0
   

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

 
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2005 08:29 am
kelticwizard wrote:
Hi. Just thought I would pop in to post that map of the country everyone's talking about.

The last three Red States left in the country as of Nov 2005 are clearly labelled in this one. Incidentally, out of 538 Electoral Votes, these three Red States have 12. Very Happy


The poll didn't inquire whether those folks would vote for Kerry over Bush, did it? Not that I place that much stock in any poll other than an election, but it doesn't strike me that because someone may be disenchanted with the current choice, that means they would necessarily vote for any Liberal candidate.

I still live in a red state, I assure you,
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2005 10:35 am
Ticomaya wrote:
kelticwizard wrote:
Hi. Just thought I would pop in to post that map of the country everyone's talking about.

The last three Red States left in the country as of Nov 2005 are clearly labelled in this one. Incidentally, out of 538 Electoral Votes, these three Red States have 12. Very Happy


The poll didn't inquire whether those folks would vote for Kerry over Bush, did it? Not that I place that much stock in any poll other than an election, but it doesn't strike me that because someone may be disenchanted with the current choice, that means they would necessarily vote for any Liberal candidate.

I still live in a red state, I assure you,


The polls are also not recording the low status of opinion re Congress. GOP senators and congressmen, as a group, receive low ratings. Democrats senators and congressmen, as a group, receive low ratings. The public is generallydisgusted with their perception of a wishy washy ineffective self-promoting government these days, and the media is only too happy to encourage that perception.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2005 11:00 am
Fox is correct: here's the latest poll on congress, and how they will vote in their districts:

....................Dem.....Rep
11/2/05..........53........36
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2005 10:46 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
but it doesn't strike me that because someone may be disenchanted with the current choice, that means they would necessarily vote for any Liberal candidate.


Let's not be naive. Your feelings about who is the leader of the party does affect the other candidates.

Some years ago I listened to a radio interview with a Republican who had lost in a primary to the Republican nominee for Senator. That Republican nominee in turn was far, far behind in the polls at the time, (and eventually did lose big), to the Democratic candidate Joe Lieberman.

Speaking of his own party's candidate, the Republican admitted that a victory was unlikely, but said that money still needed to be spent on the campaign.

"We have to get his numbers up, even if he loses", the Republican said. "With these numbers, he'll drag down everyone else on the ticket", he added.

It is not possible to entirely disconnect your feelings about one party's leader and his policies from your feelings about all candidates from that party. That is simply basic practical politics.


Ticomaya wrote:
I still live in a red state, I assure you,
You might be sure, but at the moment things seem to be shifting.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 07:57 am
Clearly, Bush the Coward is planning to cut and run from Iraq. I mean, it is one thing if a lowly congressman or senator says we ought to plan to get out. But what message does it send to the enemy if the President starts talking defeatist shitt like that?


Quote:
link
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 08:00 am
what about the kids who have laid down their lives??? Was the sacrifice for nothing?!
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 09:43 am
blatham wrote:
Clearly, Bush the Coward is planning to cut and run from Iraq. I mean, it is one thing if a lowly congressman or senator says we ought to plan to get out. But what message does it send to the enemy if the President starts talking defeatist shitt like that?


blatham's spinmeister techniques are alive and well Smile

One of the Iraqi bloggers I've been privileged to read for months and months now recently theorized that the Arab League conference in Cairo calling for a timetable for a US troop withdrawal had actually been pre-negotiated with the US administration.

Then we have our own Sec'y of State's comments that the US will "probably not need to maintain its current troop levels in Iraq very much longer" (no exact timetable you'll notice) which to me suggests setting the stage for such a reduction.

Contrast that with Murtha who called for the termination of our depoyment in Iraq - wherein he used the words "immediate redeployment" in his speech - twice.

The drawdown plans of deployment levels was already in the works. Murtha's cut-and-run plan is still what it is: a betrayal of Iraq and of America.

You can try to spin this if you wish, blatham. You can't erase the 403-3 vote, however.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 09:55 am
The President says we will leave Iraq when our mission is accomplished and not one day earlier.

Fox News version of Bush's five-point plan for Iraq. When accomplished, we can leave.:CBS's version of Bush's five-point plan for Iraq. When accomplished we can leave:

------Hand over authority to a sovereign Iraqi government.
------Help establish stability and security.
------Rebuild Iraq's infrastructure.
------Draw other countries into military and other operations.
------Move toward national elections by January.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/24/iraq/main619325.shtml

The President's plan as he laid it out:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040524-10.html

And here
http://www.cpa-iraq.org/transcripts/20040616_bush-5ptplan.html
0 Replies
 
Mortkat
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 12:46 pm
Thus Foxfyre and Just Wonders skwer the all knowing all seeing Blatham. Indeed, one of the left wingers in the Senate, the esteemed Barack Obama, D. Illinois said in a speech on Nov.22nd that
"We don't necessarily need a timetable, in a sense of a precise date for US troop pullouts, but a framework for such a phased pullout. WE NEED TO SAY THAT THERE WILL BE NO MORE BASES IN IRAQ A D E C A D E FROM NOW and that the United States armed forces cannot stand up and support an Iraqi government in P E R P I T U I T Y"

When asked about his vision of how troops should be withdrawn, Obama said: "I'm not a mililtary man. I'm not running the war in Iraq."

source- Chicago Tribune - November 27, 2005- P. 30


It would appear that Senator Obama does not want the US to replicate our experiences in Japan, Germany and Korea where we still maintain troop strength.

The Senator is quite correct, a phased withdrawal is in order. A pullout whose timing and size is determined by the commanders in the field.

BUT THE DETAILS WERE SO WELL STATED BY JUST WONDERS IN THE PREVIOUS POST.
0 Replies
 
Mortkat
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 01:22 pm
Keltic Wizard said: "Your feeling about who is the leader of the party does affect the other candidates"

Perhaps Keltic Wizard remembers the debacle, caused by the glandularly encumbered Bill Clinton in 1984 in which he Democrats lost the House and Senate never to regain them again.

I am very much afraid that Keltic Wizard is not tuned to the many fine points of elections and electing in the year 2006.

First of all, the election is eleven months away--A lifetime in politics.

Secondly, the group FAIRVOTE, a bi-partisan organization devoted to the reform of elections, point out that, due to the massive and intensive gerryamandering by both parties, a gerrymandering based on the 2000 census and one that exceeded in its scope all previous such remapping, the seats in the House of Representatives which can be labeled 'competitive" are no more than 30 in number.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 09:57 pm
Mortkat wrote:

Perhaps Keltic Wizard remembers the debacle, caused by the glandularly encumbered Bill Clinton in 1984 in which he Democrats lost the House and Senate never to regain them again.

I am very much afraid that Keltic Wizard is not tuned to the many fine points of elections and electing in the year 2006.M


And I am afraid, Mortkat, that you clearly have no knowledge of contemporary politics at all.

For instance, you clearly do not know that in 1984, Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas and was hardly in a position to affect national politics. Yet you somehow claim that he affected the House and Senate races that year..

I'm afraid that nothing you post can be taken seriously if you insist on holding to such bizarre beliefs.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 10:05 pm
kelticwizard wrote:
Hi. Just thought I would pop in to post that map of the country everyone's talking about.

The last three Red States left in the country as of Nov 2005 are clearly labelled in this one. Incidentally, out of 538 Electoral Votes, these three Red States have 12. Very Happy

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/kelticwizard100/BlueStateNov20053.gif
This is what the country looks like when there told the truth. Aaaahh America the beautiful.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 10:29 pm
The three red states are rather contradictory - or are they? Idaho, the home of KKK. Utah, the home of the LDS. Wyoming? None of the above.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 10:32 pm
Wyoming is the state that gave us Dick Cheney.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 10:34 pm
kelt, That explain it. Thank you!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 10:40 pm
Let me make it patently clear that I implied no relationship between the KKK and LDS in my above post.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2005 12:32 pm
Quote:
Bruce Willis Comes Out Fighting for Iraq's Forgotten GI Heroes

ANGERED by negative portrayals of the conflict in Iraq, Bruce Willis, the Hollywood star, is to make a pro-war film in which American soldiers will be depicted as brave fighters for freedom and democracy. It will be based on the exploits of the heavily decorated members of Deuce Four, the 1st Battalion, 24th Infantry, which has spent the past year battling insurgents in the northern Iraqi town of Mosul.

Willis attended Deuce Four's homecoming ball this month in Seattle, Washington, where the soldiers are on leave, along with Stephen Eads, the producer of Armageddon and The Sixth Sense. The 50-year-old actor said that he was in talks about a film of "these guys who do what they are asked to for very little money to defend and fight for what they consider to be freedom".

Unlike many Hollywood stars Willis supports the war and recently offered a $1m (about £583,000) bounty for the capture of any of Al-Qaeda's most wanted leaders such as Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri or Abu Musab al- Zarqawi, its commander in Iraq. Willis visited the war zone with his rock and blues band, the Accelerators, in 2003.

"I am baffled to understand why the things I saw happening in Iraq are not being reported," he told MSNBC, the American news channel.

He is expected to base the film on the writings of the independent blogger Michael Yon, a former special forces green beret who was embedded with Deuce Four and sent regular dispatches about their heroics.

[Read the rest...link in title]


I know I've mentioned Michael Yon in this thread before, but here's a link to his blog...well worth reading IMO.

http://www.michaelyon.blogspot.com/
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2005 01:21 pm
Well, that settles it.

The insurgency is over. Democracy will take root and blossom in Mesopatamia. All will become sweetness and constitutional light in Iraq.

Why? Bruce Willis is making a movie.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2005 04:09 pm
Yes, KW, and my prediction is that Willis' movie will be a blockbuster. Here's just one of the reasons why:

Quote:
SYMPATHETIC VIBRATIONS

By Chris Cillizza and Peter Slevin

Sunday, November 27, 2005; Page A04

Democrats fumed last week at Vice President Cheney's suggestion that criticism of the administration's war policies was itself becoming a hindrance to the war effort. But a new poll indicates most Americans are sympathetic to Cheney's point.

Seventy percent of people surveyed said that criticism of the war by Democratic senators hurts troop morale -- with 44 percent saying morale is hurt "a lot," according to a poll taken by RT Strategies. Even self-identified Democrats agree: 55 percent believe criticism hurts morale, while 21 percent say it helps morale.

Democrats fumed last week at Vice President Cheney's suggestion that criticism of the administration's war policies was itself becoming a hindrance to the war effort. But a new poll indicates most Americans are sympathetic to Cheney's point.

The results surely will rankle many Democrats, who argue that it is patriotic and supportive of the troops to call attention to what they believe are deep flaws in President Bush's Iraq strategy. But the survey itself cannot be dismissed as a partisan attack. The RTs in RT Strategies are Thomas Riehle, a Democrat, and Lance Tarrance, a veteran GOP pollster.

Their poll also indicates many Americans are skeptical of Democratic complaints about the war. Just three of 10 adults accept that Democrats are leveling criticism because they believe this will help U.S. efforts in Iraq. A majority believes the motive is really to "gain a partisan political advantage."

This poll is one of the few pieces of supportive news the administration has had lately on Iraq. Most surveys have shown significant majorities believe it was a mistake to go to war, as well as rising sentiment that Bush misled Americans in making the case for it.

Even so, there is still support for Bush's policy going forward. A plurality, 49 percent, believe that troops should come home only when the Iraqi government can provide for its own security, while 16 percent support immediate withdrawal, regardless of the circumstances.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2005 05:57 pm
Nice bit from The American Conservative...

Quote:
Forging the Case for War
Who was behind the Niger uranium documents?

http://www.amconmag.com/2005/2005_11_21/feature.html
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/12/2025 at 01:01:52