0
gary350

Finally - America Catching On To George Bush

By gary350, in The Bonfire

Recommended Posts

gary350    0

gary350
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4253596/

Poll: Public’s trust in Bush at low ebb

Many think he lied or exaggerated on WMD

By Richard Morin and Dana Milbank
washingtonpost.com
Updated: 7:59 a.m. ET Feb. 13, 2004

WASHINGTON - A majority of Americans believe President Bush either lied or deliberately exaggerated evidence that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction in order to justify war, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The survey results, which also show declining support for the war in Iraq and for Bush's leadership in general, indicate the public is increasingly questioning the president's truthfulness -- a concern for Bush's political advisers as his reelection bid gets underway.

Barely half -- 52 percent -- now believe Bush is "honest and trustworthy," down 7 percentage points since late October and his worst showing since the question was first asked, in March 1999. At his best, in the summer of 2002, Bush was viewed as honest by 71 percent. The survey found that nearly seven in 10 think Bush "honestly believed" Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Even so, 54 percent thought Bush exaggerated or lied about prewar intelligence.

Honesty and credibility have been central to Bush's appeal since the 2000 campaign, when he benefited from disgust over President Bill Clinton's lies about the Monica S. Lewinsky affair and when Bush's campaign accused then-Vice President Al Gore of "saying one thing and doing another." But a number of factors, including the failure to find unconventional weapons in Iraq and the administration's underestimating of its Medicare prescription drug plan's costs, appear to have undermined perceptions of his credibility.

Bush's possible Democratic opponent, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), has begun to talk about a "credibility gap." Even some Bush allies say they have been misled about Iraq's weapons, and the current Time magazine cover story asks: "Believe him or not -- does Bush have a credibility gap?"

Questions about Bush's use of prewar intelligence, in addition to feeding doubts about his honesty, have sent his performance rating plummeting. Fifty percent of Americans approve of the job he is doing, the lowest level of his presidency in Post-ABC polling and down 8 percentage points from January. The survey found that, for the first time since the war ended, fewer than half of Americans -- 48 percent -- believe the war was worth fighting, down 8 points from last month. Fifty percent said the war was not worth it.

Nine-point advantage for Kerry
These doubts have affected Bush's reelection prospects. In a head-to-head matchup, Kerry beat Bush by 52 percent to 43 percent among registered voters. Bush had more passionate support -- 83 percent of his backers said their support was strong, while 59 percent of Kerry supporters said so -- and retains an advantage over Kerry in dealing with Iraq and the war on terrorism. But the Democrat was seen as better able to handle the economy and jobs, education, and health care -- all top issues with voters this year.

The survey found a steep drop in public perceptions of Bush as a president and as an individual. In a sign that Bush has been set back by recent controversies over Iraqi weapons, his National Guard record and the federal budget, the number of Americans viewing him as a "strong leader" has slipped to 61 percent, down 6 points from December and the lowest level since the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Bush's rating on handling the economy stood at 44 percent, down 7 percentage points, with nearly half of the public saying they are worse off now than they were when Bush became president three years ago. Six in 10 disapprove of the job Bush is doing creating jobs. On education, 47 percent said they approve of the job Bush is doing, down 8 points from January. And his rating on health care has also fallen.

But the president's declining ratings related to Iraq were most striking. Approval of his handling of the situation there has fallen to 47 percent, down 8 percentage points in the past three weeks. About half of Americans -- 51 percent -- said they would prefer a report evaluating the accuracy and use of prewar intelligence before the election, while 35 percent favor what Bush has ordered: a broader study of the overall accuracy of U.S. intelligence-gathering operations that reports its findings after the election.

While 21 percent believe that Bush lied about the threat posed by Iraq, a larger number -- 31 percent -- thought he exaggerated but did not lie. Indeed, six in 10 Americans believed, as Bush did, that Iraq had such weapons.

Three in four Democrats said Bush either lied or exaggerated about what was known about Iraq's weapons, while an equally large majority of Republicans said the president did neither. Slightly more than half of all independents believed Bush had misled the public about Iraq's weapons cache.

'He's manipulatable'
"I think he was believing what he wanted to believe," said one respondent, Ron Perholtz, an accountant from Jupiter, Fla. "I can't say he's dishonest. He heard what he wanted to hear. He's manipulatable by [Vice President] Cheney and others."

Many respondents expressed regrets about the Iraq war. For example, Mike Richcreek, 52, of Warner Robbins, Ga., believes Bush neither exaggerated nor lied. "He went by what the intelligence given to him showed," Richcreek said. But, at the same time, Richcreek said he has begun to doubt the merits of the war.

"I'm not sure now we should have gone to war in the first place," he said. "You think of all of our young kids getting killed. That's a problem. I'm glad I didn't have to make the decision."

A total of 1,003 randomly selected adults were interviewed Feb. 10 to 11. The margin of sampling error for the overall results is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Assistant polling director Claudia Deane contributed to this report.

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

SkydiverRick    0

SkydiverRick
Quote

Wow, the things that pass for trolling these days. C'mon...the man posts an article and you call him a troll for it? That's a bit over the top, I think. :S



He didn't disagree. In fact he jokingly made a reference to the troll sign on his avatar. I don't think that I was over the top.



never pull low......unless you are

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

SkydiverRick    0

SkydiverRick
Quote

Quote

Wow, the things that pass for trolling these days. C'mon...the man posts an article and you call him a troll for it? That's a bit over the top, I think. :S



He didn't disagree. In fact he jokingly made a reference to the troll sign on his avatar. I don't think that I was over the top.



In addition my reply was aimed more towards his second post.



never pull low......unless you are

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

narcimund    0

narcimund
Gary,

Very dangerous ground here... Bush most certainly is a better strategist than you think. Expect an October surprise.

Sudden appearance of nukes and biobombs with the "Made in America" label scratched off? Perhaps a convenient 'terrorist' attack perfectly timed to give Bush a kneejerk boost?

I'd predict a really MAJOR attack, like a nuke on an American city, but I think Bush is more inclined to save that one for 2008 right before he cancels the election and declares himself Emperor -- you know, just because of the emergency.


First Class Citizen Twice Over

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazon    7

Amazon
Quote

I'd predict a really MAJOR attack, like a nuke on an American city, but I think Bush is more inclined to save that one for 2008 right before he cancels the election and declares himself Emperor -- you know, just because of the emergency



Hell Gen Tommy Franks already called that one a few months ago.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

gary350    0

gary350
Quote

Quote

Wow, the things that pass for trolling these days. C'mon...the man posts an article and you call him a troll for it? That's a bit over the top, I think. :S



He didn't disagree. In fact he jokingly made a reference to the troll sign on his avatar. I don't think that I was over the top.



Perhaps a more astute observer would have seen the mocking, satiric nature of the response, and maybe, just maybe inferred that it was a way to gently express disgust by using self-deprecating humor instead of defensiveness or anger.

In fact, I do think that in general, this technique is disgusting - it's an attempt at censorship of postings that bring up subjects that are embarrassing or disagreeable to certain readers. Scream troll and hijack the thread and maybe the poster will be shamed into keeping quiet? I'm sure it works sometimes - not many folks, especially if relatively new to the online community, enjoy being humiliated and censured.

But it didn't work a few weeks ago when I posted the news, (accompanied by my sickened, satiric thanks to George Bush for providing it with his lies) that the 500th American soldier had been killed in Iraq. That post was a great example - the good little dittoheads quickly came out in force to express their boredom with the subject, distract from it with links to "gay-curious" websites, ridicule the poster, and of course scream "TROLL!" (even a moderator!)

Nice try, but despite the attempts at censorship, it turned out to be a 424 post long, pretty much civilized discussion of (mostly) America's policies regarding Iraq and of the Bush administration's lies - exactly what was intended by the original post, and a good use of the forum, IMO.

Looking back at it, I'm particularly interested to observe FallRate's contribution to the discussion about the milestone of 500 American soldiers being killed in Iraq:

(Defending Jimbo's "*Yawn*") >Actually, Jimbo might give the post a bit more consideration if he had the faintest reason to believe that Gary fives a fuck about the dead soldiers, instead of being quite giddy about the fact that he can use it to make a half-assed argument against the current administration.

(Response to Jimbo posting a link to a gay-curious website) >Hysterical, Jimbo!!! Kudos.

(Another defense of Jimbo's "*Yawn*") >The yawn was directed at the fact that your post is a blatant troll. But you know that...troll!

(Response to another poster calling Jimbo on his "boredom") >There are trolls. Then there are those losers who prop 'em up.

That's it. A serious thread that goes one week/424 posts and THAT is the entire contribution from FallRate. I'm NOT saying he doesn't have the right to say what he said or only contribute drivel to serious discussions or anything else - he does have the right to post whatever he wants within the rules. But I do think it is ironic that HE is the one screaming troll, or in the case of this thread, you.

Seems like there is a direct correlation between the level of discomfort with the subject matter (Bush, lies, dead Americans, dropping poll numbers...) and the likelihood that someone (dittoheads) will call troll, even if it isn't. Sure, you can adjust the definition of troll to suit your own needs and MAKE it fit, but I don't think that makes it right - I think it is a form of attempted censorship and complete bullshit.

Billvon's timely post regarding the definition of a troll: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=919329

Note to SkydiverRick: (realizing you may not give the slightest shit) Though you did provide the catalyst, I hope you won't take this rant(?) as directed much at you personally. I notice your genuine participation in many threads and don't have reason to believe that you particularly wish to discourage posters with opposing views.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

gary350    0

gary350
Quote

Gary,

Very dangerous ground here... Bush most certainly is a better strategist than you think. Expect an October surprise.

Sudden appearance of nukes and biobombs with the "Made in America" label scratched off? Perhaps a convenient 'terrorist' attack perfectly timed to give Bush a kneejerk boost?

I'd predict a really MAJOR attack, like a nuke on an American city, but I think Bush is more inclined to save that one for 2008 right before he cancels the election and declares himself Emperor -- you know, just because of the emergency.



Hi LJ! Dangerous ground? I LIVE for danger!

I actually do struggle with how dangerous it is to let myself believe that this nightmare might actually come to an end in november. I want to believe, I want to be optimistic and positive, but at the same time I don't want to set myself up to be devastated emotionally if it doesn't happen. Life will have to go on.

Trying to find a balance between the two. But like a lot of people across the country, I am disgusted and angry and fearful like I have never been before, and I AM going to channel it into action.

My hope comes from hearing more and more folks who are in the middle, or even to the right, who think this administration is not just conservative but radical, out of control, untrustworthy, and flat out bad for America's future.

I know how many people are reactionary and fickle and just plain clueless - I know a terrorist attack might swing things suddenly. But, THIS POLL IS GREAT NEWS! MORE PEOPLE ARE GETTING IT!!!! At least for now, and damnit, I'm gonna risk letting myself have some hope.

Happy VD to you and Raist!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

kmcguffee    0

kmcguffee
Quote

By Richard Morin and Dana Milbank
washingtonpost.com



I've had a few very detailed discussions with Richard Morin by e-mail. I wouldn't characterize his political views as "Fair and Balanced" by any stretch of the imagination. He completely opposed the US doing anything to Afghanistan after 9-11 among other issues.

I wonder why this sentence:
Quote

The survey found that nearly seven in 10 think Bush "honestly believed" Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.


is buried and kept out of the headlines. Answer - because that wasn't the anti-Bush statement they were trying to confer.


"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

benny    0

benny
Quote

NEW survey out today, this time by CNN/USA Today/Gallup:

(CNN) -- Democratic presidential hopefuls John Edwards and John Kerry both hold leads of 10 percentage points or more in hypothetical match-ups against President Bush

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/18/elec04.prez.poll/index.html



We heard it here first!;)

Never go to a DZ strip show.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
0
Go To Topic Listing