Exit poll predicition: Arnold in/Davis out.

[medea]

"CNN projects that California's electorate will recall Democratic Gov. Gray Davis and choose actor-turned-politician, Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger as the state's next governor, based on statewide exit polls.
Despite recent reports that Schwarzenegger allegedly groped and sexually harassed at least 15 women, CNN exit polls showed that roughly 47 percent of female voters backed the Austrian-born actor. Men voted heavily for Schwarzenegger, according to these exit polls.
A whopping 72 percent of those who voted Tuesday said they disapproved of Davis's job performance, according to the exit polls, with only 27 percent giving the incumbent a positive approval rating. "
Polls closed at 8 p.m. (11 p.m. EDT).
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/recall.main/index.html


Crazy.

[Durandal7]

Latest tallies:

Yes- 57%
No- 43%
% of precincts reporting: 11

[Les Kern]

This country is screwed up. Can some please tell me exactly when we went from sick to insane? Don't even get me started on why I believe this is a travesty.

[SoonToGetAMac]

I can't believe this! Although only 17% precincts are reporting, this is really depressing if Arnold is the new governor.

[Doctor Q]

A large exit poll is likely to be more accurate than the early vote tally, because the early tally usually has a large percentage of absentee votes, and absentee votes tend to come from the more upscale voters, who tend to be more conservative. We'll see.

[jasylonian]

what's more depressing than a $38,000,000,000 deficit with high unemployment? gray davis was depressing with his "wait and see" approach, his pay-for-play administration, constant lies about his "handling" of the economy, size of the budget deficit, signing of a bill to give ILLEGAL immigrants driver's licenses in order to win the votes of LEGAL immigrants, and.... Sure, Schwarzenegger may not be the most intelligent man on the planet, but politics has never been and never will be about a single man's intelligence. He has a political staff that is good enough to win an election for Republicans in an overwhelmingly Democratic state and obviously has some knowledge of the issues at hand. I can't wait until the Democrats start clogging up the attorney general's office with their whiny lawsuits and the "Reverend" Jesse "I enjoy making bastards" Jackson starts sticking his nose where it shouldn't be. If people can't read the back of their sample ballots to find out where their polling location is, they shouldn't have the right to vote. Democracy won today. Get over it. Ya, I know this probably doesn't make much sense, but I'm incredibly annoyed with all you pansy whiners complaining about Repubs in the Governor's Mansion.

[CMillerERAU]

(at the risk of being flamed into oblivion) here! here! jasylonian!

[G4scott]

As of right now, the porn star is 11th, with 2664 votes...

So, guys, are you going to start chanting for a recall like the fools at the Davis speech?

[Dros]

It is funny that Republicans are so quick to embrace a man that has engaged in non-consensual sexual activities while married when they had a complete fit over Clinton's consensual activities. Which were worse?

Is this process really democratic? How come Davis couldn't be elected after a recall? He had (at one time, numbers will change) 44% of the voters wanting him to stay. It is possible that is more people than voted for Arnold. I don't know how it will turn out, but it seems really odd to me that someone could have gotten elected with fewer votes than wanted the original person to stay. Bizarre system.

[KCK]

Originally posted by Dros
It is funny that Republicans are so quick to embrace a man that has engaged in non-consensual sexual activities while married when they had a complete fit over Clinton's consensual activities. Which were worse?B]

You mean just like the democrats supported Clinton in the Paula Jones case ( which was non-consensual) yet the democrats are leading the charge against Arnold?

Is this process really democratic? How come Davis couldn't be elected after a recall? He had (at one time, numbers will change) 44% of the voters wanting him to stay. It is possible that is more people than voted for Arnold. I don't know how it will turn out, but it seems really odd to me that someone could have gotten elected with fewer votes than wanted the original person to stay. Bizarre system.

In Calif. we have term limits. You can only be elected to the same office twice. Davis has already been elected governor twice so under term limits he isn't able to be elected governor again. Also it is the way the recall provisions in the state constitution is written ( which was upheld by a court by the way)

[CMillerERAU]

I have heard a lot of talk about the things that Arnold did with women and I can see several thing that distinguish what he did from Clinton. First off, this happened a long, long time ago. What most people got upset over Clinton was that he did it WHILE in office. What Arnold did was decades ago. And I guess in politics it’s really a matter of the better of the two evils, a Republican with a tarnished image or a Democrat? I think most Republicans will choose the Republican, especially in Arnold's case. At least he came out and apologized instead of Clinton who danced around before finally apologizing (a very weak apology in my eyes). Frankly I would think anyone could do a better job than Davis’s administration. And since the only other leading Democrat was Bustamante, Davis’s right-hand-man, my next choice in line would be Arnold. Well after the stripper and the 100 year old lady of course. ;)

[Lancetx]

Originally posted by Dros
It is funny that Republicans are so quick to embrace a man that has engaged in non-consensual sexual activities while married when they had a complete fit over Clinton's consensual activities. Which were worse?


True enough. But what's also quite funny is that the same people who are now complaining the loudest about Arnold's alleged sexual past didn't have any issues with Clinton and his sexual exploits in the Oval Office or the Arkansas Governor's mansion either. As for which was worse? Well, ask Paula Jones or Juanita Broaddrick if their encounters with Clinton were consensual and see what they say...

[jasylonian]

There is talk of Schwarzenegger getting more votes than Davis did in the last election... It's still early. Meanwhile, I would rather have had Riordan or Ueberroth win it, but Arnold took over. I also believe that people can change. While Clinton was sexually harrassing people in office and getting Monicas in the Oval Office, Arnold was settling down with Maria Shriver. Do I blame Clinton for anything? Well, I guess I got a little upset with him for causing a distraction, but other than that, he was a fairly solid president despite leaving GW with an economy that was trending towards recession. In 8 years, it's gonna happen. Davis, on the other hand... his whole administration has been one disaster after another.

[Doctor Q]

Arnold promised to address each of the women's allegations when the election was over. Do you think he will?

[Dros]

Originally posted by KCK
You mean just like the democrats supported Clinton in the Paula Jones case ( which was non-consensual) yet the democrats are leading the charge against Arnold?


In Calif. we have term limits. You can only be elected to the same office twice. Davis has already been elected governor twice so under term limits he isn't able to be elected governor again. Also it is the way the recall provisions in the state constitution is written ( which was upheld by a court by the way)

Just as long as we both agree that both parties completely don't care about the morals of the politicians and it is just politics. I guess it rubs me a little more the wrong way when the Republicans do it with "Family values" so central to their ideology.

As for the legality of the process, sure, fine. I said it was bizarre, not illegal. Term limits are to prevent someone from holding power forever, not holding more than 1 term and 1 year. Technically it may be right, but I'm just saying it is weird. Don't you think it could be strange that someone could be thrown out with close to 50% supporters and then someone else win with much less. It doesn't look that is the case here, Arnold will have similar support to Davis, but just that it could happen seems wrong.

[rainman::|:|]

well then i guess this proves that only 57% of Californians are nutcases... as opposed to the 100% that everyone thought before. So arnold has already done good, i guess.

at least we won't see the man in any movies for the next 3 years.

pnw

[Waluigi]

I can't wait until tomorrow night's conan o'brein when they talk to arnold via stalite!!

Good luck to arnold, who will have one hell of a task ahead of him.

--Waluigi

[Backtothemac]

Ok, everyone take a deep breath and read this slowly.

THIS is not only a good thing for the State of California, but for the US as a country. It was the PEOPLE that voted in this recall, and they sent a message to the politicians. STOP SCREWING US!

How can this be bad for democracy, when this is democracy in action. AND do not compare Clinton to Arnold. They are not one in the same. Clinton did what Clinton did, and that was that. As a republican I don't care what he did in his personal life, just don't lie under oath. Other than that, I can give a crap what Clinton did. And this is not the same, because this was smear tactics by a politician that has done this stuff in the past. Two days before an election. Please. That is a joke.

Furthermore, I hope that Arnold does succeed. Maybe the rest of the jackasses that are in office will get a message straight from California. We sometimes don't have to wait four years to get you out. Thank God for this recall, it has once again empowered the PEOPLE to decide their destiny in government beyond a party line. Arnold isn't a "true" republican. I think he is a perfect republican. He is what I am. A social moderate, and a fiscal conservative. mcrain knows that i have called myself that for years here.

Pro gay rights, pro choice, anti partial birth abortions, pro imigration (by the rules), pro national defense, pro small government, anti-taxes.

Finally, someone with MY ideals is representing a state in this great country.

I go to sleep a happier man tonight.

[jasylonian]

hooray for moderate republicans! Now if only we could convince Doug Ose not to retire....

[CMillerERAU]

jasylonian and Backtothemac:

Good to see people like me in this world, all I ever hear about is how liberal I am (from my conservative friends) or how conservative (from my liberal friends)! I too think Arnold is the perfect Republican, lets just hope he holds up to his promises.

[hulugu]

I hope that Arnie manages to do a single thing he has promised because California and the rest of the country are in bad shape economically. You can argue whether this is because of an uncontrollable down-turn or failed Republican policies, but no matter what we need a real and true governance and not the straw-man government of Schwartzeneger. What bothers me most about him is not his apparent groping and cheating (although I agree Clinton had the audacity to confuse sexual terminology and lie under oath, while Arnold immediately appologized), but his total lack of actual policy. He just says things that sound great, but I don't think he has any real idea of what to do. But, I believe the National GOP does. So, California is now beholden to the same conservative idealogy that runs the White House.
Also, the Energy Crisis in California was caused by Enron. You remember Enron right? And the Republican links to Enron? Right?
Arnold's environmental idealogy seems non-existant (fleet of Hummers, G-Wagons, etc.), he lacks any progressive thoughts, and he seems to believe that cutting taxes will allow the state government to have a better fiscal period (huh?)
I hope the Terminator will be able to stand against the bad-parts of the Republican party and remain a moderate social conservative, but I have the distinct feeling that the Christian Right, the NRA, etc. will be asking for favors and will not go begging this time.
So, while Davis was obviously a poor governor, I don't think you've traded in for a better one. I think this a lateral move to the right at best.

[Balin64]

Originally posted by jasylonian
what's more depressing than a $38,000,000,000 deficit with high unemployment? gray davis was depressing with his "wait and see" approach, his pay-for-play administration, constant lies about his "handling" of the economy, size of the budget deficit, signing of a bill to give ILLEGAL immigrants driver's licenses in order to win the votes of LEGAL immigrants, and.... Sure, Schwarzenegger may not be the most intelligent man on the planet, but politics has never been and never will be about a single man's intelligence. He has a political staff that is good enough to win an election for Republicans in an overwhelmingly Democratic state and obviously has some knowledge of the issues at hand. I can't wait until the Democrats start clogging up the attorney general's office with their whiny lawsuits and the "Reverend" Jesse "I enjoy making bastards" Jackson starts sticking his nose where it shouldn't be. If people can't read the back of their sample ballots to find out where their polling location is, they shouldn't have the right to vote. Democracy won today. Get over it. Ya, I know this probably doesn't make much sense, but I'm incredibly annoyed with all you pansy whiners complaining about Repubs in the Governor's Mansion.

Those ILLEGAL immigrants picked the lettuce and veggies you ate today, as well as performed the most dangerous jobs in the country, a**hole. If you were from California you would not have that opinion. You, like most Americans, are so woefully misinformed about your own affairs it draws your intelligence and ability to observe your own sietz-im-liebe to a pathetic and irresponsible level. Yes: indeed: Democracy spoke today: look at another feckless leader you Americans "elected." Your unconcousness is no longer scary... it is alarming. Stop making excuses for your stupidity and ignorance: do you really not comprehend what happened today? A person you elected for four years was just struck down. What does that say for your loyalty/accountability? Oh, and getting back to your original comment of "Illegal Immigrants", do you forget that unless your ancestors were people who crossed the Bearing Strait you were the original Illegal Immigrant? Grow Up America!

[Balin64]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
THIS is not only a good thing for the State of California, but for the US as a country. It was the PEOPLE that voted in this recall, and they sent a message to the politicians. STOP SCREWING US!


PLEASE! This was NOT Democracy at work! Who, mind you, payed for the signature-gathering company? Yes, a Republican who spent 2 million of his own money to ensure the 890,000 signatures necessary to get the recall on the ballot. Without his bankroll, they mustered only 200,000. Yeez, do you guys listen to your own American Media? I listen to the BBC and feel more informed than you. Or are you just myopic? America easily exchanges terms: democracy, patriotism, freedom. They are NOT interchangeable, only if you blindly follow the rhetoric of your government. Open your eyes and conceptualize... is THIS what your "founding fathers" intended... really?

[jywv8]

Originally posted by Doctor Q
Arnold promised to address each of the women's allegations when the election was over. Do you think he will?

Maybe when hell freezes over.

[jywv8]

Originally posted by Dros
I guess it rubs me a little more the wrong way when the Republicans do it with "Family values" so central to their ideology.

My thoughts exactly.


Originally posted by Backtothemac Other than that, I can give a crap what Clinton did. And this is not the same, because this was smear tactics by a politician that has done this stuff in the past. Two days before an election. Please. That is a joke.

Spending $40 million to have a Big Tobacco flunky smear a president and finding no evidence of wrong-doing anywhere, except for the cover-up of a sexual affair, and releasing the Starr Report, complete with pornographic details, to Congress and the public just a month before the 1998 elections. Now that's a better joke.

I'm laughing on the inside.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by Balin64
PLEASE! This was NOT Democracy at work! Who, mind you, payed for the signature-gathering company? Yes, a Republican who spent 2 million of his own money to ensure the 890,000 signatures necessary to get the recall on the ballot. Without his bankroll, they mustered only 200,000. Yeez, do you guys listen to your own American Media? I listen to the BBC and feel more informed than you. Or are you just myopic? America easily exchanges terms: democracy, patriotism, freedom. They are NOT interchangeable, only if you blindly follow the rhetoric of your government. Open your eyes and conceptualize... is THIS what your "founding fathers" intended... really?

Yes, but it IS democracy at work because of the people that voted. Look at the turnout. Look at the number. I am not talking about the gathering of sigs, but the way the recall played out.

[Dros]

I have mixed emotions about the recall process because, while it provides a direct link to the voting populace and holds leaders responsible, it also panders to a fickle public.

What leader in recent years has maintained a popularity level greater than 50% for their entire term? Now, anytime people get caught up in the heat of the moment the leader can be ousted. Is that what we want?

So, with 99% of the precincts reporting:
Arnold got 3,570,000 votes
Davis got 3,490,000 "no recall" votes

Who would have won head to head?

Some percentage of the people that voted "no recall" then went on to vote for Arnold, even though they may have preferred Davis.

Likewise, some people voted against recall because they thought the process was wrong, but then voted for Arnold and would prefer Arnold.

It would have been extremely close, I think. And I think it would have been a better process if the two most popular candidates were allowed to be chosen by the voting public.

[wdlove]

The recall option is the law in California. So I agree that the election was legal. I'm very happy about the outcome. All I can say is that I prayed for the election, just like I did in the 2000 & 2002 election.

[jasylonian]

Balin 64, before you go out on your self-righteous rants, you should probably start by making less assumptions. First of all, I am from California and I do appreciate everything that hard-working illegal immigrants have done for this country. In fact, prior to September 11th, 2001, I was a big fan of the idea of extending citizenship to them. Unfortunately, I find the plan to be less feasible while trying to maintain national security. Secondly, I believe driving is a privilege of citizenship. Therefore, if the privilege is extended to non-citizens I have to wonder what my citizenship stands for. I also believe that signing the bill was a grab for voters especially since Davis was unwilling to sign a similar bill earlier in his administration. Third of all, I'm Taiwanese. Therefore, my ancestors (read: my parents) are legal immigrants. As a result of the legal means by which my parents obtained their citizenship, I cherish it for all it's worth and am offended when I believe that it is being cheapened. My loyalty never was to Gray Davis. And for all those who did vote for him to be governor for 4 years and proceeded to recall him, they have the right to believe that he has committed an offense which justifies the recall, such as (but not limited to) lying about the size of the budget deficit in order to be in office. And you have not even seen Governor-Elect Schwarzenegger at work and you are already calling him "feckless." Is that really what you think of every Republican that will ever take the stage? In that case, I should just say that every Democrat ever to have existed is useless and we'd be even. However, since I am more open-minded than you, I believe in giving elected officials a chance whether or not I voted for them. Gray Davis had his chance and his approval rating dropped to 26 percent. Basically, YOU, BALIN 64, are the reason I hate debating because your only argument is "you're stupid because you're republican" and by extension "you're racist and greedy." So instead of insulting my intelligence with words and your existence, why don't you try debating me in a matter befitting the civilized world?

[hulugu]

Do I have to?

To address a few things:

First, this is Democracy at work, it is a messy system far-removed from the streamlined ideal we believe the founding-fathers created. In fact it was just as messy then, there were newspapers and pamphlets that exposed lies and contradictions, politicians fought, rember Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton? They fought a duel to decide how the Treasury should be established.

Second, Davis' move to give illegal immigrants driver's licenses was stupid both politically and in practice. I agree, illegal immigrants are just that, illegal, however California has built its economy on the backs of these transient people and that needs to be acknowledged. A driver's license is a mark of citizenship and is not an inherent right, however health care I believe is. Illegal immigrants should be made legal, not stigmatized and ignored.
Third, I'm willing to give Arnold a chance, but I think the body-builder turned actor turned governor does not have a clue on how to guide California out of its recession. I believe, as I posted before, he is a straw-man or a prince with a Republican Machiavelli pulling the strings.
Fourth, not all Republicans are racist, greedy and stupid...it just seems that way.
It's a joke laugh.
Democrats are idiot spend-thrift womanizing wankers who couldn't fight a war against a 5th grade civic-class.
Laugh, the Europeans are.
Which, by the way, those cheese-eating surrender monkeys and their brethren need to stop critiquing the US on government. We're a Republic damnit! Read a civics book, you're socialists, Monarchy's w/ a strong Paraliament, etc. And oh yeah, with the exception of the British Europe was controlled by a bunch of facists. So maybe you could hold off for another century before telling the world's oldest democracy what to do.
Flame me, I dare you.

[Dros]

Originally posted by wdlove
The recall option is the law in California. So I agree that the election was legal. I'm very happy about the outcome. All I can say is that I prayed for the election, just like I did in the 2000 & 2002 election.

Were you praying for the same things? A pro-life, pro-gun control, pro-gay rights Republican? I don't know what your politics are, so I don't know if you are the right person to ask, but how many Republicans here are really happy for the platform Arnold has espoused? Or is that secondary to getting Davis out?

No one wants to speculate if Gray or Arnold would have won head to head?

[ColoJohnBoy]

My secret hope? Gray Davis resigns before the vote is ceritified. That way Bustamante becomes governor, and the whole recall is negated. Sure court battles would follow, but there's no legal precedent for it, neither is there in recourse for pro-Governator people. Davis wouldn't be breaking any rules, other than those of courtesy and good taste.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by ColoJohnBoy
My secret hope? Gray Davis resigns before the vote is ceritified. That way Bustamante becomes governor, and the whole recall is negated. Sure court battles would follow, but there's no legal precedent for it, neither is there in recourse for pro-Governator people. Davis wouldn't be breaking any rules, other than those of courtesy and good taste.

Actually, that would not work. The vote is a valid vote, and election law at the time of the vote would be upheld. He was in office, if he resigned, it would go to Arnold.

[jywv8]

Originally posted by hulugu
... those cheese-eating surrender monkeys and their brethren need to stop critiquing the US on government. We're a Republic damnit! Read a civics book, you're socialists, Monarchy's w/ a strong Paraliament, etc. And oh yeah, with the exception of the British Europe was controlled by a bunch of facists. So maybe you could hold off for another century before telling the world's oldest democracy what to do.
Flame me, I dare you.

Ah yes, well the current stereotype of Europeans is easily summarized. Europeans are weak, petulant, hypocritical, disunited, duplicitous appeasers. Americans, by contrast, are strong, principled defenders of freedom, standing tall in the patriotic service of the world’s last truly sovereign nation-state.

And, of course, the worst abuse is reserved for the French.

There has always been a strong strain of anti-Europeanism in the United States. This was recently obscured for eight years after the end of the Cold War by the presence of Bill Clinton. In 2001, George W. Bush, a gift to every European anti-American caricaturist, arrived in the White House with a unilateralist agenda, ready to jettison several international agreements.

It is interesting to note that the most publicly outspoken American Euro-bashers are neoconservatives using the same sort of combative rhetoric they have habitually deployed against American liberals.

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Pro gay rights

keep in mind this is the man who once said "i think gay marriage should be between a man and a woman".

yes, i wrote that right.

if he does a good job, then i'll eat my words. but until then, everything i've seen and heard from the man suggest a far-below-average intelligence. i'd guess about 82. which makes me think that he'll make a lot of bad decisions at the hands of advisors that a more intelligent person would be personally involved in. part of the reason bush isn't good. you never know which stooge is really pulling the strings at any given time...

pnw

[Dros]

Originally posted by paulwhannel
keep in mind this is the man who once said "i think gay marriage should be between a man and a woman".


He also said, "I have no sexual standards in my head that say this is good or this is bad. Homosexual-that only means to me that he enjoys sex with a man and I enjoy sex with a woman. It's all legitimate to me." It sounds like he supports domestic partnerships with adoption rights for gay couples. He isn't the most pro-gay candidate, but about as far left as any Republican I've heard on this issue. And since this is typicaly a litmus test issue for Republicans, along with abortion and gun control, for which he also goes against the party platforms, I was curious how that made Republicans feel. Here are issues central to the party platform, and yet I've heard barely a peep of protest. I guess everyone loves a winner. For a while.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by Balin64
Open your eyes and conceptualize... is THIS what your "founding fathers" intended... really?

No, the recall is a result of the populist movement of the turn of the 20th Century.

That said...yes, I like the idea that a charismatic movie star can become governor. I would have voted for McClintock myself (I'm pro-life) but even while I may not like Arnold Schwarzenegger, I do like the fact that people like him can come to America from a small village in Austria and become rich, famous, and governor of California.

And, for the record, I don't think Arnold is really that dumb. And, for someone in his position, he ran his campaign *perfectly*. Arnold ended up getting more votes than most candidates that win an actual election, and if it wasn't for McClintock, it would have been an utter landslide.

[Dros]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
That said...yes, I like the idea that a charismatic movie star can become governor.

I hope it turns out better than Estrada and the Philipines.

Didn't California already elect a charismatic movie star governor? How many times can you enjoy that particular scenario?

[CMillerERAU]

Originally posted by Dros
Didn't California already elect a charismatic movie star governor? How many times can you enjoy that particular scenario?

I don't know, that last time we had a movie star governor things went pretty well.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by Dros
I hope it turns out better than Estrada and the Philipines.

Didn't California already elect a charismatic movie star governor? How many times can you enjoy that particular scenario?

This time he's an A-list actor with little political involvement beforehand.

Reagan was a big Goldwater supporter and was active in the actor's union IIRC.

[Dros]

I wasn't commenting on Reagan's abilities as governor, nor implying that like Arnold, he had little to qualify him for the post.

I just wanted to point out to those that may not remember Reagan that your comment that you liked the idea that a movie star could become governor was not a new thing.

[Phil Of Mac]

Also, Reagan was born in America.

[Dros]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Also, Reagan was born in America.

Which will prevent the rest of the story from being repeated, unless Arnold does such an amazing job that we reverse the "born in the USA" rule and beg him to become President.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by Dros
Which will prevent the rest of the story from being repeated, unless Arnold does such an amazing job that we reverse the "born in the USA" rule and beg him to become President.

Orrin Hatch is also (coincidentally) introducing legislation to do that. I support it on principle: all things being equal, a naturalized citizen is going to care more about America than a natural-born citizen, after all, the naturalized citizen chose this country of his own free will.

[hulugu]

Originally posted by jywv8
Ah yes, well the current stereotype of Europeans is easily summarized. Europeans are weak, petulant, hypocritical, disunited, duplicitous appeasers. Americans, by contrast, are strong, principled defenders of freedom, standing tall in the patriotic service of the world’s last truly sovereign nation-state.

And, of course, the worst abuse is reserved for the French.

There has always been a strong strain of anti-Europeanism in the United States. This was recently obscured for eight years after the end of the Cold War by the presence of Bill Clinton. In 2001, George W. Bush, a gift to every European anti-American caricaturist, arrived in the White House with a unilateralist agenda, ready to jettison several international agreements.

It is interesting to note that the most publicly outspoken American Euro-bashers are neoconservatives using the same sort of combative rhetoric they have habitually deployed against American liberals.

I was actually being facetious and because that line from the Simpsons is actually very funny.
And, Americans have never necessarily been anti-European afterall the French did help us win the Revolutionary War, but we have always been suspicious of European involvement, ie Napoleon, etc. I trust the EU and its various governments about as far as I trust good old Shrub and that's not saying much.
My problem is with Europeans, the center of facism for much of the 20th Century suddenly finding democracy and then busily critiquing the US. The thing is, Democracy is hard and there are constant forces that push and pull at it; that tension can tear it apart, but that tension is also what makes it so great.
Europeans have been duplicitous, weak, and hypocritical and France hasn't the best record of winning the great battles (World War I & II, sorry but they surrendered Paris twice) and has fought tooth and nail for places it had no business in (Algeria and Vietnam). France's involvment in various things, including testing of nuclear weapons in the South Pacific, the continued development of nuclear reactors in Iran and Iraq (just like the Russians) as well as the sale of Exocet missiles, including to Argentina during the Falklands (which were used against their allies the British, oops!) haven't exactly endeared me.
Not that the US has been better, I don't think the neocons attitude of America, home of the brave land of the free rhetoric has been especially honest either, but the Europeans (not the entire population, but the governments of such) don't get to go unscathed because Shrub is a dumbass.