Post #45,992
7/18/02 3:46:46 PM
|
Why public opinion is stupid.
[link|http://money.cnn.com/2002/07/18/news/bush_poll/index.htm|CNN] Despite the growing scrutiny of the administration, President Bush remains highly popular, with a 70 percent approval rating, which is down from 89 percent following Sept. 11. -and- When asked about President Bush's dealings as a former director of Harken Energy, 48 percent of those polled said they believe the president is hiding something, another 9 percent believe he is mostly lying, while 17 percent think he is telling the truth, the Times reported. So, 70% approve of him and 57% think he's lying to some degree or another. So, some simple math and that means that 27% (100% - 70% approval means 30% non-approval which is removed from the 57% believing he lies) believe he is lying to some degree AND APPROVES OF THIS.
|
Post #45,993
7/18/02 4:16:25 PM
|
No...it means that
57% approve what he's doing as President and that he has lied about an unrelated business venture.
Come on...I mean, if sex is unrelated to the job of President, certainly business dealing are unrelated to the job of President. Next thing you know you'll be telling me it shows his 'character' and it's the 'principle of the matter'.
At least he haven't started an independent counsel to investigate this stuff. All that would do is divert the country from it's focus on the war (and waste millions of dollars).
|
Post #45,996
7/18/02 4:33:53 PM
|
You have me confused with another person.
Next thing you know you'll be telling me it shows his 'character' and it's the 'principle of the matter'. Nope. This is just about public opinion. I was hoping that someone would read further and quote this next part. Views on who is in charge of the country were also split, as 45 percent think it is President Bush, another 45 percent believe it is someone else, and another 4 percent think the President shares responsibility with others in the administration, the paper reported. Even the citizens don't believe that Bush is "President".
|
Post #45,995
7/18/02 4:24:07 PM
|
Nothing new under the sun
This is not surprising in the slightest. We only need look back to 1998 to see that the American public has a significant disconnect when it comes to ethics and a president's approval rating. Clinton had a whopping [link|http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeachment.poll/|73% approval rating] in December after the impeachment started. Just months earlier, [link|http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/07/29/poll.clinton.lewinsky/|56% believed he lied] and 46% thought (same ref) he actually obstructed justice. The overlap is even greater here than Bush's. I am really beginning to wonder if, in the current atmosphere of ethical apathy, Nixon could skate away from Watergate. Hell, with the right spin, it might have made him even more popular. "With the bravery of being out of range." - Roger Waters
Cliff
|
Post #46,044
7/19/02 1:01:04 AM
|
Watergate wouldn't even rate...
...an Independent Counsel now.
Compare facts.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #46,080
7/19/02 12:28:25 PM
|
Exactly
Watergate wouldn't even rate an Independent Counsel now. It really cracks me up when I hear the hissing and loathing generated by discussions of Nixon's trespasses yet a complete pass is given to more current events. "With the bravery of being out of range." - Roger Waters
Cliff
|
Post #46,108
7/19/02 4:18:42 PM
|
The Thing about Ethic$-free at the top is -
it appeals to the innate, Universal dishonesty of (pick yer fav) I want Mine and Screw You\ufffd ie
It's contagious - no known antidote except .. maturity? A lengthy process which isn't ever valued highly in a juvenile culture.
ie. expect nothing: Be Happy.
Ashton
|
Post #46,156
7/19/02 8:13:48 PM
|
I think it comes down to tolerance.
Back in the Watergate days, we weren't quite so aware of the crap going on in the Whitehouse, and now we've developed a certain tolerance to it.
Which is really not a good thing for Democracy, by any means.
There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
|
Post #46,252
7/20/02 11:20:40 PM
|
Maybe more like punch-drunk
The endless parade of scandals from Iran-Contra to Zipper-gate to Enron to ad nauseum has no end in sight. I doubt that tolerance has increased. It seems more like the callouses have thickened and most people have tuned out.
Which isn't a good thing for a republic, either.
"With the bravery of being out of range." - Roger Waters
Cliff
|
Post #46,267
7/21/02 3:51:11 AM
|
Well, there's always the chance..
(theoretically)
that after some level of universal disgust is reached, that fabled 'groundswell from the grass roots' can function - generating a sustained and serious attention would be necessary. Maybe the last time that occurred was WW-II (?) and most later events were seen to be contrived, political - incapable of galvanizing such allegiance.
Overcoming the ad-conditioning and even speech style, which correctly presumes a short attention span - would be hard.
But it isn't unthinkable.
Ashton
|
Post #45,997
7/18/02 4:50:58 PM
|
Politicians lie
or rather exagerate the truth or whatever you call it, leave out important details? Even Ronny Raygun did it when he claimed he didn't know what his own people were doing on the Iran-Contra scandle.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #46,013
7/18/02 6:16:42 PM
|
No..
Shit, Shinola !?
Never would I have *guessed* this Vital Piece of Information, had you not troubled to explain it to me and all? So THAT's how we got? where we are today? and.. and..
You Knew It All The Time? !!
When in doubt?.. do NOT uncheck [x] Preview?
|
Post #46,023
7/18/02 7:17:36 PM
|
Politicians have to learn how to lie to survive
that way they can cover up their past mistakes. Clinton did it, Reagan did it, Bush Sr. did it, Nixon did it, LBJ did it, etc. No matter what, the US people will get screwed one way or another by what a politician does or says.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
