The Democrats Gloat Thread

In line with your above post, let's now look at this quote from a prior blatham comment:

"Last week, georgeob wrote a post wherein he said he had concluded that he'd been wrong regarding the wisdom/necessity of Bush's war on Iraq."

I made two assumptions in my response:

1) That george's prior position was that the War in Iraq was the product of some wisdom and necessity
2) That you accurately represent's george's position in your quote

In any case the position which you did represent makes no reference to

- The conduct of the war in Iraq
- The wisdom and necessity of the war in Afghanistan
- The conduct of the war in Afghanistan
- The general success of The War on Terror

These are all separate issues,
yes, they are
and george may have constant or changed opinions on each of them, but when it comes to the reasons for launching a war in Iraq, if he has changed his position, he is now wrong.

For the record my own opinions concerning these issues are also unchanged:

- The conduct of the war with the government and military of Saddam was masterful.
I agree, though tempering your enthusiasm with two considerations: the rather severe disparity in military resources of the two parties; and in consideration that a brilliant twenty second intro to an orchestral piece becomes a bit irrelevant if the following two hours is garbage.
The conduct of the war with insurgents has been unorganized and often ineffective. This does not alter my believe in the wisdom and necessity for launching the war.
As I detailed earlier, I suspect that belief is unalterable, finn. As it was not and is not shared by many in the highest levels of the US military, state department, intel, foreign policy agencies, non-aligned experts, foreign governments and the great majority of the citizens of the world - BUT IS held pretty consistently only by those who count themselves members of the conservative movement, I find it ideological and extremist and irrational.

- It was wise and necessary to launch war in Afghanistan
Probably. Which still leaves open the significant factors (re wisdom/necessity) of competence in execution, present states of affairs there, and unintended consequences. Still, I think the attempt was/is justifiable.

- Conduct of the war in Afghanistan has, overall, been successful.
I do not know who, other than compatriots in your movement, would agree with this statement. I truly do not know what accounts you are attending to in forming this opinion. I'm not going to bother arguing it.
Bin Laden's ability to escape from Tora Bora seems clearly to have involved mistakes or misjudgments on the part of the American military, but, in the end, that has had little impact on the war in Afghanistan, although it can be credibly argued that it has been something of a setback for The War on Terror.
I'm not wise enough to figure out how important Osama's survival/escape has been to the Islamist cause. But it is certainly possible that even had he died there, the Taliban would today still be in resurgence in Afghanistan and Nato/US would still have "control" of only minimal territory.

- The War on Terror has been successful on a number of fronts. I don't think anyone of any intelligence believes or has believed that there will ever be a dramatic and crushing victory leading to the surrender of Islamist terrorists around the globe, and it will be many years yet to come before we can judge its overall success.
Or failure. Anyone who argues that recruitment to the cause has declined is simply a fool.

The central point, however, of my original response is that it takes quite a bit of arrogance and/or stupidity to suggest that because someone has not changed their mind to your your way of thinking, they are guilty of intellectual cowardice.
Sure...if it was a matter of a single issue, or even a few. But it is a clear and obvious pattern manifested in you and tico and foxfyre and others. You all read or attend to the same core information sources. Those sources provide the service of reflecting back your certainties. There is some individual variation, but it is minimal and peripheral.

Poll finds rebound in Bush approval

Clearly anticipating the first question many will ask, however, the Gallup summary also includes this important point about party identification:

The improvement in Bush's ratings appears to result from a more positive evaluation of him from all party groups, rather than a short-term shift in more basic party loyalties. In the current poll, 34% of Americans identified as Democrats and 31% as Republicans. In the prior September poll, when Bush had a 39% approval rating, 35% identified as Democrats and 30% as Republicans.

Rhode Island Senate: Whitehouse (D) 51%; Chafee (R) 43%
Mon Sep 18

The GOP establishment forcefully backed Republican Lincoln Chafee in the primary over a more conservative and arguably less-electable Republican. But, perhaps damaged by having to struggle so long for the nomination, it is not clear how electable Senator Chafee remains. The incumbent now lags his Democratic challenger 43% to 51%.

This is the fourth Rasmussen Reports election poll in row showing former Attorney General Sheldon Whitehouse with the lead-and the lead is growing.

Ohio Senate: Brown (D) 47% DeWine (R) 41%

September 18

In Ohio's edge-of-seat Senate race, Democratic challenger Sherrod Brown now claims a six-point lead of 47% to 41% over Republican Senator Mike DeWine.

The tables have turned slowly but dramatically in this hard-fought campaign. Last November, the incumbent had the edge in the Rasmussen Reports' first Ohio poll for Election 2006. DeWine sustained a lead through April but Brown has now held a lead for three polls in a row (four of the last five). Last month, like the preceding month, Brown's lead was statistically insignificant. But this latest poll confirms that the electoral winds have clearly shifted in the Ohio Senate race. [..]

Each candidate fares well with his base. But Brown has a big edge now with both unaffiliated voters and moderates. [..] Voters may be seeing DeWine as part and parcel of a GOP establishment they're ready to pink-slip. Republican Governor Bob Taft has been indicted on corruption charges, and his approval rating is still in the dumpster: only 6% strongly approve of his job performance while 53% "strongly disapprove." [..]

Montana Senate: Tester By Nine - Tester (D) 52% Burns (R) 43%

September 18

The latest Rasmussen Reports election survey in Montana shows Democrat Jon Tester leading incumbent Republican Sen. Conrad Burns 52% to 43% (see crosstabs). The candidates were tied at 47% in August's survey. The current results represent Tester's biggest lead ever. In the fall of 2005, Burns had a double digit lead. That collapsed by January as the Abramoff story became big news. Since then, for the bulk of the campaign, Tester and Burns have generally been within a few points of each other.

The incumbent Senator Burns came under attack this week by television ads sponsored by Campaign Money Watch that criticize his links to the big oil companies. The ads, along with another from the Tester camp that tracks Burns' recent slip-ups on the campaign trail, were posted to the popular Web site YouTube. [..]

Tester has added nearly 10 points to his base vote; 92% of Democrats now say they'll vote for him in November, up from 84% last month. He's also pulling votes from 20% of Republicans. Seventy-seven percent (77%) of GOP voters are supporting Burns.

A majority of voters (54%) have an unfavorable opinion of Burns, with more than one-third of respondents (37%) reporting "very unfavorable" views of the incumbent. Both those numbers are up two points from our last survey. Tester earns favorable reviews from 55%. [..]

Maryland Senate: New ad for Republican Michael Steele makes no mention of party affiliation and takes lighter tone, with Steele noting that he loves puppies, even if upcoming negative ads say otherwise, the Washington Post notes.

Republican Governor Bob Taft has been indicted on corruption charges, and his approval rating is still in the dumpster: only 6% strongly approve of his job performance while 53% "strongly disapprove."

But there's little to notice of a Republican recovery in those state-by-state polls.

Momentum Shift?

September 18, 2006

Our last Slate Election Scorecard update on Friday night shows a shift in national momentum for the first time, based on recently improving Democratic fortunes in states like Tennessee, Virginia, Missouri and Washington. These gains have occurred despite the small upward trend in the Bush job approval rating as seen on recent national surveys, as noted in Charles Franklin's post on Friday. How could these trends be moving in opposite directions?

Our Slate national momentum meter is an average of the averages of recent horserace results in each of thirteen competitive contests we have included on the Slate Scorecard. Much of the shift appears to come from states where Democratic candidates have benefited from issues or tactical advantages specific to those states. These include George Allen's "macaca" gaffe in Virginia, Harold Ford's post-primary spending advantage in Tennessee, the DUI revelations regarding Republican Mike McGavick in Washington.

At the same time, the more recent improvements in the Bush job rating are slight and may have less immediate impact on the attitudes of likely voters in the key races states. [..]

Across the nation's 36 races for governor, Republican candidates are playing up their liberal positions.

I rather enjoyed this bit from the NY Times...

Quote:

Across the nation's 36 races for governor, Republican candidates are playing up their liberal positions.

Given the common rhetorical abuses of the term "liberal" that we've watched for thirty years now, this is not far from the following:

"Across the nation's 36 races for governor, Republican candidates are playing up their communist positions."

Bush and bin Laden, or when the "urban myth" happens to be true

George W. Bush on Osama bin Laden, Sept. 15, 2006: "There's kind of an urban myth here in Washington about how this administration hasn't stayed focused on Osama bin Laden. Forget it. It's convenient throwaway lines when people say that."

George W. Bush on Osama bin Laden, March 13, 2002: "You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you ... And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure ... I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him."

The state results will be determined by local issues and personalities, so we should look at state-by-state polls.

Meanwhile, in Maryland Republican Senate candidate Steele is trying to win votes by pretending he's not Republican

"We Democrats are just, well, confused," Obama writes. He goes on. "Mainly, though, the Democratic Party has become the party of reaction. In reaction to a war that is ill-conceived, we appear suspicious of all military action.

Bush's Useful Idiots

"For 12 years I wandered in the wilderness, went through a divorce and struggled with questions about my direction. Then suddenly and movingly, I had a revelation about the connection between the work I was doing as a public servant and my formative teachings. Indeed, the scriptures provided a firmer guide about values applied to life," he said.

That's all fine and dandy, nimh, but how's "my guy" doing? You know, "my candidate" .... the State Senator in NJ. What's his name again?

nimh wrote:

Meanwhile, in Maryland Republican Senate candidate Steele is trying to win votes by pretending he's not Republican

Similar, I suppose, to Harold(screw separation of Church and State)Ford filming a campaign ad inside his church and coming out strong against illegal immigration.

Or Obama lecturing Dems on religion and national security (no points from the KosKids on those issues).