Bush supporters 'in denial'?

bigfatron

Emperor
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
1,927
Location
London
Fascinating study from a US policy institute, which basically shows that Bush supporters are simply unwilling or unable to accept facts that are contrary to their view of the President and the world. If true, this explains a lot about why this election is where it is, at least for me....

Bush Supporters Still Believe Iraq Had WMD or Major Program,
Supported al Qaeda

Agree with Kerry Supporters Bush Administration Still Saying This is the Case
Agree US Should Not Have Gone to War if No WMD or Support for al Qaeda

Bush Supporters Misperceive World Public as Not Opposed to Iraq War,
Favoring Bush Reelection


Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.

Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.

These are some of the findings of a new study of the differing perceptions of Bush and Kerry supporters, conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks, based on polls conducted in September and October.

Steven Kull, director of PIPA, comments, "One of the reasons that Bush supporters have these beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them. Interestingly, this is one point on which Bush and Kerry supporters agree." Eighty-two percent of Bush supporters perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or that Iraq had a major WMD program (19%). Likewise, 75% say that the Bush administration is saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. Equally large majorities of Kerry supporters hear the Bush administration expressing these views--73% say the Bush administration is saying Iraq had WMD (11% a major program) and 74% that Iraq was substantially supporting al Qaeda.

Steven Kull adds, "Another reason that Bush supporters may hold to these beliefs is that they have not accepted the idea that it does not matter whether Iraq had WMD or supported al Qaeda. Here too they are in agreement with Kerry supporters." Asked whether the US should have gone to war with Iraq if US intelligence had concluded that Iraq was not making WMD or providing support to al Qaeda, 58% of Bush supporters said the US should not have, and 61% assume that in this case the President would not have. Kull continues, "To support the president and to accept that he took the US to war based on mistaken assumptions likely creates substantial cognitive dissonance, and leads Bush supporters to suppress awareness of unsettling information about prewar Iraq."

This tendency of Bush supporters to ignore dissonant information extends to other realms as well. Despite an abundance of evidence--including polls conducted by Gallup International in 38 countries, and more recently by a consortium of leading newspapers in 10 major countries--only 31% of Bush supporters recognize that the majority of people in the world oppose the US having gone to war with Iraq. Forty-two percent assume that views are evenly divided, and 26% assume that the majority approves. Among Kerry supporters, 74% assume that the majority of the world is opposed.

Similarly, 57% of Bush supporters assume that the majority of people in the world would favor Bush's reelection; 33% assumed that views are evenly divided and only 9% assumed that Kerry would be preferred. A recent poll by GlobeScan and PIPA of 35 of the major countries around the world found that in 30, a majority or plurality favored Kerry, while in just 3 Bush was favored. On average, Kerry was preferred more than two to one.

Bush supporters also have numerous misperceptions about Bush's international policy positions. Majorities incorrectly assume that Bush supports multilateral approaches to various international issues--the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the treaty banning land mines (72%)--and for addressing the problem of global warming: 51% incorrectly assume he favors US participation in the Kyoto treaty. After he denounced the International Criminal Court in the debates, the perception that he favored it dropped from 66%, but still 53% continue to believe that he favors it. An overwhelming 74% incorrectly assumes that he favors including labor and environmental standards in trade agreements. In all these cases, majorities of Bush supporters favor the positions they impute to Bush. Kerry supporters are much more accurate in their perceptions of his positions on these issues.

"The roots of the Bush supporters' resistance to information," according to Steven Kull, "very likely lie in the traumatic experience of 9/11 and equally in the near pitch-perfect leadership that President Bush showed in its immediate wake. This appears to have created a powerful bond between Bush and his supporters--and an idealized image of the President that makes it difficult for his supporters to imagine that he could have made incorrect judgments before the war, that world public opinion could be critical of his policies or that the President could hold foreign policy positions that are at odds with his supporters."

The polls were conducted October 12-18 and September 3-7 and 8-12 with samples of 968, 798 and 959 respondents, respectively. Margins of error were 3.2 to 4% in the first and third surveys and 3.5% on September 3-7. The poll was fielded by Knowledge Networks using its nationwide panel, which is randomly selected from the entire adult population and subsequently provided internet access. For more information about this methodology, go to www.knowledgenetworks.com/ganp.


I guess this is a combination of people having a strong empathy with the man as an individual, combined with the misinformation from the Administration over the years, the inaccuracy of sources of information available and accessed by the average Bush supporter (Fox, etc), and finally not really giving a damn what the truth is anyway ('My country right or wrong' tends to be a right-wing attitude in all nations).

Still, it is quite a frightening conclusion, that so many voters are going into these vital elections either ignorant or denying of reality. :(

Ona side note, it seems majorities of Bush supporters believe he is in favour of a number of international treaties/processes that he is actually dead set against. Bush - pro-Kyoto?! :lol:

Link: http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html#1
 
The power of the media lies in it's ability to twist minds into digesting just about anything...

...
 
Well, it seemed pretty obvious to me that most Bush supporters were in full denial of reality.
But not that they were SO FAR in denial.

My, they don't even get what are their president policies :rolleyes:
 
Oh man... Do they breed Bush supporters in secluded areas with no access to the outside world, or something?? With near-religious indoctrination that Bush is the Returned Messiah?
 
It took me a year after the war started to accept that there really were no WMD in Iraq, and I've despised Bush from the start. Nor have I ever voted Republican in other than local elections. It was just too high of a psychological hurdle to believe the administration had lied, not about the usual political garbage, but about the justification for a war. Part of me still has trouble accepting the administration could be so cynical, self-serving and arrogant.

So this doesn't surprise me. If accepting the administration's lies was so difficult for me, can you imagine how hard it must be for those who perceive Bush as being on their side with regard to all the social and economic issues -- the stuff that really matters to them? Kerry isn't going to bring about an end to legal abortions, for example (nor will Bush, but that's another matter). If they let themselves accept that they'd been lied to about Iraq, they'd have to accept that their own side had done something most of them would consider evil, and then who would they have left to vote for? Who would stand up for them in the nation's capital? So they deny, and take comfort in the smug and mocking denials of right-wing commentators and the administration themselves.

Renata
 
Good post Renata! :)

I'd put a lot of the denial down to what I've for a long time thought about as "the American naivity". The US are the good guys. The President is in the know. Period.

No amount of foreigners telling them otherwise can change that self-perception. Europeans like me watch in horror how the Americans close ranks around their Prez and the army. For me it triggers memories of the Bad Old Days when the Army was the glory of our nations and the King/Tsar/Whatever has a "special" status.

Kings/Emperors were considered to be rulers by divine will. GW Bush is said to believe himself that Providence (i.e. God) placed him at helm of the US in a time of crisis. And at least some of his followers seem to agree. He may be thought of as an elected (or appointed?) "king" (like Napoleon III), ruling with divine approbation.

The US is starting to look a bit like the nations of 19th c. Europe. Or to quote David Bowie: "I'm afraid of Americans / I'm afraid of myself"
 
@Renata - many thanks for that post, one of a number of things I have read lately that are beginning to help me understand the way America as a nation thinks, something I had previously despaired of comprehending.

@verbose - you expressed very neatly some of the apprehensions I have watching the US decision-making process from outside; there is a feeling to me of a throwback to an imperial era, where 'the nation' was all-important, the military was not just respected but glorified, religious observance was the centrepiece of the nation, and leaders were annointed in some mystical way by God. Sometimes its like watching digitally generated cinefilm from 1880's Berlin or St Petersburg...
 
Verbose said:
Good post Renata! :)

The US is starting to look a bit like the nations of 19th c. Europe. Or to quote David Bowie: "I'm afraid of Americans / I'm afraid of myself"

I agree the gov of america has gone power mad, the american people must take action.
Irak had nothing to do with WMD but more to do with oil. (colonies)
The sooner the american people see this the better of they are.
 
Everyone should keep in mind that polls can be constructed in such a way as to get the results you want.

Racism should not be overlooked as a perfectly acceptable reason for war among a percentage of Bush's supporters. With that as their 'reason', they really don't care about everything else, and deny them because they don't really want to talk about them. The whole idea of 'showing the barbarians the way' makes this war just in the minds of many. This poll could have easily gotten the results it has by polling people like this.
 
True, although it would be unfortunate, to say the least, if a supposedly academic foundation had done so. And it's quite hard to see how the poll could be structured to deliver some of these results - for instance the President's stance on Kyoto or the ICC.

Cerrtainly I take your point, but I think you have to accept the underlying premise at face value, particularly as it is consistent with some other pieces of information verified elsewhere, such as the levels of belief in Iraqi involvement in 9/11.
 
I find these results uncomfortably close to the standard cliches about the Americans, the Republicans and the Democrats... and suspiciously unsurprising.
In fact I'm split between two stances :
1. people can't be THAT naive and secluse
2. the bigger the lie...
 
Well, I have really no problem about the denyal of the US population which is something that we can understand. However, I have a bigger problem with the denyal of a large part of the US media who, still today, don't want to see how harsh the truth is.

But anyway, I won't blame the Americans. Too many people are doing so accross the world. And by the way, I don't think people who support Bush do so because of the war in Iraq. If Bush has so many supporters, it's mainly because of social issues. Most of the Bush supporters in this forum talk about social issues such as abortion, gay marriage, death penalty, religion everywhere, etc...

If you agree with Bush about banning abortion, making gay marriage anti-constitutional, and so forth and so on, would you vote for Kerry simply because we didn't find WMD's or link between Al-Qaeda and Saddam ?
 
Unfortunately, the USA has become what it has tried to fight since its foundation, and to some extent without even realizing it.
 
denial? hogwash.

my opinions and who i vote for are rooted in fact, reality and the cold hard truth.

i won't get into the whole wmd mess b/c it's said and done. there ain't any of em and this is water under the bridge.
 
Renata said:
It took me a year after the war started to accept that there really were no WMD in Iraq, and I've despised Bush from the start. Nor have I ever voted Republican in other than local elections. It was just too high of a psychological hurdle to believe the administration had lied, not about the usual political garbage, but about the justification for a war. Part of me still has trouble accepting the administration could be so cynical, self-serving and arrogant.
Renata
I have posted a few times here that I simply do not underdstand why so many Americans think GWB does a fair (let go good) job on fighting (international muslim fundamentalist) terrorism. Some posters have done a great job to enlighten me, so I do understand this phenomenon slightly (not agree of course).

This post brings me another great step further to understand GWB's popularity, when regarding the 'War against terrorism'.

But, I do have some comments/questions on your post, Renata:
The Prime Ministers of most countries that did support the invasion of Iraq politically, like Italy, Spain, Poland, Japan, Denmark and the Netherlands, never told their inhabitants they supported the invasion because they were sure Saddam had WMD / was an immediate thread to Western world. The usual reasoning used was stuff like:
-Saddam is no good anyway
-Saddam refuses to cooperate with UN people (extremely biased opinion btw)
Of course, I do not know what was said exactly in Spain, Italy Japan Denmark and Poland, but here in NL, I never heared any secretary say: "Saddam has WMD".
And then we have all those other administrations that kept saying: Iraq has NO WMD, thus we won't support a US/UK invasion of Iraq.
This information was available in the US, before the invasion.
My question: why trust the US administration above those of France or Germany, or all those other countries that did support the US, but not for reasons like 'Saddam has WMD'?

Apart from this, some members of the current US administration have already admitted that removal of Saddam (Regime Change) was the number one reason to invade. It has been on the agenda for over a decade (thus including WJC). The 9/11 disaster brought the excuse of terrorism, and thus the administration started to present (false) evidence for a link of Saddam and terrorism, in order to find an (international) excuse to carry out a 12 year old plan.
Wolfowitz and Powell were relatively clear on it, and if you listen to Rumsfeld, anyone could also conclude this is how it happened.

Another question: How did the administration earn your trust anyway?
If you would have interviewed Europeans randomly, before the 9/11 attack, and asked them: "Do you think the US administration would present possibly false evidence about Iraq&WMD to its citizens, in order to justify an invasion?", I think a rather large majority would say YES, those cowboys could do such a thing.
The US has always had a warmongering image. Though I have made some comments on this forum that this is not fair, and that the US should be applauded for their readiness to act, and thus risking opposition and even failure, I really think the way 'Iraq' was handled by the GWB administration shows tremendously bad leadership.
And funny enough, Joe Average American might very well vote for GWB, because Joe thinks GWB shows good leadership.............
 
I think that those so called bush supporters represent the 80 million hardcore fundamentalist of the united state who believe (at least thats what I heard) that Bush was chosen by god to guide the american people. These are the kind of people that cannot be reasoned with and that will stick with their beliefs no matter what the facts say.
I met a guy from San-Francisco who's parents were fundamentalists and I could not believe those story about the will of god to guide the american and to directly communicate with the president..... What the he** is that??????
 
How the hell do you figure there are 80 million hardcore fundamentalists in the US?
 
Back
Top Bottom