Bush admits he was wrong on Iraq!!!

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Oct 8, 2004.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #1
    Well no, not really. :D

    (Oh, come on, don't get mad. You didn't really fall for that, did you?)

    My real question is: say Bush were to admit his mistake. "I was wrong. I never should have taken us into Iraq. I apologize to the American people, especially the families of those brave young men and women who died because I refused to listen to my own staff. I will now try to make the best of the situation as it is in Iraq. I will try to put things right. And I will learn from this mistake, so that I will never make another like it again."

    Would people be less inclined to vote for him, or more likely to vote for him?

    On the one hand, he'd be admitting he was a royal screw-up. On the other hand, there is a certain segment of the population that believes it takes a big man to admit he's wrong, and that if you sincerely admit your mistake, you deserve a second chance. I wonder if any of the fence-sitters would be in that group?
     
  2. Roger1 macrumors 65816

    Roger1

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Location:
    Michigan
    #2
    I think more people would vote him, because it takes a lot of guts to admit a mistake this colossal. But I still won't vote for him.
     
  3. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #3
    It does take a big man to admit when you are wrong. But to deny, deny, deny until the evidence is so stacked against you does not work in my book. You have to admit you are wrong when you know you are wrong rather than remaining in denial until everyone else knows you are wrong.

    If he admits he was wrong now he has two choices. He can admit that he didn't see any of the signs he was wrong until now (either completely out of the loop or not intelligent enough to grasp the situation). Or he can admit that he has been misleading the American public for at least a couple months. Not good choices.
     
  4. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #4
    Something wrong with someone who cant ever admit a mistake and even spinning the lack of WMDs now for going in. Bush has character flaws and never being wrong is a big one.
     
  5. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #5
    Accountability.

    Honesty is not a pleasant option for Bush either...:

    " I would like to apollogize to the American People, the People of Iraq, The people of Afghanistan. I was misinformed and rushed to war on faulty intelligence. I regret my administration (save Mr. Powell) lacks appropriate experience in security, military and foreign policy. My administration was built around the assumption that I'd have four years to work on the economy with little to worry about abroad."

    Wouldn't be pretty. :D ;)
     
  6. katchow macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #6
    well, it seems like we're conceding that bush just made a mistake?

    if we actually went into iraq based on other motives (not just intelligience reports, or the major-threat argument, but things like oil and his own re-election) then did he ever really make a mistake?
     
  7. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #7
    If those were the reasons he hasn't made a mistake going to Iraq but he's been lying to the world for well over a year now which would be worse than the mistake. It would mean that he put the troops in harm's way for politcal/economic issues rather than the safety of our country. He's in a bind. To admit a mistake he has the two options I outlined earlier, stupidity or misleading the people. To not admit a mistake makes him seem out of touch with reality. To admit true motives should be impeachment at the least. I don't see a gracefull way out of this and recent polls are starting to show that he is losing ground.
     
  8. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #8
    I was supposing a best case scenario for Bush admitting ANYTHING. I find it impossible that he'd admit complicity in misusing Executive power to foreward personal gains. No matter the likelihood of such a transgression it's just outside the realm of possibility.
     
  9. katchow macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #9
    i can dream can't I? :)
     
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    He'd plead the fifth.
     
  11. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #11
    It's an interesting question, but not one at all appropriate for the Bush administration. Rather, I think the question is better in the hypothetical, asking whether President X's admission of wrong doing on matter Y would elicit a particular response from electorate Z (or, perhaps, specifically, the US electorate). However, the Bush administration's ardent steadfastness and enthusiasm for terminating any employee who disagrees with its neoconservative agenda.

    I have heard about studies, though, that consider just this question. The study I'm referring to (which I found out about through CNN) suggested that politicians benefit from admitting wrongdoing (and, importantly, from apologizing), but that the extent to which they benefit diminishes with the duration of the controversy. That is, if a politician waits until apology is the last resort, the political gain is marginal. Moreover, if the politician's apology does not admit wrongdoing (although that is not the case for our hypothetical situation), then its efficacy is also severely reduced. I'm not sure whether these effects are a result of the number of people who consider the politician's acts wrong or questionable (which, one might suppose in many instances, increases over time) or the public's general receptiveness to contrition.
     
  12. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #12
    We can see two good examples:

    "I am not a crook."

    Result: Only avoided Impeachment via Presidential pardon from his replacement. Essentially the entire Whitehouse staff was investigated, fired, arrested, resigned or melted off the scene.


    (Paraphrasing): "I didn'y have sex with her, I just had a little hummer. It was stupid and hurtful and I apologize."

    Result: Higher approval rating, failed impeachment, GOP witch-hunt was more obvious that any since Mcarthy.
     
  13. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #13
    He's stuck either way, but he would never admit it because he's known that it's possible he might be wrong all along. The proof has been tenuous at best since the beginning. People like Richard Clarke and Howard Dean raised questions, but this administration already had it's mind made up and were working backwards to find reasons to go. That's why the reasons keep changing. He won't admit it because he can't.

    People wouldn't forgive him either way because it's too little too late anyway.
     

Share This Page