Bush's approval rating down AGAIN

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Aug 5, 2005.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #1
    Well, you can read the article for yourself, but did want to comment on some of the more incongruous parts of the story:

    Suburban women? Soccer moms? That was a group that was said to have voted overwhelmingly for Clinton in the 1992 and 1996 elections. They are only now coming to realize that Bush is dishonest?

    I have never understood this voter mentality. Why on earth should trust be more important than believing that your man is doing the right thing?

    Using that logic, I'd wanna be pals with people like con men, because even though I don't agree with their profession or understand how they do it, I at least know they're going to rob me.

    On second thought, that idea hits too close to reality. ;) Anyway.

    Oh my gosh, there are so many things wrong with that statement, I scarcely know where to begin.

    First of all, "likability" is bullcrap. To get back to my previous analogy, con men are "likable"...that's how they sucker you in. I'd sooner take a straightforward drone like Gore or Kerry than the "likable" liar who's in the White House now.

    And, uh, men of "character" and honesty do not lie to manipulate people, especially when those manipulations result in the deaths of U.S. soldiers. Bush is not only not honest in the things he says, he's not even a man of strong personal beliefs. He himself is a tool of co-presidents Cheney and Rove.

    And as far as not being afraid to show his belief in God, well...if you've ever heard Bush discuss his faith, his thoughts display all the depth of a Sunday school catechism.

    Bush's poll numbers may be sliding down, but it's obvious that there's still a sizeable portion of the voting public that is just effing stupid.
     
  2. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #2
    They're not stupid, they just wanted to believe so bad they let the neo-cons pull an old-fashioned con on them. People were desperate to restore 'honor and dignity' to the WH. Bush promised them that, and they took the bait.

    Hell, I think Bush was conned by the neo/theo-cons too. I think he believed we'd be in and out of Iraq by the time the '04 election rolled around.

    Regardless, it's not very helpful to call victims of a con stupid, and it's not helpful to call Americans who you'd like to have on your electoral side next time around stupid either.

    Of course I'm also tired of hearing how elitist I am, or how naive liberals are, how I don't support the troops etc etc. You don't win converts by putting them down.

    That said, Bush's numbers are tanking. Nothing he does seems to stop the slide. He gambled his presidency on the success of the Iraqi people, and so far he's losing that bet.

    As I said pre-election, outside of the SCOTUS nominees Bush will get, I'm glad Bush gets to deal with the mess he made for four more wars... I mean years. If Kerry had been elected the Iraq debacle would be all his fault by now.
     
  3. Roger1 macrumors 65816

    Roger1

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Location:
    Michigan
    #3
    I think it's sad that because I lean liberal, I hear the "liberals don't support our troops, or "America:Love it or Leave it!"
     
  4. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #4
    translation: "don't question the government Or strike off and start your own country like our forefathers did!"
     
  5. JesseJames macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2003
    Location:
    How'd I get here? How can I leave?
    #5
    (Sigh)
    Is anyone else getting a little tired of all this partisan bullcrap?
    Is it so f**king hard to want to do the RIGHT thing?
    Reduce our dependency on foreign oil, a sane national energy policy, shoring up public education, healthcare that works? Basic things that the government should be taking care of?
    INFRASTRUCTURE people. Can I get a "Hell yeah" for that?

    So damn sick of politicians and their pandering and flattering. Talking to people like we're morons at a pep rally. I'm even more upset at the voters of this country who are a bunch of shortsighted nincompoops. Their representatives are a direct reflection of themselves. (shaking head)

    Oh Lord...I...am...jaded. Trying hard not to let it turn to cynicism.
     
  6. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #6
    Back during the Vietnam war, author Harlan Ellison proposed an alternative saying: "America: Change It or Lose It". :)
     
  7. latergator116 macrumors 68000

    latergator116

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    #7
    I also heard "America: Fix it or F**k it" (not that I was around back then :p).
     
  8. xsedrinam macrumors 601

    xsedrinam

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    #8
    He he... :D I don't know if it's because I just got back from a 13 hour, all night drive and am so tired, or I just flat out resonate with a true, blue Cynic, but if you'd add pathetic foreign policy decision-making in that pool, I'd give you a "Hell yeah"!
    X
     
  9. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #9
    Almost thought this was an old thread...

    Those numbers just keep going down, don't they.

    You think that's bad. Try being an independent. Liberals calling you a selfish idiot, neocons saying you hate America and are no better than terrorists. Both side calling you fascists. At least when the Democrats were in charge I could criticize them. :rolleyes:

    What's worse, look at how they're treating real Republicans. John McCain getting lectured on torture. Arlen Spectre getting criticized for raising questions about nominees to very influential public offices, then getting lectured about stems cell (last I saw him, he wasn't in the best of shape). Not to mention people like George Voinovich, who backed down way to quickly IMO. All while people like Rick Santorum and Bill Frist get away with all sorts of actual crimes. Priorities are way off here, and people are starting to see it. It takes awhile, and sometimes they need to be personally affected to get it through their thick skulls. Some people still don't see it, but that happens on boths sides. It's just human nature, especially for Americans it seems.

    So Dems, how 'bout you stop calling me stupid and taking the high road, and start giving me a better candidate? Then, I don't know, maybe fight for it. People are scared, they want someone like Bush even if they don't like him. Which is a little sad. And scary. But that's the just way it is.
     
  10. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #10
    well as long as they don't try to be simply "republicans light" because that only made it worse in the last election
    they have to have a clear party line and not that "me too" line like they have at the moment

    they same problem which the austrian spö had a few years ago where after 15 years of the big coalition both parties were way to close to each other and thus both loosing voters to the smaller ones
     
  11. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #11
    The Dems need to put up better candidates, no doubt about it. But that still doesn't excuse those people who blindly put their trust in this administration. I mean heck, there is no civilized country in the world where guys like Bush could get elected...except this one. Says a lot about us, doesn't it?
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
  13. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #13
    Yeah, I shouldn't have said "the world", but certainly not in any advanced European country, for example (with the possible exception of Germany).

    But if we're thinking of other countries where Bush would be electable, and the best we can come up with is Iran and North Korea, well... :D
     
  14. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #14
    My point also.
    ;)
     
  15. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #15
    I assume you're not talking about postwar Germany here...
    :confused:
     
  16. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #16
    C'mon, surely your not implying that Gore and Kerry aren't bald faced liars too are you? Puh-leaze.

    Don't count me as blind Bush defender, but I recognize politics for what it is... POLITICS. The whole process is corrupt, and both (or all if you don't just limit to Repubs/Dems) sides are liars, cheats and thieves.

    Neither side can completely thump their chest in pride in their candidates IMHO. They are all human and break down in the process. We all have dirt we want hidden, words we wouldn't want repeated in public, and decisions we wish we could make differently.

    Also, campaigns are different than holding the office. Any can promise the moon, but delivering is a different matter. Just because a candidate promises to be the savior of the country and even the planet, doesn't mean that he can accomplish squat.

    When I vote, I vote against someone more than I do for someone.

    Woof, Woof - Dawg [​IMG]
     
  17. swindmill macrumors 6502a

    swindmill

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    KY
    #17
    To some extent, politicians may be dishonest in general, but you can't label a politician as either "honest" or "dishonest" and leave it at that. Honesty, like anything else, works on a continuum. This administration is about as far to the "dishonest" side of that continuum as any administration has ever been. To assert that Kerry and Gore are also "dishonest" does nothing the defend the deceptive tactics of the Bush Administration.
     
  18. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #18
    Hello, I said I wasn't trying to defend Bush, I said that specifically in my post...

    And I do think that all administrations have been dishonest, self serving and crooked from the get go... Kennedy<check>, Johnson<check>, Nixon<check>,Ford<check>, Carter<check>, Reagan<check>, Bush<check>, Clinton<check>, yep, that's in my conscious lifetime.

    But can't say that McGovern, Dukakis, Dole, et. al. would have been any better either.

    Not sure that Bush's administration is better/worse than any others. Doubt we have enough information on them all (what's on the surface is just the tip of the iceberg).

    And I do think that the record shows Gore and Kerry to be just as guilty of all of the things that others are accused of...

    Do I think Iraq is a mess? Yes
    Do I think that Kerry/Gore et. al. would have cleaned it up, lowered gas prices, saved the airline industry, cured the common cold and saved the world? Nah, not hardly.

    Could we do better than Bush? Yes
    Could we do worse? Yes

    Woof, Woof - Dawg [​IMG]
     
  19. swindmill macrumors 6502a

    swindmill

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    KY
    #19
    You may not have been trying to defend Bush, but you made a comment that took the defensive with regards to Bush's dishonesty, and that's what I was addressing. I would agree that other administrations have been dishonest, but again, honesty in politics must be seen on a continuum. If it were black and white, every single administration would be just as dishonest as any other, and that's just not how it works. There is good reason to believe that this Bush administration is overly deceitful and dishonest, and that's what matters now. I'm not sure how someone can say that Kerry and Gore are just as dishonest as Bush. For one, there is really no analogy to be made. Neither of them has run this country. To say that they would be as dishonest is pure conjecture and has no place in a critique of the current adminstration. As far as one of them being able to clean up Iraq, I would agree, they probably couldn't have entered office in January and won the war and made the world happy, but that's not the issue. They didn't deceptively lead us into this potentially un-win-able war, and they should not have been expected to get us out smoothly.

    The American Neo-Conservative ideology is a scary one in my opinion. Central to their strategy is that there are necessary illusions to feed the people in order to get what they want done politically. Too many people are falling for it right now, but hopefully this second Bush term will put a dent in their efforts to shape the world in their vision.
     
  20. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #20
    I think based on their track record, we can indeed say that

    No, they haven't run the country, and that is part of my point. To say that they would be substantially better is equally a stretch, based on their track records.

    Easy to take shots at the one doing the job, and I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to be accountable, but there will always be the "my guy woulda done better" mentality.

    Woof, Woof - Dawg [​IMG]
     
  21. swindmill macrumors 6502a

    swindmill

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    KY
    #21
    What in their track record makes them comparable to Bush in terms of dishonesty and deceit? I don't follow that assertion. When I think to myself, or say, that Kerry could have done better as president, I base that on his ideology, intelligence relative to Bush, and his general view of the world. The Neo-Conservatives (Bush included) see the world in terms of good and evil. That is dangerous, and has led to much of what is wrong with this country right now. I can at least say that Kerry would not have based decisions on that sort of view of the world.

    In the end, all you can do is judge the job that the current administration is doing, and that's what we should be doing. That is why I'm pointing out that saying others are also, or would also have been dishonest, is not only impossible to support, it's irrelevant.
     
  22. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #22
    I'll take a guy who's lies hurt only his family over a guy who's lies have taken 1800 American lives, not to mention countless others, any day.

    To make the argument that Clinton's lies are the same as Bush's lies you have to buy the argument that manslaughter is the same as premeditated murder. We do have different penalties for manslaughter than we do for murder, don't we?

    It would seem that if all lies are equal than anyone who ever said "Yes honey, you still look lovely with that giant cold sore on your lip" would be a monster unfit for elected office.
     
  23. JesseJames macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2003
    Location:
    How'd I get here? How can I leave?
    #23
    I don't think it's so much Bush is lying is that he just screwed up and can't admit it. Just like a child.
    Iraq war was based on misinformation. They will obfuscate and equivocate to no end to try and escape the idea that they made a mistake.
    It's all about SPIN folks. Everyone does it. The government and the media are experts at this.
     
  24. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #24
    Their track record shows them to be dishonest and deceitful, period. They have not had the opportunity to display it on as grand a scale as Bush, but I venture (my opinion) they would.

    My point is you can't just criticize the current administration without offering an alternative. I'm also saying that the alternatives are just as bad, or in some cases much worse.

    And further Mactastic, to compare Clinton's lies to a husband/wife conversation is silly. And I dare say that we have yet to uncover all of the garbage that the Clintons were involved in.

    To say that Bush's administration is the worst is a matter of opinion I suppose, but I've read enough of Johnson's administration to believe that he was out of control, as well as Nixon and others.

    The lives lost in Iraq et. al. are a tragedy that none of us deny or trivialize. I for one do not take their sacrifices lightly.

    Woof, Woof - Dawg [​IMG]
     
  25. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #25
    and then:
    Some disconnect here, I think.

    This is what is silly - in fact ludicrous: comparing a sexual peccadillo to an illegal invasion which has cost thousands of innocent lives.
     

Share This Page