PDA

View Full Version : Blair Ratings Plunge After Iraq Scientist Suicide


zimv20
Jul 23, 2003, 12:28 AM
link (http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=3131040)


It also showed Blair's personal approval rating had dropped to minus 17 -- down from plus seven on the so-called "Baghdad Bounce" in the immediate aftermath of the war.


how is it possible to be at -17? do the brits use a different scale?

[pretend idiocy]
is it metric?
[/pretend idiocy]

macfan
Jul 23, 2003, 12:31 AM
LOL, not even Gray Davis (Gov. Short-timer) has a -17!

Rower_CPU
Jul 23, 2003, 12:48 AM
Maybe an over/under 50% rating...?

Oh, and calling a 2 term governor "short timer" is a little disingenuous...and premature. ;)

The record for a CA Gov is 5 days. :eek:
http://www.infospect.com/govs.html#Latham

macfan
Jul 23, 2003, 12:51 AM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Maybe an over/under 50% rating...?

Oh, and calling a 2 term governor "short timer" is a little disingenuous...and premature. ;)

The record for a CA Gov is 5 days. :eek:
http://www.infospect.com/govs.html#Latham

Not really. He may win the recall, but it looks fairly certain to go forward.

Rower_CPU
Jul 23, 2003, 12:55 AM
Originally posted by macfan
Not really. He may win the recall, but it looks fairly certain to go forward.

Until he loses the recall election, calling him "short timer" is premature.

toontra
Jul 23, 2003, 02:07 AM
My personal problem with Blair is that, when pressed on his reasons for invading Iraq, he continually states that he took the action because, finally, it was his "passionate personal belief" that it was the right thing to do (with a quaver in the voice and an onion in the eye we have become accustomed to in the UK whenever he wants to appear sincere).
What this actually means is his Christian morality.
I have a problem with that. Surely the leader of a country should make serious decisions like this based on calm analysis and a careful weighing up of all the facts at his disposal, and this should not be prejudiced by "passionate personal beliefs".
As far as I'm concerned he's finished. I reckon he'll resign before the next election at best, unless anything underhand is made to stick in the coming weeks about improper practice about the intelligence which he used to justify war, in which case he'll be forced to resign.
Either way, good riddance!

caveman_uk
Jul 23, 2003, 05:57 AM
I think the -17 is the difference between the percentage of people who think he's doing a good job and those that think he's a two-faced liar. So -17 would mean mostly the latter.

zimv20
Jul 23, 2003, 09:52 AM
Originally posted by caveman_uk
I think the -17 is the difference between the percentage of people who think he's doing a good job and those that think he's a two-faced liar.

that sounds reasonable. thanks!

zimv20
Jul 23, 2003, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by toontra
My personal problem with Blair is that, when pressed on his reasons for invading Iraq, he continually states that he took the action because, finally, it was his "passionate personal belief" that it was the right thing to do


sounds like what molly ivins says about bush:

It's not stupidity as much as ignorance, and his inability and unwillingness to learn. He's not very curious. And it's not a first-rate mind. I mean, you get him to a certain point in a discussion, and if you ever hear him talk about "my instinct" or "my gut tells me," then you know we're in trouble. Then you know we have left the realm of facts and logic and where we're going is something else altogether.


link (http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/07/10_ivins.html)