This is Just F-ing Scary!!

[Nyghtfall]

http://www.bobharris.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=65&Itemid=2

Major New Survey: Bush Supporters Simply Wrong On Facts, Unaware Of Bush's Positions

Thursday, 21 October 2004

From Jim Lobe's story posted on Alternet, concerning a new survey (.pdf) of about 900 random, equally pro-Bush or pro-Kerry folks -- roughtly the same sample used in Zogby, Gallup, and other national polls we see every day:


Three out of 4 self-described supporters of President George W. Bush still believe that pre-war Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or active programs to produce them... the same number also believes that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein provided "substantial support" to al Qaeda.


Bush supporters are also quite demonstrably wrong on the man's actual positions:


The poll also found a major gap between Bush's stated positions on a number of international issues and what his supporters believe Bush's position to be...

In particular, majorities of Bush supporters incorrectly assume that he supports multilateral approaches to various international issues, including the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (69 percent), the land mine treaty (72 percent), and the Kyoto Protocol to curb greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming (51 percent)...

In all of these cases, majorities of Bush supporters said they favored the positions that they imputed, incorrectly, to Bush. Large majorities of Kerry supporters, on the other hand, showed they knew both their candidate's and Bush's positions on the same issues.


Bush voters also have no freakin' clue how hated the dude is in the rest of the world:


Despite a steady flow over the past year of official statements by foreign governments and public-opinion polls showing strong opposition to the Iraq war, less than one-third of Bush supporters believe that most people in foreign countries oppose the U.S. decision to invade Iraq. Two-thirds believe that foreign views are either evenly divided on the war (42 percent) or that the majority of foreigners actually favors the war (26 percent)...

Similarly, polls conducted during the summer in 35 major countries around the world found that majorities or pluralities in 30 of them favored Kerry for president over Bush by an average of margin of greater than two to one. Yet 57 percent of Bush supporters believe that a majority of people outside the U.S. favor Bush's re-election, while 33 percent think that foreign opinion is evenly divided.


Kerry supporters, since you asked, display a vastly greater awareness of all of the above. But you knew that.

The study concludes that a lot of folks are still too traumatized by 9/11 to think clearly. Maybe so. You almost feel sorry for these people. (Bush, on the other hand, can only be characterized as an extremely successful exploiter of fear and trauma, with horrific consequences.)

When you're not just terrified of the price we might all pay for this massive paralyzed ignorance.

[Lou Cypher]

:lol3: you really crack me up Nyght.

Lou :globe:

[RHooks]

This was as inevitable as the sun rising tomorrow.

[Nyghtfall]

This was as inevitable as the sun rising tomorrow.

All this time I thought Bush supporters favored Bush because they support his issues. I had no idea most don't even know what issues he supports!

I guess I'm even more naive about politics and people than I thought.

[RangerRick]

As is the article. It's funny how articles only look at things from one perspective, be it left or right. Too bad there's no in between. :yes:
:(:

[Rafal Dudek]

All this time I thought Bush supporters favored Bush because they support his issues. I had no idea most don't even know what issues he supports!

I guess I'm even more naive about politics and people than I thought.

Why are you so single-sided towards Kerry? What makes you think that Kerry supporters are any better? I've seen alot of people who say "Anyone but Bush" yet they dont know what issues Kerry supports.

[Nyghtfall]

Why are you so single-sided towards Kerry?

Because I've been through 4 years worth of Bush's politics, and I absolutely despise what he's done to this country! I know what Kerry's about! I know what he stands for. I want him to be our next President!

What makes you think that Kerry supporters are any better? I've seen alot of people who say "Anyone but Bush" yet they dont know what issues Kerry supports.

Zed, read the survey again. The vast majority of Kerry supporters do know what Kerry stands for. His issues are why they're supporting him.

[Ojnod]

Why?

Patriot Act (lack of rights)
War on Iraq (lack of planning)
No Child Left Behind (lack of funding and proper implementation)


just my 2 cents. But don't worry about me, it isn't like I can vote anyway :rolleyes:

[RangerRick]

Because I've been through 4 years worth of Bush's politics, and I absolutely despise what he's done to this country! I know what Kerry's about! I know what he stands for. I want him to be our next President!

Do you really? I doubt that very much! Kerry has no real backbone to stick to one side of an issue. You believe what you want to believe, nothing more, nothing less! Kerry is giving false hopes, I'm sorry to say. That's not the kind of president that we need. Mark my words.

[quotw]Zed, read the survey again. The vast majority of Kerry supporters do know what Kerry stands for. His issues are why they're supporting him.[/QUOTE]

You say read the survey again. Is this a totally independent survey? I don't think so, and you know it. Where is Kerry going to get the money for his 'issues'? You have no idea, and neither does he, unless he raises taxes for the middle class, regardless of what he said. I know you believe otherwise, but there is no other real answer. :mad:

[RangerRick]

Why?

1.Patriot Act (lack of rights)
2.War on Iraq (lack of planning)
3.No Child Left Behind (lack of funding and proper implementation)


just my 2 cents. But don't worry about me, it isn't like I can vote anyway :rolleyes:

1. that would have occured no matter who was president after 9/11,
and it was enacted by congress.
2. Hindsite is great, isn't it?
3. Yes, perhaps not enough was done, but it is a start, and additional
funding will will be provided in the future.

Ans like you said, you can't vote anyway! :lol:

[Lou Cypher]

Patriot Act (lack of rights)
War on Iraq (lack of planning)
No Child Left Behind (lack of funding and proper implementation)
1: Compared to what happened in this country during WWII in respect to "rights", the Patriot Act pales in comparison.
2: The German strategist Helmut von Moltke once said, "No plan survives contact with the enemy."
3: "Funding for the federal Department of Education grew a whopping 58% under Bush during his first three years, and Bush proposed another 5% increase for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1, including sizeable increases in spending for children from low-income families and for special education for disabled children."

Lou :globe:

[Ojnod]

Let me refine a few of these.

1. Still stands, I wasn't around in WWII so I have nothing to compare it to, and I am not very worldly when it comes to history.

2. I did't not really mean planning the way that I think you thought I meant. I just meant that I think we should have had more allies or atleast verbal support and finished our first goal before we stuck our feet into something else. I am certainly not against wars or against an interventionist attitude, but I did not like the way that the administration did this. Just my personal oppinion. This is not one of the bigger issues in my mind.

3. Right now in my eyes, I see teachers around the country trying to teach to the tests that they know their kids have to pass. Their jobs are on the line and they just want to get the kids through the system. Teachers should be teaching kids how to think and how to learn, not whatever is on page 234 in the book "blah blah blah". If there was some way to measure the improvement of the kids, and not put everybody on a certain standard, I think this would be better.

Better yet, instead of forcing all kids through the same pipe, do what countries like germany do. Once you get to high school you can split up and go to different schools. Go to a certain school if you are going to a trade school after high school and go to another school if you plan on going to college and etc. This way kids are taking courses that interest them and are more likely to stay involved.

Or even easier. Increase the pay for teachers. If the teacher's pay was higher there would acctually be competition for teaching jobs, and everybody knows that when their is competition, the people win. Ask Gary how many times someone asked to take his job, it will probably be between 0 and uhh 0. All the best teachers are going to colleges, because that is where the money is. Maybe if they got equal money (with the exception of the teachers that have PhD's and teach the very high level courses that are taken at the end of a student's college career), then we could get a good mix of people in there teaching. I good teacher can make kids like a subject that they never liked before, and usually when a kid likes a subject they are bound to do well.

Ok, well those are just some alternatives, but my point was: Forcing kids to take a test to see how well their teachers taught them is not the right solution.

I don't really know what Kerry's stance is on this matter other than "I plan to give more money to the No Child Left Beheind act", so he may or may support any of my ideas. Then again, I am starting to like Kerry less and less, but I am also not starting to like bush more and more. If I WERE to vote this election I would probably vote nobody (my vote 2 weeks ago was going to kerry).

[Gaim Mastr]

Do you really? I doubt that very much! Kerry has no real backbone to stick to one side of an issue. You believe what you want to believe, nothing more, nothing less! Kerry is giving false hopes, I'm sorry to say. That's not the kind of president that we need. Mark my words.


Ironically, the exact same words apply to you and Bush. You have children about to go into military service? Mark my words, you really don't want Bush in control. :no:


1. that would have occured no matter who was president after 9/11,
and it was enacted by congress.

No, it wouldn't. Oh, perhaps a version of it probably would have. And having some form of Patriot Act bill was a needed thing. But to imply that the same bill would have been offered if anyone else were president is folly.

And by the way, the bill was passed into law by a truly vast majority of congressmen who NEVER READ IT.

And I blame the Patriot Act fiasco on the congressmen (Republicans and Democrats alike), not just on Bush.


2. Hindsite is great, isn't it?

Good grief !!
You're pretty unforgiving of Kerry's flaws and mistakes. But for Bush..... "oh, it was unavoidable due to lack of hindsight".


3. Yes, perhaps not enough was done, but it is a start, and additional
funding will will be provided in the future.

Now, I can agree that with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and with the need for additional Homeland Security funding, that the NCLB program should have been expected to be underfunded. Especially since its original funding was based on pre-9/11 America.

On the other hand, I have to wonder how much more funding would have been available if Bush had developed a better coalition of military troops before jumping into Iraq. I mean, sure, at one time there were something like 35 members of the "coalition of the willing". But how many of those members sent in at least 1,000 troops, or sprang for more than a scant $50,000,000 worth of military supplies ??

[RangerRick]

Oh, perhaps a version of it probably would have. And having some form of Patriot Act bill was a needed thing. But to imply that the same bill would have been offered if anyone else were president is folly.

I did not mean to imply that the same bill would have been applied, BUT, you do not know that and neither do I. I was just making a simple reply, and not conjecturing. It's also folly not to believe if someone else was president, a more strict bill could have been enacted. It's the old addage, 'is the glass half full or half empty'.

And by the way, the bill was passed into law by a truly vast majority of congressmen who NEVER READ IT.

That's congress's knee jerk, irresponsible action.



You're pretty unforgiving of Kerry's flaws and mistakes.
Your saying there's something to foregive Kerry For?!?! THe same flaws and mistakes repeated over and over again?
And when did I say I forgave Bush of anything? Huh, when?

It's funny how those who lean towards Kerry think he tells no lies, and Bush does nothing but. I've stated that BOTH of them lie.

You have children about to go into military service? Mark my words, you really don't want Bush in control.

And I WOULD want Kerry? What are you smoking? :lol: Have you seen the articles in the papers about the veterans and how they're leaning in the election? I've seen several, and I also think it may have been on tv. Many do not trust Kerry to do things the right way(even less so than Bush).
My son has already been in Kosovo, and in Kuwait in 2002 when we were getting ready to go into Iraq. His guard unit leaves on Monday for training as an mp, and then heads to Iraq for a year. I do not want it to me for more than a year!
Kerry has said he'll put 40000 more troops into Iraq. How's he going to get them? Extend the time of those already there!

[Gaim Mastr]

It's the old addage, 'is the glass half full or half empty'.

Depends if you're emptying it or filling it. :face10:


And when did I say I forgave Bush of anything? Huh, when?

2. Hindsite is great, isn't it?

Well let's just say that I find that to be a pretty forgiving attitude.

As I recall, and correct me if I'm wrong here, you've never stated that you think Bush rushed into Iraq without a good plan for keeping the peace after military operations.

But hey, why worry about little things like that as president when you've got so many supporters who'll just quip about how we can't blame your lack of foresight, because eventually the situation will become hindsight, and we all know that's always 20/20, which you clearly can't be held accountable for.



His guard unit leaves on Monday for training as an mp, and then heads to Iraq for a year. I do not want it to me for more than a year!
Kerry has said he'll put 40000 more troops into Iraq. How's he going to get them? Extend the time of those already there!

I see. And despite the fact that Bush already has kept people there two and three times longer than they were supposed to, via a back-door draft, you still think he has the better plan for bringing your son home after only one year ??

I just don't see the logic. Sure, Kerry might keep people there longer than they should be. But we already know that Bush will.

And yes, Kerry has claimed that he wants to increase the number of personnel over there by 40,000 more troops. And he might not reach that number. But you should be asking why Bush hasn't offered a similar plan. Then again, there's no real need to ask why, is there? We already know that Bush's plan is to maintain the back-door draft and keep servicemen over there far longer than they should be.

I really fail to see how you can look at Bush and say, "Yes, he'll bring my son home in a timely manner without keeping him there longer than he should."

I just don't get it.

[Rafal Dudek]

Let me refine a few of these.

1. Still stands, I wasn't around in WWII so I have nothing to compare it to, and I am not very worldly when it comes to history.

2. I did't not really mean planning the way that I think you thought I meant. I just meant that I think we should have had more allies or atleast verbal support and finished our first goal before we stuck our feet into something else. I am certainly not against wars or against an interventionist attitude, but I did not like the way that the administration did this. Just my personal oppinion. This is not one of the bigger issues in my mind.

3. Right now in my eyes, I see teachers around the country trying to teach to the tests that they know their kids have to pass. Their jobs are on the line and they just want to get the kids through the system. Teachers should be teaching kids how to think and how to learn, not whatever is on page 234 in the book "blah blah blah". If there was some way to measure the improvement of the kids, and not put everybody on a certain standard, I think this would be better.

Better yet, instead of forcing all kids through the same pipe, do what countries like germany do. Once you get to high school you can split up and go to different schools. Go to a certain school if you are going to a trade school after high school and go to another school if you plan on going to college and etc. This way kids are taking courses that interest them and are more likely to stay involved.

Or even easier. Increase the pay for teachers. If the teacher's pay was higher there would acctually be competition for teaching jobs, and everybody knows that when their is competition, the people win. Ask Gary how many times someone asked to take his job, it will probably be between 0 and uhh 0. All the best teachers are going to colleges, because that is where the money is. Maybe if they got equal money (with the exception of the teachers that have PhD's and teach the very high level courses that are taken at the end of a student's college career), then we could get a good mix of people in there teaching. I good teacher can make kids like a subject that they never liked before, and usually when a kid likes a subject they are bound to do well.

Ok, well those are just some alternatives, but my point was: Forcing kids to take a test to see how well their teachers taught them is not the right solution.

I don't really know what Kerry's stance is on this matter other than "I plan to give more money to the No Child Left Beheind act", so he may or may support any of my ideas. Then again, I am starting to like Kerry less and less, but I am also not starting to like bush more and more. If I WERE to vote this election I would probably vote nobody (my vote 2 weeks ago was going to kerry).


You're also dealing with a quite another problem Donjo. You see, there be undisciplined kids that DON'T want to bother to learn. I see this everday here in NYC.

[Ojnod]

Well Zedd, that is why we have Alaska, they can go up there and live with eskimos.

[gametime]

You're also dealing with a quite another problem Donjo. You see, there be undisciplined kids that DON'T want to bother to learn. I see this everday here in NYC.
__________________
Yes many don't want to learn, mainly because of what they teach and how they teach it. Donjo is right :)

[Rafal Dudek]

You're also dealing with a quite another problem Donjo. You see, there be undisciplined kids that DON'T want to bother to learn. I see this everday here in NYC.
__________________
Yes many don't want to learn, mainly because of what they teach and how they teach it. Donjo is right :)

hmm try teaching Math to some of the public schools here :p:

[mandrake]

hmm try teaching Math to some of the public schools here :p:

lol
I taught 7th/8th grade math at an inner-city school in Fort Worth.
Quite fun!

[Gary V.]

Heh, try teaching writing to 7th graders. Headache Central, USA.

[MatW]

All this time I thought Bush supporters favored Bush because they support his issues. I had no idea most don't even know what issues he supports!

I guess I'm even more naive about politics and people than I thought.

Agreed ....

[night]

people don't know what Bush supports?
even if it's true it's a lot better than Kerry, not even Kerry knew what Kerry supported :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[mandrake]

^^lol