Why Bush won? Fantastic analysis from Salon

Discussion in 'Elections' started by MikeLastort2, Nov 5, 2004.

  1. Mel Brennan

    Mel Brennan PLANITARCHIS' BANE

    Paris Saint Germain
    United States
    Apr 8, 2002
    Baltimore
    Club:
    Paris Saint Germain FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    http://media.musicforamerica.org/images/young_ev_map.png
     
  2. flowergirl

    flowergirl Member+

    Aug 11, 2004
    panama city, FL
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Amen. My one time $600 and $100 a year in taxes doesn't make up for the fact that i'm making $7000 less annually than i did 2 years agoand no longer have sick leave. But maybe if i was a corporate CEO i'd feel differently. :rolleyes:
     
  3. Mattbro

    Mattbro Member+

    Sep 21, 2001
  4. Mattbro

    Mattbro Member+

    Sep 21, 2001

    I have no idea how much of a tax break you got, but you're really saying it offsets all of Bush's other failures since he became president? You're willing to turn a blind eye to his piss-poor performance because you got a tax break?
     
  5. dj43

    dj43 New Member

    Aug 9, 2002
    Nor Cal
     
  6. Mattbro

    Mattbro Member+

    Sep 21, 2001
     
  7. Dan Loney

    Dan Loney BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 10, 2000
    Cincilluminati
    Club:
    Los Angeles Sol
    Nat'l Team:
    Philippines
    I didn't say every Bush voter was a Bigot-American, any more than every Kerry voter was young. I was saying Bigot-Americans outpolled the youth vote.

    Okay, every Bush voter IS a Bigot-American, but that wasn't the specific point I was making there.
     
  8. argentine soccer fan

    Staff Member

    Jan 18, 2001
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    As far as I know I am not a Bigot-American. In fact, I don't even know where the hell Bigot is, or even what kind of hateful slur it is that Bigot-American is supposed to replace.
     
  9. MikeLastort2

    MikeLastort2 Member

    Mar 28, 2002
    Takoma Park, MD
    I said an effective mass media propaganda machine.
     
  10. Dan Loney

    Dan Loney BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 10, 2000
    Cincilluminati
    Club:
    Los Angeles Sol
    Nat'l Team:
    Philippines
    You know, the B-word. B!gger.
     
  11. Smiley321

    Smiley321 Member

    Apr 21, 2002
    Concord, Ca
    Well, have you listened to Rush lately? They all go stale after awhile.

    I am puzzled at how you liberals keep Dan Rather and Baba Wawa in business, however. They should have been dead meat after Carter lost to Reagan.
     
  12. MikeLastort2

    MikeLastort2 Member

    Mar 28, 2002
    Takoma Park, MD
    I don't think I've ever listened to Rush.

    And I can't stand Rather. He's an idiot. Gilda Radner was much funnier as Baba Wawa that Barbara Walters ever was good as a reporter.
     
  13. Smurfquake

    Smurfquake Moderator
    Staff Member

    Aug 8, 2000
    San Carlos, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No, he did not -- the gay marraige bans passed in Michigan and Oregon which both went to Kerry.
     
  14. Dan Loney

    Dan Loney BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 10, 2000
    Cincilluminati
    Club:
    Los Angeles Sol
    Nat'l Team:
    Philippines
    Liberal? One of the two reporters you mentioned dated Alan Greenspan.
     
  15. Karl K

    Karl K Member

    Oct 25, 1999
    Suburban Chicago
    Hmm....really? It "came through?" Someday you'll learn the meaning of the words you write. I ain't holdin' my breath.

    http://www.benningtonbanner.com/Stories/0,1413,104~8676~2515005,00.html

    http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2004/11/05/EdOp/Voting.Disappointment-795072.shtml

    http://www.techcentralstation.com/110404A.html

    Young voters were supposed turn out in droves to produce a Kerry victory. Sorry, Boss, and P-Diddy, they didn't, cementing their reputations as no-shows -- again. Not even Kerry's last-minute attempt to raise the specter of a military draft managed to move them off the dime. Young voters came out in almost precisely the same percentages they did in 1992, 1996 and 2000.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1104/p03s01-ussc.html

    All the outreach to young voters, from music video campaigns to get-out-the-vote efforts on campus, had at least a nominal effect, as more 18-to-24-year-olds went to the polls this year than in 2000. As a group, this age bracket strongly supported Kerry.

    But less than 10 percent of voters were under 25, about the same percentage as in 2000. Thus the Kerry campaign's hope for a big push from energized youth did not pan out.
     
  16. Asprilla9

    Asprilla9 Member

    Dec 15, 2000
    Beaverton, OR
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    same percentage as compared to the whole, which increased mightilty. actually, 5 million more young voters came out this time, which would normally be a sizable accomplishment. but this year every demo's numbers were up, so even by adding 5 million more voters the youngans still stayed at 17%, the exact same as in 2000.

    not to mention they didn't vote overwhelmingly for kerry, as many of the pundits had thought.
     
  17. Ian McCracken

    Ian McCracken Member

    May 28, 1999
    USA
    Club:
    SS Lazio Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    Italy
    I will give you a chance to rescind your offer.
     
  18. MikeLastort2

    MikeLastort2 Member

    Mar 28, 2002
    Takoma Park, MD
    I really don't remember anyone saying Kerry was the best candidate the Democrats could offer.

    Got links?
     
  19. Smiley321

    Smiley321 Member

    Apr 21, 2002
    Concord, Ca
    I did, and I still would say that. Of the ones who ran, anyway. Clark, Lieberman, Gephart, Dean, they all would have been dogmeat for dubya.

    But I'm not a Democrat.
     
  20. Smiley321

    Smiley321 Member

    Apr 21, 2002
    Concord, Ca
    He must have been looking for some easy show biz nookie
     
  21. MikeLastort2

    MikeLastort2 Member

    Mar 28, 2002
    Takoma Park, MD
    You know, that really is a pathetic crop of candidates. Edwards was probably the best of the lot that ran, except for his inexperience.

    The Democrats are going to have to start gromming their '08 candidate now, and it CANNOT be Hillary.
     
  22. MikeLastort2

    MikeLastort2 Member

    Mar 28, 2002
    Takoma Park, MD
    Did Greenspan date Dan Rather?
     
  23. Smiley321

    Smiley321 Member

    Apr 21, 2002
    Concord, Ca
    Yeah, but Edwards would have been a big gamble. BIG gamble, considering his inexperience and general party bona fides.

    I thought that Kerry ran a decent campaign. He made some mistakes, sure, but he was nowhere near the embarassment that Bob Dole was.

    I thought that kerry's biggest mistake was walking into the swift boat vets with his eyes wide shut.
     
  24. Mel Brennan

    Mel Brennan PLANITARCHIS' BANE

    Paris Saint Germain
    United States
    Apr 8, 2002
    Baltimore
    Club:
    Paris Saint Germain FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    What the Dems need to do over the course of these four years is get Americans to RECONSIDER their current TAKE on Christ-like behaviour. To compare and contrast, with the support to a variety of clergy and religious institutions like the UCC, the clear Commands and Directives of Christ with the bombing of weddings, women and children in Iraq, an attack and invasion which doesn't come close to even the sad Just War test of my dogmas, including the Catholic Church.

    They need to cast the Republican leadership, the neocon leadership, as what they are: a group that has actively and passively allowed a conception of a nonviolent, loving Christ who lived, taught, and died nonviolently to become, well, Rambo.

    Then, MOST importantly, they eed to offer an alternative. Friedman said one thing in that March 2003 SAIS lecture that has stuck with me in my analysis of the States and the neocon empowerment.

    He said that UBL and his small band were offering "an authentically Arab, authentically Muslim retrograde vision to the people. What's needed to counter that is an authentically Arab, authentically Muslim progressive vision." I agree with that; it is about ideas, and ideation, or thr process of coming to engage any idea, that is the first and last "battleground," there, and, now, in the States.

    The neocons are offering an authentically American, authentically Christian retrograde vision of America and the world to people. What's needed to counter that is an authentically American, authentically spiritual progressive vision. Not just a talking point, but a VISION that folks can organise around, can go to sleep feeling good and empowered by, and, most importantly, that allows people to live fearlessly with.

    Now who, in the entirety of the Democratic Party machine, can offer that?

    That's the problem. The candidate, or even the kingmaker, is not on our screens or scopes right now. The very thing/person/movement that the Dems need is the very thing that is entirely missing, IMO. Daschle and Pelosi acquiescing to the war, Obama talking about attacking Iran, Sharpton being Sharpton, Jesse being Jesse, Hillary being Hillary; nope, noone at all.
     
  25. cl_hanley

    cl_hanley New Member

    Sep 3, 2001
    Costa Mesa
    Having some days to reflect and reading various articles attempting to explain the results, I've resigned myself to accepting the theory that the fear of terrorists was the trump card that just couldn't be beat here. I also believe that people didn't want to be forthcoming and say, "I'm afraid of terrorists, so I'm going to ignore the facts and figures, and vote for the guy that talks about 'old sayings in Texas, wanted Dead or Alive...etc...etc...'" and that's where the "moral" issue comes in to play. What are the chances that, besides being an opportunity for folks to make a moral stand, it served as a veil for many people to cloak a concious decision to ignore what should have been a 7 point kiss of death?

    Perhaps it's just that I need some kind of rationale to come to grips with the fact that 59 million people looked at that list and said, "I'm okay with that."

    Regarding the Democrats trying to incorporate 'faith' into their platform, they've got to be very careful with that, and I actually think it really smacks of 'flavor of the moment'. If a Dem candidate does in fact incorporate religion into his/her daily life, then fine, that's great. If it's just for show, then it's going to fool nobody. I'm doubtful that henceforth "values" will be a major point in all future elections. In 2004 "values" was the blitzing linebacker and the Dems never called an audible. For whatever reason, they lacked the tactical savvy to recognize something different was afoot.

    Funny thing is...once Bush is gone I might be okay with voting for a moderate Republican, so the manner in which the Democrats proceed form here may or may not concern me in the future.
     

Share This Page