The irony being, originally the invasion of Iraq was tied by the Bush administration to fighting terrorism. Now he's still regarded as being better at dealing with terrorism, even while electorate approval of his handling of Iraq continues falling.
John. Kerry. Not. Running. In. 2008. Stop.
- Thread starter Pontiuth Pilate
- Start date
- Status
The irony being, originally the invasion of Iraq was tied by the Bush administration to fighting terrorism. Now he's still regarded as being better at dealing with terrorism, even while electorate approval of his handling of Iraq continues falling.
Sahkuhnder
Delusions of grandeur
I found this but I don't recognize the source, even though it posts data from sources I do trust. I thought it better to post a more mainstream news article source like USA Today, even if it is a bit out of date. Plus the article headline "Bush approval rating hits new low" backs up what I was saying that Bush popularity 2000 =/= 2004 =/= 2006. The new link has different overall numbers, but still nicely charts his decline over the last few years and even as far back as 2001.
Sahkuhnder
Delusions of grandeur
Standing by MB on this one
No problem. Please feel free to do what he has failed to do and post some actual data in support of your opinion.
I don't think they did polls back then, but John Wilkes Booth didn't seem too fond of him.
Actually, in mid-November it was a plurality, not a majority with Bush getting a 1-point edge over Democrats in Congress 46% to 45%. If you assume that Iraq is a central front in the war on terror (as Bush does) then the Dems get the nod 53% to 38%. Your view is so 2004.
http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
I bolded your quotation marks. If there were an investigations, they were, as you put them, "investigations". The Florida was undeniably fraudulent. Well, undeniable if you prefer logic over dogmatically influenced reasoning. I think my favorite part, was that election fraud aside (which nevertheless should not be an aside) if a FULL statewide recount took place, one advocated by Bush instead of Gore, and if such a recount had not been blocked by a supreme court voting party lines, Gore won.
I will further conclude from readings I did early in Bush's first term, so I no longer have specifics, that Bush was just as, if not more so, in place to sue his way into the presidency as Gore, and that furthermore Bush being on the defending side of the recount was merely a media perception, and had little basis on reality for they were both trying to claim victory that was not definitively in their grasp.
I don't even dislike Bush, but have you seen his approval rating lately? He's certainly less popular than he was in 2000, and Gore is definitely a lot MORE popular than he was back then. I don't even think it would be much of a contest.
Don't see where you're logic is in that statement?
Kraznaya
Princeps
Sounds like the "We Will Gain Seats in the House" statements before the 06 midterm elections.
No doubt.
Insane_Panda
Deity
Don't forget that was before the aggressive re-districting of the 90's. A lot more seats were in play on average before than were in play in '06.
EDIT: Yes, I do deny this. Looking at the records, the Democrats only gained 5 seats in the house, and the republicans lost 5. The Senate was taken by the Democrats, but thats it in terms of losses. This compared to 2006, where the Democrats gained 30 seats in the House.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_elections%2C_1986
DBear
unbeliever
Democrats. will. be. stuck. with. She. Who. Must. Not. Be. Named.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
*presents Kraznaya with an official Most Thorough Pwning Of Mob In This Thread Award*
I wonder how many Republicans will switch registrations just to vote for her in the primary.
Actual Democrats mostly hate her guts. Even worse than Republicans do. You hate her because she's a woman and because she's Bill Clinton's wife and because she's supposedly an uberliberal.
We hate her because we know she's not a liberal, she's not the next Clinton and she doesn't represent women.
Kraznaya
Princeps
No doubt.
Thank you, I would like to take this time to thank the Academy, and the
I doubt that many Pubs will change party lines, it would be like... getting Canadian citizenship for them, even for a while.
Power politics is overrated and 06 proves that Rove tactics are not god.Agree with latter portion of statement.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Thats baloney. Even the recounts that were done in Florida were in favor of Bush and actually extended his count further.
A person who prefers logic tends to not believe in conspiracy theories. You lose.
Kraznaya
Princeps
Actually indecisive. Although the recounts that had happened had extended Bush's lead, the fact is that the majority of the questionable votes were never recounted due to the court order.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Funny you only respond when I barb my rhetoric.
Firstly, I said if a FULL statewide recount took place. That was not the partial "recounts that were done in Florida" that I directly quote from you. This plays back to a thread I started a few years ago when I was still in high school, in which we are speaking two different languages here. Otherwise I'd accuse you of deliberately twisting my words.
Wanna talk conspiracy? First let's remember what a conspiracy is, not the linguistic myth that conspiracy means paranoia of conspiracy. A conspiracy is a secret agreement among two or more individuals to commit a wrongful act.
First, some background before the conspiracy: In Florida, a contract was signed for a private company to purge felons from being allowed to vote as per Florida State law.
Second, well known facts about felons in Florida: they are disproportionately black, and blacks overwhelmingly vote democrat. This is concrete. (BTW, 31% of black men in Florida are felons)
Third, Florida's executive branch had vested interest in the successful election of George Bush: party, idealogical, and arguably familial interests.
Fourth, the election was clearly going to be contested as polls would show: party loyalists would fight to win.
Therefore when the following occured, you can understand that at least there was a conspiracy to turn a blind eye not to correct in time, and at worst a deliberate plan reaching to the highest echelons of the party (personally I suspect a middle ground): The company assigned to purge the rolls over purged in a number of ways: First, they purged those with the names of those felons. Then they purged those with similar names, excluding many nonfelons as well, then they purged people Wrongfully Accused in the State of Texas (When watchdogs discovered this malfeasance, there was some action reverse that, which resulted in some corrections but still thousands of overwhelmingly democratic voters denied their franchise, more than enough to way overturn the election results). Many thousands of legally enfranchised black democratic voters were illegally disenfranchised by this. And this was caused by Republican officials ranging from complacency to deliberacy.
Firstly, I said if a FULL statewide recount took place. That was not the partial "recounts that were done in Florida" that I directly quote from you. This plays back to a thread I started a few years ago when I was still in high school, in which we are speaking two different languages here. Otherwise I'd accuse you of deliberately twisting my words.
Wanna talk conspiracy? First let's remember what a conspiracy is, not the linguistic myth that conspiracy means paranoia of conspiracy. A conspiracy is a secret agreement among two or more individuals to commit a wrongful act.
First, some background before the conspiracy: In Florida, a contract was signed for a private company to purge felons from being allowed to vote as per Florida State law.
Second, well known facts about felons in Florida: they are disproportionately black, and blacks overwhelmingly vote democrat. This is concrete. (BTW, 31% of black men in Florida are felons)
Third, Florida's executive branch had vested interest in the successful election of George Bush: party, idealogical, and arguably familial interests.
Fourth, the election was clearly going to be contested as polls would show: party loyalists would fight to win.
Therefore when the following occured, you can understand that at least there was a conspiracy to turn a blind eye not to correct in time, and at worst a deliberate plan reaching to the highest echelons of the party (personally I suspect a middle ground): The company assigned to purge the rolls over purged in a number of ways: First, they purged those with the names of those felons. Then they purged those with similar names, excluding many nonfelons as well, then they purged people Wrongfully Accused in the State of Texas (When watchdogs discovered this malfeasance, there was some action reverse that, which resulted in some corrections but still thousands of overwhelmingly democratic voters denied their franchise, more than enough to way overturn the election results). Many thousands of legally enfranchised black democratic voters were illegally disenfranchised by this. And this was caused by Republican officials ranging from complacency to deliberacy.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
More ballots in Florida were marked Gore than Bush. That's according to the strictest standard used in the recounts Bush agreed to - by more common-sense standards, Gore won by tens of thousands of votes. The only reason Bush won is because those votes weren't counted. But the legal technicalities of a recount don't obviate the fact that the people of Florida wanted Gore to be President - as did the rest of the country. And since that's what this thread is about, you're wrong.
See, that's me being nice, I didn't even add an "as usual" to the end of that
Anyway, to sum up, Gore won and then ****ed up the recount. But the requirement for being President is getting people to vote for you, not having a great team of lawyers. Bush was not elected President and the history books will have as snide things to say about him as they have to say about Hayes. It's not the first time America screwed up an election.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Is "May God continue to bless America" a new thing? Quite an arrogant statement I'd say. "God bless America" is an expresion of hope, add 'continue' and it becomes a self-righteuos statement.
Or is that the Loves Smell of Own Farts European in me talking?
Or is that the Loves Smell of Own Farts European in me talking?
scipian
Czar
That actually is a quite a good poll/graph. I'm not particularly saying Bush would win an election now or that he's real popular or anything. I was just sorta annoyed at the laziness in posting a more or less moot poll.
scipian
Czar
Was that directed towards me? Because what I posted was from January 25th, 2007. Quite recent.
- Status
Similar threads
