WHAT are the Republicans seeing that nobody else is? - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-23-2008, 10:11 AM   #31
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,474
Local Time: 01:06 PM
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 01:12 PM   #32
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,372
Local Time: 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
According to a new ARG poll Bush is at a 19% approval rating (76% disapprove). The internals:



What the hell, honestly?

Is this such blind devotion, or is there seriously something wrong with their thought process? The Dems are a given, but the Independents hold nearly identical views - so is everybody else crazy or what?

Somebody ssplain?
we've gotten to the point in our nation where if there was a democrat in office who was doing just as bad a job, the numbers would look very similar, only reversed. thus why nothing can get done in this shit hole, and we're headed right down the toilet just like every empire in the history of man kind has before us.
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 01:20 PM   #33
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 01:06 PM
I guess some are especially good at living in denial and/or covering their own butts and rationalizing. They voted for him and they don't want to admit reality and face it that he was a mistake. That combined with living in a bubble. Some of them are so well off that they would also respond that the economy is doing well too. Remember, the recession is just mental and we're all a bunch of whiners.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 01:39 PM   #34
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
I guess some are especially good at living in denial and/or covering their own butts and rationalizing.
I would guess that that's why he's still supported by some members of the military and their families. Supporting him is their attempt to reduce cognitive dissonance, and to give their experiences meaning. And really, in this case, I can't blame them. They've gotta cope somehow.
__________________
VintagePunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 02:59 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 06:06 PM
Gosh, I feel bad for those poor ignorant types who don't think like us. They must be ignorant/self-absorbed/ill-informed/poor/military families who have to cope somehow.

I love me some stereotypes!

ETA: Just like most other people, I too am looking forward to a new administration. I think that the first six years of the Bush presidency were a great proving ground for why both parties need to get past the resentment of the 2000 election and learn how to work together, why ideologues on both sides need to stay relegated to the sidelines, and why government works best under a two-party system where no one party has a stranglehold on the legislative and executive branches.

At the same time, I think it's patently offensive to write off those who disagree with our mentality. It's not fair to them, and it's not really fair to the two-party system we try to uphold. There are those who still support Bush, particularly when it comes to core conservative issues like national defense. Those people should not be ridiculed or written off, or -- worse -- patronized. There was a day (prior, it seems, to 2000) when smart, educated people on both sides of the aisle could disagree without accusing the other side of idiocy or ignorance. Oh, to have those days again...
__________________
nathan1977 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 03:07 PM   #36
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 06:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post

Bush didn't do everything wrong. To the contrary, luckily in part he didn't do anything.
Liberals need to develop a more honest and objective view of the Bush years instead of presuming that everything that has gone wrong over the past 8 years is Bush's fault, and that everything that has gone right over the past 8 years he had nothing to do with it.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 03:10 PM   #37
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,474
Local Time: 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Gosh, I feel bad for those poor ignorant types who don't think like us. They must be ignorant/self-absorbed/ill-informed/poor/military families who have to cope somehow.

I love me some stereotypes!


i take the point, but is it also not fair to ask the question: why do certain empirical facts not seem to have any bearing on certain people's perception of this particular president?

as as been said, everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts, and when there's a wide, wide, inarguable gap between the two, is it not poor thinking to wonder if there's not some magical thinking going on in the minds of this particular 19%?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 03:19 PM   #38
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Gosh, I feel bad for those poor ignorant types who don't think like us. They must be ignorant/self-absorbed/ill-informed/poor/military families who have to cope somehow.

I love me some stereotypes!

ETA: Just like most other people, I too am looking forward to a new administration. I think that the first six years of the Bush presidency were a great proving ground for why both parties need to get past the resentment of the 2000 election and learn how to work together, why ideologues on both sides need to stay relegated to the sidelines, and why government works best under a two-party system where no one party has a stranglehold on the legislative and executive branches.

At the same time, I think it's patently offensive to write off those who disagree with our mentality. It's not fair to them, and it's not really fair to the two-party system we try to uphold. There are those who still support Bush, particularly when it comes to core conservative issues like national defense. Those people should not be ridiculed or written off, or -- worse -- patronized. There was a day (prior, it seems, to 2000) when smart, educated people on both sides of the aisle could disagree without accusing the other side of idiocy or ignorance. Oh, to have those days again...
Please. 19% who approve and 76% who disapprove means that there is a very, very large segment from your side who disapprove of him, as well. Are they being offensive, too? Or is the 19% a group who were gifted with some sort of special insight that the rest of us don't have?
__________________
VintagePunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 03:19 PM   #39
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 06:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i take the point, but is it also not fair to ask the question: why do certain empirical facts not seem to have any bearing on certain people's perception of this particular president?
Many Democrats should be asking themselves that question since they have a particularly unwarrented extreme view of the current President despite the empirical facts.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 03:23 PM   #40
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 06:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
Please. 19% who approve and 76% who disapprove means that there is a very, very large segment from your side who disapprove of him, as well. Are they being offensive, too? Or is the 19% a group who were gifted with some sort of special insight that the rest of us don't have?
Or could it be that its the many of the 19% who are correctly assessing the situation just as the 22% who approved of Truman in 1952 have been proven to be correct in their assessment of Turman.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 03:43 PM   #41
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,656
Local Time: 12:06 PM
Have any of you considered the fact that the majority of the 19% is Strongbow, Sting, Sting2 taking the poll under several aliases?

That's the only logical answer I can find.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 04:29 PM   #42
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Zoots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: the great beyond
Posts: 36,802
Local Time: 08:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Yes I suppose invading other countries could be considered "travel."
Good one!
__________________
Zoots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 04:31 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
the empirical facts.

A select few empirical facts.
__________________
Utoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 04:37 PM   #44
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,474
Local Time: 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post
A select few empirical facts.

i think "empirical" is being a bit generous.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 05:27 PM   #45
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Or could it be that its the many of the 19% who are correctly assessing the situation just as the 22% who approved of Truman in 1952 have been proven to be correct in their assessment of Turman.
Oh, I think odds are highly against that.
__________________

__________________
VintagePunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com