| Author |
Message |
    
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5422
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 6:35 pm: | 
|
According to the latest WaPost/ABC poll, the majority of Americans disapprove of the way Bush is handling every topic they were asked about. This includes the "war on terror." By a 59/39 margin, those asked "All in all, considering the costs to the United States versus the benefits to the United States, do you think the war with Iraq was worth fighting, or not?" said no. 62% do not approve of the way Bush is handling the war.
If the Dems can step up and deliver a strong message in November, the GOP majority is going to be history.
As for the "fringe" remark, here's how my source puts it
Quote:the ideological breakdown of the respondents to this poll: Only 18 percent described themselves as "liberal," while 42 percent self-identified as "moderate" and 38 percent as "conservative." It is, therefore, quite difficult to argue (or at least it ought to be) that opposition to the war in Iraq or strong disapproval of President Bush is confined to "liberal" corners.
Guys, you're the dead-enders now. Neo-con control of the USA is in its last throes. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7672
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 8:33 pm: |
|
Libs said the same thing in 98, 00, 02, 04.. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1409
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 8:00 am: |
|
I love this. I'd much rather be the fringe that wins than the majority that loses. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5431
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 8:43 am: |
|
My question on another thread is, how is a fringe element going to win?
I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just wondering how it's going to happen, and how it can be made plausible on the morning after the election. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1411
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:13 am: |
|
Fringe is in the eye of the beholder. Tom, do you not realize that polls and elections are two different processes? We all know a modest percentage of eligible voters actually vote. Can we agree on this or do you believe 100% of registered voters vote? Therefore, a poll is unable to take into account who will actually get off their backsides and take the time to go to a polling station and vote. Therefore, the most rabid folks like me and you tend to vote. I just see more passion on the conservative side of the table than on the liberal side.
I know a bunch of folks in my circle of friends and family who agree with your side about Bush and the war. However, these are the same friends and family members who rarely vote. How many times have we seen liberal Democrats whine and yet take no action to back up their whine. This happens in Congress all the time and those folks are in the spotlight. I'll agree that my rabid liberal friends here on MOL are busting their backside to elect their philosophy, but I don't see much other enthusiasm throughout the country.
Using CT as an example, Lamont won by a decent yet not huge margin, and this was in a die hard liberal state. I see definite pockets of Democratic victories in November, but I don't see the huge sweep many of you dream of. I see the Repubs still maintaining control. You can then play the conspiracy and cheating card which I know you have at the ready. It will at least make MOL fun through the winter.
As for your reliance on polls, I just disagree. If you ask 100,000 people if they would like to lose 30 pounds and return to their physique they had at age 22, I'm sure you'd get 99% that say they would like to do this. But how many would actually get off their butts and do it? This is why I call the Democratic party a lazy lot of people. Words are easy to use, actions are difficult because it takes effort and the Dems just aren't willing to put in the effort. I'm sure you'll be screaming that the Repubs "stole" the election, when in reality we got our people to the polls and you Dems didn't because you relied on the "polls". Without going into personal stuff which I don't think MOL should be used for, I will be doing my part to get conservative voters to the polls in my community so I have seen the ineptitude by the other side up close and it is sad, yet funny from where I sit. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5434
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:24 am: |
|
Don't forget, Dem turnout in CT was about five times higher than typical for this kind of primary. The motivation is there.
You're not going to inoculate yourself against charges of cheating so easily. We're all over it this time. Are you gambling that if the election results look bogus that Americans are going to roll over and take it indefinitely? Riots and massive civil unrest are not exactly an impossibility here in the USA. Bound to cut into your investments' value. Maybe you should switch to T-Bills ... oh wait, the Republicans are ready to default on them.
If some Dem senate candidate from, say, Georgia, has a huge polling lead but loses spectacularly, by a 20-point or so shift overnight, voters might well start to ask, "prove it." Problem is you can't. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1414
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 2:10 pm: |
|
tom,
The burden won't be on me to prove it, the burden will be on the you to prove the results were manipulated.
I see you just can't accept reality and would rather live in poll world. You guys were all over the elections we had less than 2 years ago and you didn't find anything other than Democratic incompetence. So I guess your stance is if your side doesn't win you will riot and create civil unrest. I say go for it. A good riot every once in a while does wonders for urban areas. Maybe you fine New Jersey libs could actually improve Newark with riots. At least the weather will be nice in late November.
As for the motivation being there idea, again you don't get it. The only place motivation matters is in the close races. Unless, I'm missing something this Connecticut Senate seat was never in any peril of going Republican. Therefore, the motiviation for a Democrat to win a Democratic primary is laughably worthless. Hey, if we hold a Republican Primary down here in Georgia, I bet I could make the same argument that a lot of Republicans voted for a Republican. The battle for the Senate and House won't take place in Connecticut or my state of Georgia. Those seats are safe. It comes down to the close races so you better hope the neo-libs are as fired up as you are. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 2242
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 5:02 pm: |
|
"One swallow does not a spring make," unfortunately. |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1352
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 5:16 pm: |
|
"Hope springs eternal" in the minds of the true believers.
The Ned Lamont debacle will help ensure that the looney Kos lemmings silence and intimidate mainstream dems and push the party extreme left.
How do you say, 1972 in 2008? |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 10396
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 5:19 pm: |
|
60% of ALL Americans oppose the war. They are the mainstream. |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1354
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 5:28 pm: |
|
Dave-
Let's see what happens at election time. |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 10400
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 5:33 pm: |
|
True. It may be 70% by then. |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1357
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 5:48 pm: |
|
Dave, Dave, Dave.
As a recovering democrat I offer you :
1972. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1416
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 7:43 pm: |
|
Dave,
I love your optimism man. Nobody can say you can't take a licking and come back ticking. You and Foj are topnotch on my list. You believe what you believe and aren't afraid to say so. I respect that even if I disagree. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5436
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 8:21 pm: |
|
I might offer you 1952 as a counterexample. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5437
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 8:35 pm: |
|
exit polls |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15254
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:18 pm: |
|
It's time for some wagers.
|
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15255
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:26 pm: |
|
Speaking of wagers about elections, let me tell a story. I bet Ed May $20 that Forrester would not win the gubernatorial election in NJ. Of course, I won the bet. He never sent the money or contacted me. I ran into him in Memorial Park on July 4, and I reminded him. He gave me $10. I said, "Thanks, Ed. You've fulfilled half your promise."
Did I make some kind of mistake?
|
cmontyburns
Citizen
Username: Cmontyburns
Post Number: 1944
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:28 pm: |
|
$1 says that 10 years from now we'll still be debating which political party has done most to screw up the country.
|
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15528
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:28 pm: |
|
Yeah, you should have bet a lot more. Five grand would have gotten you $2500 and it was a sure thing. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2938
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:29 pm: |
|
1972? I dunno, if Nixon and McGovern ran against each other again, I'm not so sure it would turn out the same way. I guess we'll never know. Of course if the GOP allows itself to be taken over by the extreme Right and runs against stem cell research and the teaching of evolution they might repeat McGovern's 1972 performance or that of Goldwater in 1964. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5441
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:49 pm: |
|
In '72 Nixon wasn't exactly running a "stay the course" campaign. They were actively trying to end the war through negotiation. Remember "peace is at hand," Kissinger's announcement shortly before the election that the war was almost over? Both candidates campaigned on ending the war, McGovern simply wanted to end it faster.
On the other hand, today the Administration is quite upfront about the fact that the war is not ending any time soon, and that the next administration will inherit the task of wrapping it up.
If 1952 is too far back, think about 1968. A sitting president quit the race because of the strong antiwar sentiment. Nixon campaigned on his "secret plan" to end the war. And Humphrey's close loss to Nixon is widely attributed to the fact that he did not distance himself enough from Johnson's pro-war policy. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2321
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:12 pm: |
|
doesn't anyone remember the post-Watergate, post-Vietnam elections of '74 and '76? the Republicans got their clocks cleaned. but it isn't 1968 or '72 or '74 or '76, or '94. This year is different and incumbency is a lot harder to fight against. but I wouldn't want to be out there trying to tell my constituents that the war in Iraq is going well and expect to win, whether Republican or Democrat. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15256
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 12:00 am: |
|
Now I remember exactly what I said to Ed: "Ed, you're a man of half your words."
|
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 6874
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 9:15 am: |
|
Oh Tom... I am so proud of your restraint. A person who sought public office, and hence asked people for money welches on a bet?? OOOOO thats fodder all right. Good for you for being the bigger man than I ever would have been. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1418
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 9:19 am: |
|
Reingold,
I agree with you. If someone makes a bet they should stick to it. Especially if it's a measly $20. However, making a wager on an anonymous message board is rather foolish. How do you know who you are dealing with. Heck, I'm on three other political type boards with a username of Tom Reingold! Don't worry, I won't make any bets using your name because in general I'm not the gambling type.
However, I do like the spunk you Dems are finally showing this year. I don't recall seeing any wagers being requested on Kerry. It seems you guys truly believe you are going to win something. My thread from about a month ago about Definition of Winning tried to figure out what you guys will claim as a victory. Many Dems are already claiming victory because a Democrat won the Democratic primary in Connecticut (shocking).
You know my stance, victory is having at least one more seat than the opposition. I just can't wait to see the Repubs still in the majority, yet the Dems will be celebrating because they picked up some seats. I will be right there celebrating with them. But no Tom, I am not willing to bet on any outcome because I have no idea how voters in other districts will vote. Unlike tom, who believes he knows what every district should do and if not he is preparing to riot, I don't know how the election will turn out and sure won't put money on any outcome. |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1364
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 9:41 am: |
|
'68, '72, '74?
Bunch of old guys talking on this thread.
j/j |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3806
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 9:56 am: |
|
Southerner: Do you deny that there are independents and even Republicans who are voicing sincere displeasure with this administration, and threatening to cross over to the Democratic side in 2008, and even 2006? |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2322
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 10:31 am: |
|
Quote:'68, '72, '74?
Bunch of old guys talking on this thread.
Or people who don't believe the world began when they were born.
 |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1421
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 10:52 am: |
|
tulip,
No I don't. Every election there are voters who change their vote between parties on account of particular issues. I'm sure many posters on this board voted for Gore and then Bush, or Bush and then Kerry. It isn't unusual. I just don't see the mass ground swell that you do. What I see is the normal Democrats making more noise which you interpret as more switch over votes. I don't see it. If voters didn't switch over in 2004 when the exact same issues were in play, I don't see them switching over now.
However, if the Repubs are able to continue the drumbeat of the fringe left and paint guys like Lamont with that ultra left label and how the Democratic Party is being taken over by the fringe, I see a lot of moderate Dems backing away. Maybe not in New Jersey and other die hard blue states, but those states aren't in play.
I'll be the first neo-con to agree all this rhetoric by the RNC is just political manuevering in the same vein as anyone who votes Republican and goes to church is painted as a neo-con evangelist. However, it's time to fight hard so we will do our best to paint the Dems as fringe wackos and will continue the drumbeat until 2008 and the big prize. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3811
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 11:01 am: |
|
Southerner,
I heard Cheney's statements, too. I don't think anyone, red state or blue right now, is fooled by the old saw that anti-Iraq war means weak on defense. It's an old one, and I don't think it'll work. They'll have to come up with another excuse for the defeat of an eighteen-year Senate careerist by a citizen who campaigned for eight months. It's about the war, and about Lieberman's relationship with Bush. It was toxic. Even red=staters know this Iraq misadventure is just that. You save your face, there Southerner, and watch what happens.
Just don't gloat about your victory in 2002. It's inappropriate, and you would do well to start backing off that stance.
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1423
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 1:48 pm: |
|
tulip,
What are you talking about? I don't know of Cheney's comments and don't know what you are addressing.
As for backing off, I don't know what you mean. I haven't gloated about any victory. I simply point out the facts when most of the libs try to revise history. Many libs (tom being one) like to always point to the polls about how the libs and Democrats are the majority. When I point to the actual election results I get blamed for gloating, when in reality I am pointing out facts. As for saving my face, again, what are you talking about? As far as I know there is no face to be saved on any side of any issue. This is an anonymous board where a lot of garbage is being talked. If that is your way of saying you are going to gloat heavily at me if the Dems take control then I say go for it. I'm a big boy and some posts on a message board aren't going to rattle me. Actually, it would make it even more interesting reading.
Here's my stance - I think the Repubs will maintain control of both chambers of Congress. I have no idea by how many seats we will maintain control but I believe we will. Maybe I'm wrong, but November will be here soon enough. If the Repubs do maintain Congress I hope you are poster enough to tell your fellow Dems that they should save face and back off the "Democrats are the true majority" stance we've been hearing for years.
And lastly, if I was going to gloat, I'd gloat over 2000 and 2004. 2002 was a midterm and midterms aren't just that important. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15269
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 1:52 pm: |
|
Fine, but you two are playing different games and each claiming that you're winning at the same game. You define victory by elections, and tom defines them by sentiments.
I'd like to see some real betting and record keeping begin now. That will make it interesting.
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1426
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 2:14 pm: |
|
Reingold,
Which one allows laws to be passed, Chairmanships of committees, Supreme Court nominees, picking out the Christmas Tree, and pardoning a turkey? I'll take election victory over sentiment every time.
And I love how you want to make bets and keep records starting now. You are starting to come around to my way of thinking now. If you want to keep score I'm all for it. And if it makes you feel better to start now and forget the recent past then I don't blame you. Why would you want to admit you were wrong on Gore, 2002, and Kerry. You'd make a good motivational speaker though - it doesn't matter boys that we're 0-6, but today is a new beginnig! You must be a Met fan Tom because the Mets and Dems are feeling the same way these days. Just remember, the real prize is the World Series not the Division. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15271
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 2:29 pm: |
|
No, I was not wrong. You are wrong. I did not predict that Gore or Kerry would win. What makes you think I did?
Have you heard me make any predictions at all? Think hard. You'll notice I rarely make them. It's not my thing.
And it's fine for you to state which game you prefer to play. But you have to notice when it's a different game that others are playing. Fair enough?
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1428
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 4:19 pm: |
|
Fair enough.
And Tom, please notice what I say. I never predict either. I normally say, in my opinion, or my stance is. It allows me the out like you use.
As far as games go, I don't play games so I guess that is why I may miss it when someone else is. I simply state what I believe which is why I didn't take you up on any bets. I wish everything I believed came true. Lately, in the political arena I've had a pretty good batting average and I expect that to keep up in November. Either way, I'm prepared for either the Democratic I told you so, or the Democratic the country is full of morons, or the Democratic Diebold stole the election. I'll be enjoying all of them. |
argon_smythe
Citizen
Username: Argon_smythe
Post Number: 886
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 5:25 pm: |
|
"The fringe that wins vs the majority that loses." -- Southerner
I love it. A better one-line description of the reign of Bush II, I have never heard. Highly undemocratic. Simply brilliant.
|
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1367
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 5:37 pm: |
|
Winston-
The problem for the Woodstock generation is that succeeding generations have been more conservative. While they sadly missed the free love, they smartly didn't partake of the bad acid.
|
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3813
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 5:45 pm: |
|
Southerner:
Cheney made a little speech after the Lamont victory saying that it proved that liberals and Democrats were weak of defense and wanted to get out the war and avoid fighting terrorists. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page