WHAT are the Republicans seeing that nobody else is? - Page 4 - 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, 05:32 PM   #46
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 05:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
Oh, I think odds are highly against that.



__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 05:34 PM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 10:50 AM
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?
Be very careful about who you assign sides to. I've been very clear in the past that I am not a Bush apologist. In any event, this thread has nothing to do with Bush, and everything to do with voters. I am very, very concerned about the collapse of political discourse in this country -- discourse which has nothing to do with how we see politicians, and everything to do with how we see each other. I have no idea who constitutes that 19%, but I am willing to bet that they are more complicated and more interesting than many on this board would easily or dismissively classify them as.
__________________

__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 06:04 PM   #48
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 05:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Be very careful about who you assign sides to.
Weren't you the one who did precisely that in your last post? We're all being offensive, patronizing, etc, because we're liberals who are questioning.

Pot, kettle much?
__________________
VintagePunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 06:53 PM   #49
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 10:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
Weren't you the one who did precisely that in your last post?
I was referring to your last post, which said "people from my side." Which side is that? I'm registered Independent and voting for Obama.

So you can enjoy the color of your pot by yourself...
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 07:12 PM   #50
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 05:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I am very, very concerned about the collapse of political discourse in this country -- discourse which has nothing to do with how we see politicians, and everything to do with how we see each other.
Maybe you have distinct social and cultural groups that have little in common beyond the same passport.

But it seems like nobody wants to say that out loud.
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 07:16 PM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 10:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Maybe you have distinct social and cultural groups that have little in common beyond the same passport.

But it seems like nobody wants to say that out loud.
But common courtesy, decency and respect should cross such boundaries, no?

Again, we can crap all we want on our political leaders. Comes with the territory, and it's good for them. But when we start deriding each other for deeply-held views, we seem to be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 07:19 PM   #52
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 05:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
But when we start deriding each other for deeply-held views, we seem to be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
The problem is there are factions in your country that are, objectively speaking, bigoted still.

If you were are a gay man or a lesbian, you have a huge number of your own citizens not deriding you for your deeply-held views, but wishing to impose on your laws that would relegate you to second-class citizenry.

Then you have people who listen to Rush Limbaugh and think that he is funny when he sings "Barack the Magic Negro."

Then you also have rabid atheists who have little (or no) respect for anybody with even a modicum of religious or spiritual belief and brand them stupid or what have you.

So that really goes beyond deeply held views and towards active and open dislike of who certain people ARE as people.
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 07:38 PM   #53
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 05:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I was referring to your last post, which said "people from my side." Which side is that? I'm registered Independent and voting for Obama.

So you can enjoy the color of your pot by yourself...
You're right, I looked again, and I misread one line of your post. I was wrong, and I apologize for that.

You did however toss out an accusation of being offensive and patronizing, while intentionally, I'm sure, using a phrase that I used in my post, which was directly above yours. With the many, many faults of this administration, it's not wrong to question those who still see fit to support them despite all the evidence that the past 8 years have been an utter disaster, especially in light of the fact that so much of the base have retracted their support. The incredulity with which this questioning takes place is deserved, in my opinion, given that those who question have had to sit back and watch their nation deteriorate and be made a laughing stock of the world. I'd want to know what the hell that 19 percent are thinking, too.
__________________
VintagePunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 07:50 PM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 11:50 AM
It's probably hitting the wrong people as well, but after the arrogance, spitefulness and smugness, and so much more, the Bush administration and some of their base have shown towards anyone who isn't fully going hand in hand with their crap it's hard to really stay objective critizising those who still follow these politics.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 08:01 PM   #55
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:50 AM
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.
Quote:
According to a new ARG poll Bush is at a 19% approval rating (76% disapprove).
I think this ARG poll is what we call an out liner?

Most polls have Bush still around 30%, that is a low number

and low numbers for Bush are correct and deserved

and the 22 per cent in 1952 was correct and deserved.


people that lived through the Truman years got it right.

the fact that people today rate him higher because he was President when WW II ended, means very little to me.


If Iraq some how makes it and 50 years from now it is a stable functioning country,
those people then (who won't have a clue) may want to rate W above the 19% that is the true reflection of his competency.

Truman was a mediocre President,
the fact that he burned 100,000 people to a crisp
will cause many people to rate him high
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 09:27 PM   #56
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 10:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I think this ARG poll is what we call an out liner?

Most polls have Bush still around 30%, that is a low number

and low numbers for Bush are correct and deserved

and the 22 per cent in 1952 was correct and deserved.


people that lived through the Truman years got it right.

the fact that people today rate him higher because he was President when WW II ended, means very little to me.


If Iraq some how makes it and 50 years from now it is a stable functioning country,
those people then (who won't have a clue) may want to rate W above the 19% that is the true reflection of his competency.

Truman was a mediocre President,
the fact that he burned 100,000 people to a crisp
will cause many people to rate him high
The vast majority of historians and people today do not feel that Trumans 22% approval rating in 1952, the lowest of any President in history, was correct and deserved. The majority of Truman's low approval ratings were do to the Korean War, a war that the vast majority of Americans today believe was a necessity and continue to support the stationing of US troops in South Korea. But in 1952, only 37% of Americans approved of US military intervention in Korea.

Trumans ratings today are higher because Americans have changed their views about the necessity of the Korean War, and respect the policies that the Truman administration put in place to help guide US policy during the Cold War. Its Truman's post-World War II policies that have made many people consider him one of the greatest Presidents of all time, not the few months he spent as President towards the end of World War II.

Honest, objective and accurate assessments of situations, free of political bias and influence, come with the passage of time as more information becomes available and the true and lasting results of certain policies become more visible. Nearly all Democrats who voted against the 1991 Gulf War admit today that doing so was a mistake. Its doubtful that many people in 20 years will be arguing that Kuwait, the Persian Gulf, or the United States would be more safe and secure if the United States had left Saddam's regime in power.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 10:35 PM   #57
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 04:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
The vast majority of historians and people today do not feel that Trumans 22% approval rating in 1952, the lowest of any President in history, was correct and deserved.
Source?

Quote:
Trumans ratings today are higher because Americans have changed their views about the necessity of the Korean War, and respect the policies that the Truman administration put in place to help guide US policy during the Cold War.
Sting: Arbiter of Truth, Reader of Minds.

Quote:
Its Truman's post-World War II policies that have made many people consider him one of the greatest Presidents of all time
Define many. I certainly don't think Truman is commonly looked upon as one of the greatest Presidents of all time, and I think that there are easily "many" (if not many more) people who don't consider him to be one of the greatest Presidents of all time.

Quote:
Honest, objective and accurate assessments of situations, free of political bias and influence


Now that is funny.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 11:28 PM   #58
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
The vast majority of historians and people today do not feel that Trumans 22% approval rating in 1952, the lowest of any President in history, was correct and deserved. The majority of Truman's low approval ratings were do to the Korean War, a war that the vast majority of Americans today believe was a necessity and continue to support the stationing of US troops in South Korea. But in 1952, only 37% of Americans approved of US military intervention in Korea.

Trumans ratings today are higher because Americans have changed their views about the necessity of the Korean War, and respect the policies that the Truman administration put in place to help guide US policy during the Cold War. Its Truman's post-World War II policies that have made many people consider him one of the greatest Presidents of all time, not the few months he spent as President towards the end of World War II.

Honest, objective and accurate assessments of situations, free of political bias and influence, come with the passage of time as more information becomes available and the true and lasting results of certain policies become more visible. Nearly all Democrats who voted against the 1991 Gulf War admit today that doing so was a mistake. Its doubtful that many people in 20 years will be arguing that Kuwait, the Persian Gulf, or the United States would be more safe and secure if the United States had left Saddam's regime in power.
Thanks for your polite response to my somewhat snippy reply.

I am not sure why Truman was at 22%

It may be because of the Korean War as you say,

I do recall when he fired MacArthur that it was not as popular as when Bush let Rumsfeld go.

I do recall the "Give em Hell, Harry" slogan.

I could do some more research learn some more.

I tend to think Lincoln is over rated, too.

Being born in 1955 I do remember a little about Nixon and do see why his standings moved up over time from when he left office. Carter seems to be holding about the same, and I can say Reagan's ratings don't change much.

I don't expect Bush 1 or Clinton's standings to move dramatiacally n future years.

Anyways, W's ratings may come up a bit, but even with good breaks I can't see them ever going up more than 8-10 points.

I guess if we live long enough, we will see.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2008, 01:06 AM   #59
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 05:50 AM
I can think of one intelligent, thoughtful person offhand who is a Bush supporter. I should ask him his reasons for continuing to support this administration. (And that's assuming he still does. He did two years ago, when he lived here in Saipan, but we haven't talked politics much since he moved away and his views of Bush may have changed).

I'd be interested in hearing an articulate defense of the Bush administration from someone interested in having an actual discussion.
__________________
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2008, 10:45 AM   #60
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 05:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Maybe you have distinct social and cultural groups that have little in common beyond the same passport.

But it seems like nobody wants to say that out loud.


i have always maintained that i had more in common with the urban francophone Europeans i've lived and worked with than with certain members of my family.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 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 05:50 AM.


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