A Flash Developer Resource Site

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 40 of 40

Thread: Oh My God, I'm actually taking Bush's side here

  1. #21
    Senior Member Hellsbellboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    193
    Originally posted by PAlexC
    I find it highly inappropriate that Ridge took the time to praise a President during an election campaign, and repeat the rhetoric found in his speeches. He should've come out, made the announcement, answered questions, and ended the conference.

    At the very least, it made Ridge look like a kissass.
    yeah that's definitely not his job and not what he should be doing.

  2. #22
    Originally posted by PAlexC
    At the very least, it made Ridge look like a kissass.
    Which is an odd thing to do since he's already said he's quitting when whoever wins the election takes office.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    234
    This administration has no previous record of being misleading, dishonest, unconvincing or fear-mongering whatsoever.

    Those Pakistani SSI agents who said Bush told them to step up the capture of terrorists before November is surely bunk, much like the reports of Prince Bandar striking a deal to lower oil prices around the same time.

    I stand completely convinced that politics played no role whatsoever in these terror warnings even though they have all directly followed times in the Democrats campaign that would tend to increase their poll numbers, but that is of course entirely coincidental.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    234
    Originally posted by yasunobu13
    Which is an odd thing to do since he's already said he's quitting when whoever wins the election takes office.
    Have you seen how they treat people who don't kiss their asses?

  5. #25
    Originally posted by cyk
    Have you seen how they treat people who don't kiss their asses?
    Yeah, they either fire them or make Powell do whatever it is he gets to do next.

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    44
    After speaking with a veteran who was in DF for 6 years, I've come to dislike the bush administration a little bit more -- I'll still vote for him, just to keep Kerry out of office and to finish this 'war', but I'm disliking him. Kerry keeps chaning his views and opinions, it's screwing me up.

    As a have been and will be service member, I've got a different outlook.

    --Sub
    What we do in our spare time:
    Free IPOD 0/5 3 pending:
    http://www.digitalcup.net/ipod/
    Free Flatscreen 0/8 0 pending:
    http://www.digitalcup.net/monitor/

  7. #27
    I'm the good one! XU1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    328
    One thing for sure...the Terrorists are united...you guys arent......I mean squabbling over wether its politics or not.....should you really care at the moment?...

    if people feel that Bush is politicking then you'd think they will vote appropriately in the coming election.

    Some of you just amaze me, not only do you show your vehement opposition to any thing Bush does, but in times of tribulation you dont even know how give the impression you are supportive of your Goverment in this war on terror.

    If and when it comes to vote THEN you make your opinions felt...but all many of you do unfortunately is just give fodder to the fanatics.




    Tony
    Last edited by XU1; 08-04-2004 at 01:21 AM.

  8. #28
    Not PWD ViRGo_RK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Posts
    1,799
    Let's face it. We haven't really had a good president since before I was alive


    PAlexC: That's just Chuck Norris's way of saying sometimes corn needs to lay the heck down.
    Gerbick: America. Stabbing suckers since Vespucci left.

  9. #29
    supervillain gerbick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    undecided.
    Posts
    18,986
    that would be in the last 8 or 9 years?

    [ Hello ] | [ gerbick ] | [ Ω ]

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    234
    Kerry keeps chaning his views and opinions, it's screwing me up
    There's nothing wrong with changing your mind over say a 30 year period. Usually when people educate themselves about various issues the possibility for changing your mind is a very real possibility - I know it's scary, but it's really quite normal.

    Here's a good example:

    One guy goes half way around the world and fights in a vicious, brutal war where he sees many atrocities being committed. He comes home believing that it really wasn't worth it and if people do go to war it should be only if necessary.

    Another guy never goes to war, barely leaves his own country, and gets bored reading any document over a single page long. This guy always proclaims to know what's best and refuses to waver from that stance no matter how foolish or ignant.

  11. #31
    Didn't do it. japangreg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    \o/ |o| |o_ /o\
    Posts
    784
    Originally posted by Hellsbellboy
    Think that's pretty stupid.. how is a Terrorist alert going to improve Bush's ratings in 1 day?
    It's called 'free media'; when someone puts on a big event and gets the public's attention, the reporters who cover it not only play up the event, but the people who put the event on. That means Kerry doesn't have to spend any money on advertising to get his face and messages out there, because the media (in their desire to fill empty spots in coverage) will do it for him. That is, as long as something else isn't taking away the focus.

    *edit*
    By the way, the Gallup is only 3 points for Bush; all others (ABC/WP, Newsweek, CBS) have Kerry ahead by 2-7 percent
    Last edited by japangreg; 08-04-2004 at 09:55 AM.
    Hush child. japangreg can do what he wants. - PAlexC
    That was Zen - this is Tao.

  12. #32
    Senior Member Hellsbellboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    193
    however you want to spin it it's still not a big bounce.. and Bush hasn't gone down.

  13. #33
    Didn't do it. japangreg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    \o/ |o| |o_ /o\
    Posts
    784
    Originally posted by Hellsbellboy
    however you want to spin it it's still not a big bounce.. and Bush hasn't gone down.
    True enough; but I'm not calling who's going down quite yet. 4 months left, plenty of time to rock those numbers either way.
    Hush child. japangreg can do what he wants. - PAlexC
    That was Zen - this is Tao.

  14. #34
    Senior Member Hellsbellboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    193
    Originally posted by japangreg
    True enough; but I'm not calling who's going down quite yet. 4 months left, plenty of time to rock those numbers either way.
    yeah that's true. something could happen to help or hinder either one..

    USA Today/CNN

    The USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll of 763 likely voters found Bush leading Kerry by a margin of 50 percent to 46 percent, with Nader drawing 2 percent. Before the convention, Kerry had support from 47 percent to Bush's 46 percent, USA Today said.

  15. #35
    Retired SCORM Guru PAlexC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,387
    Originally posted by Hellsbellboy
    however you want to spin it it's still not a big bounce.. and Bush hasn't gone down.
    Yeah, honestly the convention didn't have a big impact either way. I think the poll numbers are pretty accurate, the country's split. When all the polls put both candidates in the upper 40's, it's pretty much a draw when you factor in margin of error. Most people have their minds made up, even those who usually don't vote.

    Why?

    Because of the vast amounds of mindless garbage-laden rhetoric (on both sides) found on TV. I'm talking about the pundits, not the candidates. What passes for debate on the airwaves is rediculous. I think most non-voters are rallying to one war cry or another, on the back of over-simplified issues preached by self-righteous know-nothing blowhards. That's why I'm glad I watched the convention on C-SPAN, and will do the same for the Republican one.

    Network TV aside from PBS didn't even cover it. The conventions are probably the only time, aside from seeing a candidate in person where voters won't get a campaign reduced to 20 second sound bytes. Instead we're busy watching some reality show and voting on which bland talentless dork gets a record deal, or which 20-something attention whore who can't hold a real job gets voted out of a house for sleeping with everyone.

    What ever happened to public service time being an FCC requirement?

    /media rant

  16. #36
    ¤ ¤ ¤ PAZ ¤ ¤ ¤ nordberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    east of west
    Posts
    4,704
    c-span rocks!

    Ah, these boys is all swelled up. So this was earlier...getting set to trade. Then, woooaaah differences.
    Blog ¤ Photos ¤ Book

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    234
    USA Today/CNN

    The USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll of 763 likely voters found Bush leading Kerry by a margin of 50 percent to 46 percent, with Nader drawing 2 percent. Before the convention, Kerry had support from 47 percent to Bush's 46 percent, USA Today said.

    "likely voters" are people who voted in 2000. The eletorate is far more motivated this year than in 2000 when people were pretty lacadasical (which is what commonly occurs in times of peace and prosperity) or confused between 2 candidates that seemed very similair. This time around moderates who may not have voted last time have seen the radical, right-wing, evangelical Bush agenda are motivated to vote for Kerry. Likewise, moderates who in the post-911 world believe that rhetoric and a cowboy hat will keep them safe are going to be motivated to vote for Bush.

    There's not going to be a big bounce because most of the country knows who they are going to vote for. The people that aren't getting counted are the people who are going to make a difference and many of these people were too young to vote in 2000, or could be new citizens, or just didn't care as much 4 years ago.

  18. #38
    Senior Member Hellsbellboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    193
    Originally posted by cyk
    "likely voters" are people who voted in 2000. The eletorate is far more motivated this year than in 2000 when people were pretty lacadasical (which is what commonly occurs in times of peace and prosperity) or confused between 2 candidates that seemed very similair. This time around moderates who may not have voted last time have seen the radical, right-wing, evangelical Bush agenda are motivated to vote for Kerry. Likewise, moderates who in the post-911 world believe that rhetoric and a cowboy hat will keep them safe are going to be motivated to vote for Bush.

    There's not going to be a big bounce because most of the country knows who they are going to vote for. The people that aren't getting counted are the people who are going to make a difference and many of these people were too young to vote in 2000, or could be new citizens, or just didn't care as much 4 years ago.
    That's all nice but that was just a small section of the whole poll , and shows a apple to apple comparison, ie of the Likely Voters, Bush is up to 50% from 46% where as Kerry went from 47% to 46%.

  19. #39
    Senior Member Hellsbellboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    193
    Originally posted by PAlexC
    Yeah, honestly the convention didn't have a big impact either way. I think the poll numbers are pretty accurate, the country's split. When all the polls put both candidates in the upper 40's, it's pretty much a draw when you factor in margin of error. Most people have their minds made up, even those who usually don't vote.

    Why?

    Because of the vast amounds of mindless garbage-laden rhetoric (on both sides) found on TV. I'm talking about the pundits, not the candidates. What passes for debate on the airwaves is rediculous. I think most non-voters are rallying to one war cry or another, on the back of over-simplified issues preached by self-righteous know-nothing blowhards. That's why I'm glad I watched the convention on C-SPAN, and will do the same for the Republican one.

    Network TV aside from PBS didn't even cover it. The conventions are probably the only time, aside from seeing a candidate in person where voters won't get a campaign reduced to 20 second sound bytes. Instead we're busy watching some reality show and voting on which bland talentless dork gets a record deal, or which 20-something attention whore who can't hold a real job gets voted out of a house for sleeping with everyone.

    What ever happened to public service time being an FCC requirement?

    /media rant
    That's a good question.

  20. #40
    Didn't do it. japangreg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    \o/ |o| |o_ /o\
    Posts
    784
    Originally posted by cyk
    "likely voters" are people who voted in 2000. The eletorate is far more motivated this year than in 2000 when people were pretty lacadasical
    If you've read or watched news reports about polls taken since the Democratic convention, you've probably heard that John Kerry didn't get much of a "bounce." These reports miss the important data. Let's look at the numbers.

    1. What's changed. Three major media polls have been taken since the convention: ABC News/Washington Post, CBS News/New York Times, and CNN/USA Today. Prior to the convention, Kerry's favorable rating was nine points higher than his unfavorable rating in the ABC poll. Since the convention, this margin has grown to 19 points. Bush's positive margin on the same question is just two points.

    In a CBS poll before the convention, the percentage of voters who were uneasy about Kerry's ability to handle an international crisis was 19 points higher than the percentage who were confident in his ability to handle such a crisis. After the convention, that margin of unease has shrunk to 11 points. Bush's negative margin on the same question is 12 points. In the CBS pre-convention poll, voters said by a 51-36 margin that the Democrats did not have a clear plan for the country. After the convention, they say by a 44-40 margin that the Democrats do have a clear plan.

    In a CNN poll before the convention, voters agreed by a 12-point margin that Kerry had "the personality and leadership qualities a president should have." After the convention, the margin is 20—eight points higher than the margin for Bush on the same question. Before the convention, by a 51-43 margin, voters trusted Bush rather than Kerry "to handle the responsibilities of commander-in-chief of the military." Now the candidates are even. Before the convention, more voters trusted Bush than Kerry "to protect U.S. citizens from future acts of terrorism." Now more voters trust Kerry than trust Bush.

    2. Trial heats. Before the convention, Bush led Kerry 48-46 among registered voters in the ABC poll. After the convention, Kerry leads 50-44. In the CBS poll, Kerry turned a 45-42 lead into a 48-43 lead. The CNN/USA poll goes the other way, boosting Bush from a 47-43 deficit to a 48-47 lead. That's counterintuitive, given the pro-Kerry media coverage around the convention. It doesn't square with the CBS or ABC polls. Nor does it square with an American Research Group poll, which bumps Kerry from a 47-44 lead to a 49-45 lead, or a Newsweek poll—taken on the last night of the convention and the night afterward—which bumps Kerry from 47-44 to 49-42. So my guess is that the CNN poll is off the mark.

    Look at the numbers for Kerry in these trial heats: 50, 48, 49, 49. Even in the CNN poll, he's got 47. Kerry is that close to making a Bush victory mathematically impossible. And look at Bush's numbers: 44, 43, 45, 42. Even the 48 percent for Bush in the CNN poll is too low, given how few undecided voters show up for the incumbent on Election Day.

    3. Bush's flat line. Look at the data going back to February. Over that period, Bush's top score in the ABC trial heat is 48. In the CBS and ARG polls, it's 46. During that time, Newsweek has repeatedly asked respondents, "Would you like to see George W. Bush re-elected to another term as president, or not?" The percentage saying Bush deserves re-election hasn't risen above 46. The percentage saying he doesn't deserve re-election hasn't fallen below 50. During the same period, Zogby surveys have repeatedly asked voters, "Do you think George W. Bush deserves to be re-elected as president of the United States, or is it time for someone new?" The percentage saying Bush deserves to be re-elected hasn't risen above 45. The percentage saying it's time for someone new hasn't fallen below 51.

    Bush's job approval rating has been net negative in CBS surveys since April. Over the same period, his approval rating in ABC polls peaked at 51 but has been net negative in five of seven samplings. Even in the CNN poll, Bush's approval rating has been below 50 in four of the five surveys this year, including the latest. And in CBS surveys, the percentage of voters saying that things in the United States are on the wrong track hasn't fallen below 51 percent all year. The percentage saying things are moving in the right direction hasn't risen above 42 percent. In the post-convention CBS poll, 59 percent say we're on the wrong track. Only 36 percent say we're going in the right direction.

    4. Locking up support. Given how close Kerry is to 50 percent, Bush can't afford to let Kerry solidify his support. But that's exactly what Kerry is doing. In ABC polls since June, the percentage of Kerry supporters saying there's a good chance they'll change their mind has fallen from 12 to 5 percent. That's two points lower than the percentage of Bush supporters who say the same. In ABC's pre-convention survey, only 72 percent of Kerry's voters supported him strongly. In the post-convention survey, that number has risen to 85—virtually equal to Bush's 86.

    Four years ago, based on numbers less grim than these, I said Bush was toast. Gore had passed Bush, and I thought the numbers couldn't turn around. I was wrong. They could, and they did, and they could again. But this time, Bush is the incumbent. It's hard to imagine what he can say from here on out that's going to change people's minds about him. And it's hard to imagine what he can say about Kerry that he hasn't already said in scores of millions of dollars worth of ads. At the very least, it's Kerry's race to lose.
    Source
    Hush child. japangreg can do what he wants. - PAlexC
    That was Zen - this is Tao.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width

HTML5 Development Center