses, AND she’s not even in the race.
By the way, if 52% is so bad, how come Clinton winning with 48% in ’96 and less than that in ’92 is so good? If I’m not mistaken, Reagan had a similar re-elect number and won in a landslide.
And QP, I guess you missed the multiple times Bush and Cheney have been heckled, protested, etc.
GeorgeG
I’m a “loony lefty” and I would strongly consider voting for Bush in 04 if he could turn water into wine.
Airmon
John says:”It all really boils down to election 2000, doesn’t it?”
Well, no. That’s not all. I’m still pissed about 2000 (more on this in a minute) but mostly for me it’s about the CURRENT ISSUES. It’s about Bush Lying to the nation to get us to go to war. It’s about double standards for warfighting, like Iraqis in civilian clothing is a war crime, but US special forces in civilian clothing is OK. It’s about US agression long before the war.
It’s about the Stupid games we played with the UN. It’s how we’re now dicking over Afghanistan. It’s how we insulted other nations whose governments listened to the will of their people, 90% saying “no war”.
It’s about our closed government system creeping slowly towards fascism. It’s about the loss of rights granted by the CONSTITUTION for dubious, classified results.
It’s about the bogus “coalition”, when the only real coalition is the 160+ nations against the war. It’s about a government that says it’s taking all measures to prevent civilian casualties but won’t even count how many there are. It’s about not caring about the environment. It’s about an energy policy that virtually assures more of this bullshit agression for oil in the future. It’s about scare tactics practiced on our nation for partisan benefit by our government. It’s about hundreds of troopships but only a couple with food aid.
It’s about letting looters ransack every government ministry in Iraq except interior and Oil.
There. I could go on, but I think that’s enough for now. See all the issues other than the election?
Now, as for the 2000 election. Don’t lecture me about Miami, I live in South Florida. Kicking out the bastard and replacing him with the real winner was the right thing to do. I’m very upset by any voter fraud in our democratic nation, regardless of the party that perpetrates it.
However, the fact that a Democrat would do that is no suprise to me, we’re human too, he got what he deserved but it does not excuse what Jeb and Katherine Harris did to rig the vote for Dubya.
You may recall that W. won by a mere 537 votes. Well, in case you missed the memo, Jeb and Kathy illegally removed over 50,000 voters from the florida rolls, mostly Democrats.
They violated two court orders taking voting rights away from ex-felons that moved to Florida from other states. They removed people charged with Texas misdemeanors from the rolls.
This and other acts of voter fraud were the edge Dubya needed to “win”.
In Miami, the correct man won in the end. I think justice was served.
What do you say we correct the errors in the 2000 presidential election the same way and give George W. Bush the boot?
Isn’t that were your argument was going?
Airmon
John says:”It all really boils down to election 2000, doesn’t it?”
Well, no. That’s not all. I’m still pissed about 2000 (more on this in a minute) but mostly for me it’s about the CURRENT ISSUES. It’s about Bush Lying to the nation to get us to go to war. It’s about double standards for warfighting, like Iraqis in civilian clothing is a war crime, but US special forces in civilian clothing is OK. It’s about US agression long before the war.
It’s about the Stupid games we played with the UN. It’s how we’re now dicking over Afghanistan. It’s how we insulted other nations whose governments listened to the will of their people, 90% saying “no war”.
It’s about our closed government system creeping slowly towards fascism. It’s about the loss of rights granted by the CONSTITUTION for dubious, classified results.
It’s about the bogus “coalition”, when the only real coalition is the 160+ nations against the war. It’s about a government that says it’s taking all measures to prevent civilian casualties but won’t even count how many there are. It’s about not caring about the environment. It’s about an energy policy that virtually assures more of this bullshit agression for oil in the future. It’s about scare tactics practiced on our nation for partisan benefit by our government. It’s about hundreds of troopships but only a couple with food aid.
It’s about letting looters ransack every government ministry in Iraq except interior and Oil.
There. I could go on, but I think that’s enough for now. See all the issues other than the election?
Now, as for the 2000 election. Don’t lecture me about Miami, I live in South Florida. Kicking out the bastard and replacing him with the real winner was the right thing to do. I’m very upset by any voter fraud in our democratic nation, regardless of the party that perpetrates it.
However, the fact that a Democrat would do that is no suprise to me, we’re human too, he got what he deserved but it does not excuse what Jeb and Katherine Harris did to rig the vote for Dubya.
You may recall that W. won by a mere 537 votes. Well, in case you missed the memo, Jeb and Kathy illegally removed over 50,000 voters from the florida rolls, mostly Democrats.
They violated two court orders taking voting rights away from ex-felons that moved to Florida from other states. They removed people charged with Texas misdemeanors from the rolls.
This and other acts of voter fraud were the edge Dubya needed to “win”.
In Miami, the correct man won in the end. I think justice was served.
What do you say we correct the errors in the 2000 presidential election the same way and give George W. Bush the boot?
Isn’t that were your argument was going?
Airmon
Sorry about the double (long) post. I got an error the first time. Should have checked to see if it got through anyway.
HH
“it does not excuse what Jeb and Katherine Harris did to rig the vote for Dubya.”
Oh yeah it’s not about 2000…
Airmon
Here’s one I thing I forgot to add.
Now that it’s a well known fact that the election was rigged in W’s favor, why are lefties the only ones angry about it? It’s your country Bushco cheated too.
I wouldn’t imagine that Miami could mean too much to you unless you live there.
HH
“Jeb and Kathy illegally removed over 50,000 voters from the florida rolls, mostly Democrats.”
Yeah yeah yeah, that was all their evil scheme, uh-huh… and the networks called it early for Gore, disenfranchising mostly Bush voters… we’ve been around this tired block way too many times.
HH
“US special forces in civilian clothing is OK.”
And are these US special forces in civilian clothing targeting civilians or using them as shields?
HH
“It’s about not caring about the environment.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33999-2003Apr15.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33899-2003Apr15.html
“It’s about letting looters ransack every government ministry in Iraq except interior and Oil.”
Because as you know, none of the looting was of Iraqi government buildings and none of the looting was done by the Iraqi government and the U.S. military is able to single-handedly stop every single crime that takes place, while at the same time, getting stuck in a quagmire because they can’t win in a week.
http://glennreynolds.com
Airmon
HH- You’re getting off topic and changing the subject.
US soldiers did not act with the same inexcusable disregard for civilians that the Iraqis did.
Still, if it’s wrong for Iraqis to wear civilian clothes, it’s wrong for us to do it.
The medial called it early, it was a screwup caused by lousy exit polling methodology. Early calls affect outcomes pretty evenly. If it’s over, why turn out at all, regardless of who you vote for?
Jeb and Katherine on the other hand,actively and knowingly broke the law and violated two court orders in their “evil scheme”. Very different than a mistaken early call.
I don’t understand, are you for voter fraud? Do you have an excuse for what J & K did?
The Dam thing seems pretty good. Chalk up a good decision for the Bush admin. Did you read the whole article?
“The announcement marks a rare — and probably temporary — truce in a wide-ranging legislative and legal war between the Bush administration and environmental groups over water, timber and energy policy across the West.”
Hmmm. Doesn’t sound like this is a regular Bush view…
As for the ministries, the article you link to says “Looting, of course, is endemic to war”.I agree not all of it could be prevented.
I think we should have seen this coming and had enough forces in place to deal with it better and sooner than we did.
That we could protect the oil & interior ministries reflects really poorly on our motives and might cause us more problems down the road than the looting itself.
Matthew
“Jeb and Katherine … actively and knowingly broke the law”
In what sense? Removing convicted felons from the rolls — which is the source of this 50,000-voters disenfranchised claim — is consistent with the law here in Florida. At the same time, one might argue that Democrats in Missouri “broke the law” by allowing all-night voting to defeat Ashcroft. Sigh. Having witnessed firsthand the sh*tstorm that was post-election 2000 in Tallahassee, I don’t care to hash over this much longer. But Democratic true believers need to understand that it’s not a productive argument for them. (Yes, yes, I know, you don’t want to take advice from a Republican, but I’ll offer some anyway.)
I’ve listened to the “Bush-Cheated” line for a long time now, and I’m wondering if Democrats understand that the only people they mobilize with such rhetoric is the extreme quarter of the Democratic party base. Moderate Democrats, and, more importantly, median voters, are far less likely to be impressed with this argument, and instead care about tangible issues. Likewise, attacks on Bush for his ties to big business will prove fruitless unless a scandal emerges that links the administration to current and ongoing scandal. “Halliburton, Halliburton, Halliburton” won’t get you anywhere without a smoking gun. Republicans learned that the hard way with “Whitewater.”
I watched the Children’s Defense Fund debate among the Democratic contenders, and I didn’t see much more than cheap partisan posturing and dessicated liberalism. The DLC Democrats of old were nowhere to be seen. This may please the Democratic left, but in the long run, the Democrats will fail to capture median voters, which means that absent a major scandal or incident, the 2004 election is Bush’s to lose.
ErolOtis
The 2000 Election is water under the bridge and history will be far more critical of what happened in Florida.
The real dream world is this ‘statistical’ argument; the finger pointing at a “20% of the population”, “composed of ultra-partisan jerks who simply hate everything about Bush” and the Rights unflappable faith that the policy and attitudes of the current Administration are representative of ‘The American People’.
I don’t run in intellectual or academic circles, don’t huddle with a crew of far-left leaning friends plotting the next ‘peace rally’ or ‘die-in’- I am just a proud Teamster and laborer that understands I am not going to know the truth without seeking it out myself.
My fellow workers and friends act like Bush doesn’t even exist. They got nephews, cousins, brothers and sisters in the Gulf, Japan, Europe, ect. and certainly support and hope for their safety but don’t seem to associate support for the soldiers with unquestioning support for the president. In fact, the average ‘political’ conversations I hear surround healthcare issues, education and rising state taxes because of Fed cuts- topics that aren’t mentioned outside lip service by this Administration. The big thing right now is the state deciding to have parents pay a ‘bussing fee’ for children who ride to school. In relation to the war much of the conversation is misinformed (people who think Hussein plotted and executed Sept. 11th) or racist (people who make ‘turban’ jokes or name call Iraqi’s- ‘scummy Iraqis’ is the current popular name in light of all the looting and the disheveled appearance of the people on TV). Seems like lots of people haven’t put two and two together yet that the war is costing billions of dollars while public ed. is cut and state taxes rise. This perception doesn’t bode well for the perhaps billions of dollars we have yet to pump into helping out the ‘scummy Iraqis’ rebuild their country and provide health care for their citizens.
My father and every one of my uncles is a Vietnam Vet and not one of them voted for the man nor has their opinion (silver-spoon draft dodger) changed about him since the election (especially since the Veteran’s Administration is going through some serious problems at the moment). My father had his meds and doctor changed recently and has done some investigating of his own- he is now probably the most anti-Bush person I know.
What I am trying to get across to you is that in my opinion, Bush doesn’t relate too or represent ‘The American People’ despite what some pie-in-the-sky, elitist, right-wing pundits and their followers think. In fact, from what I can tell, the Right and this Administration is a lot like the Bolsheviks of the Russian Revolution. They seem to believe that a small group of intellectuals and insiders should run the freakin country while the people who really make the country work should sit back and STFU.
Tax cuts are great and all, who wants to pay more taxes? But, middle-class perception is vastly important in the power structure of our country and we are slowly beginning to see the effects of tax cuts that gut public services or just create more bills in the form of ‘fees’.
I don’t profess to know it all, I am 29 years old and have held a job steadily for 14 years doing whatever I could put on my plate- that’s how I was raised (anyone remember when minimum wage was four and a quarter?). What I do know is that President Bush doesn’t represent me, my family or any of the people I work with or hang out with. I also know that in the grand scheme of things, I represent the vast majority of Americans and I hope we make our voices known in November of 2004.
Sorry for expressing myself in such a personal manner but the left/right bullshit you people toss around is annoying- reality, not rhetoric is what matters as John Cole said in opening this discussion.
Airmon
My final comments:
Perhaps I wasn’t clear.
While yes, felons are to be removed from the voter rolls in FL, the list in question was 90+% NON felons. It was made up of FL voters with names SIMILAR to felons believed to have moved to florida. Felons from states where voting rights are restored after time served were also removed, contrary to two court orders. 50K voters who should have been allowed to vote were wrongly removed without recourse.
http://www.gregpalast.com/bestdemocracymoneycanbuychapter1.pdf
I do not support any voter fraud, so doing it as a democrat does not make it OK. We, as a nation, should not be so willing to accept it as we seem to be. This view makes it difficult for me to just ‘get over it’.
I brought up the election to support my underlying dislike of the President. It’s part of the argument that I’ll review below.
My main point was this: John said that Bush could do nothing to make some of us happpy. My simplified view is that I qualify as a Bush hater ( see above…), but I could admit he did something right when he does them ( I liked the dam thing that HH pointed out, and I think that the Taliban had to go.) my main beef with Bushco is that they’re doing very little I support.
John’s argument seems to be that Bush is actually doing amazingly wonderful things and we ( the 30% that still isn’t aproving of Bush) are just ignoring them out of hatred and (at least in my case) unable to get over election hangups. I’m not ignoring Bush’s actions. Instead, I’m more aware of what he’s doing than any president in history. I just don’t approve. These are policy disputes, not blind hatred.
While it’s certain that people who simply hate Bush without any reference to his actions exist, my experience leads me to believe that opposition to Dubya is much more reasoned and knowledgeable.
I think ErolOtis has it right. Bush does not represent me and many others. It’s my belief that the 30% is largely made up of those of us that see this, rather than simple Bush-haters.
Further, I suspect that the uninformed ones are more in the middle, the so-called “swing” voters. Many of these would be against the war, but have been convinced that Iraq was responsible for 9/11, etc. If they knew the truth, support for Bush would fall precipitously.
I believe that people on the far right are better informed than the middle. They know Iraq didn’t cause 9/11 or that there were no Iraqis on any of the jets. I think they see Iraq as a more general danger to the region, a more general supporter of terrorism, and thus had to be taken down anyway. He may not have WMD now, but he’ll keep trying to get them and must be stopped.
I’ll quit now. Thanks for reading and replying. This sort of debate is what makes us great.
HH
Citing Palast basically destroys your argument, the guy’s a partisan hack who distorts the facts. He failed to note in one of his pieces, for example, that a man key to his argument involved with ChoicePoint had been dead as a doornail since before the election even happened. He has zero credibility after nonsense like that. The “excuse” is a little thing called the law and the arguments that Bush and Harris planned to make these mistakes are tenuous at best. And you say it’s not about the election…
And no I’m not “changing the subject,” I’m challenging your ridiculous arguments.
HH
“Early calls affect outcomes pretty evenly.” I don’t buy that, because people would be more likely to vote for the winner in celebration… there is no logical reason anyone would vote for the loser. Secondly, we’re talking only about a portion of Florida that went heavily for Bush… hence even if it affected both sides evenly, Bush still lost a large number of net votes.
HH
“Early calls affect outcomes pretty evenly.” I don’t buy that, because people would be more likely to vote for the winner in celebration… there is no logical reason anyone would vote for the loser. Secondly, we’re talking only about a portion of Florida that went heavily for Bush… hence even if it affected both sides evenly, Bush still lost a large number of net votes.
HH
http://www.salon.com/letters/corrections/
“In the Salon Politics article ‘Florida’s flawed “voter-cleansing” program,’ it was incorrectly stated that Florida’s Secretary of State Katherine Harris hired a company, ChoicePoint, to create a voter ‘purge’ list. The company was hired in 1998 before Harris was elected to her post. Also, Rick Rozar was incorrectly identified as a founder of ChoicePoint. Rozar was the president of a company, CDB Infotek, of which Choicepoint owned 70 percent, and which ChoicePoint eventually bought. Salon regrets the errors.”
jack
Eros, the ‘alienatiom index’ is on that polling site next to the ‘right track/wrong track poll’ have a look at it.
Airmon, you admit to proven DEM vote fraud while tying that admission to partisan accusations that concern events that occurred prior to the election.
Further the supposedly improperly disallowed ballots WERE NEVER CAST, unlike the CAST military ballots that Gores’ team had disallowed AFTER the fact.
One of those actions was perpetrated without knowledge of the closeness of the election. The other was done knowing full well that any vote could turn the tide.
Tell, me which one was more likely deliberate?
Ricky
+++”Now that it’s a well known fact that the election was rigged in W’s favor…”+++
But, of course.
THAT’S well reasoned and full of logic. I’m sold! Where’s the kool-aid?
[/groan]
11/5/02 taught so many so little