-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
How is this election race so tight?
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Banned
:thumbsup:
I think a lot of people who hate much of what Bush stands for still like his tax plans. They are just voting their pocketbooks. Things are bad, but not quite bad enough.
The sad part is that if Bush wins, I think whoever the Dem's nominate in 2008 is sure to win. We would be smart as voters to take a chance on Kerry and hope for a better canidate from the GOP in 2008 if Kerry drops the ball.
jackschmittusa
Diamond Member
The race is close because there are too many "one-issue" voters. To them, their issue, whether abortion, gay marraige, blind revenge (ala 9-11), etc., overrides any and all other issues combined. IMHO, the vast majority of these voters consider themselves Republican, and GWB has consistantly catered to them. Probably nothing short of GWB announcing that he is gay could sway them.
sandorski
No Lifer
It has nothing to do with Kerry, Iraq, Abortion, Gays, or whatever. The US has split 50/50 down the middle on the sides of the 2 Parties that govern it. It has become a House divided which can't see what's best for the Nation anymore, just what's best for the Party they have sworn lifelong allegience to. Certainly there are some who see that this is bad and change their vote as required, but this is the reason that many of the Founding Fathers were adamantly opposed to a Political Party System.
cKGunslinger
Lifer
Add to your list of "one-issue" voters' picks: "Bush is stoopid," "Michael Moore told me so," "Kerry served in Vietnam," etc. There are just as many Democrats voting for these non-issues, as well as voting against Bush for some of the issues you stated above (abortion, same-sex marraige) If you think blind partisanship is just a Republican trait, then you are the very proof that it's not true.
It's like the Dems have learned nothing... they are their own worst enemy. I think the Democratic Party is slowly going crazy. When has-been Al Gore is running around making speeches... oh boy, talk about becoming unhinged. His screaming rants represents a lot of what's coming from the left and it's quite the fascinating meltdown. The Deaniacs subtly reinforce all kinds of weirdo-michael-moore type conspiracies... more conservative Democrats are scratching their heads, even some lifelong liberals like Ed Koch support Bush.
Once upon a time they had all the power. They controlled Congress, they controlled the media, they dictated national debate, and they led a nice cultural shift from the mid sixties. Now, much of this has been reversed and they are going nuts in the process. You think they would have learned the lessons of Clinton, who was a moderate "new democrat" whose image was a good old boy and down with the people. Look at John Kerry: A stuffy super rich east-coast arch-Liberal like Dukakis or drunken murderer Ted Kennedy... people cannot relate to this say-anything stereotypical politician whose positions bob back and forth like a cork in the ocean. They've nominated a dud and they know it. They are more left, more liberal, more radical, and more out of tune than they've ever been.
What these people are doing is just horrible. During a war when Americans are dying they are using any issue and terribly politicizing any situation to shamelessly attack the president, attack his team, attack the military, attack the soldiers, and attack our policy in a way that's very disturbing. What does this say to the people we are at war with? (hint: it empowers them). What does this say to the US troops laying everything on the line (hint: a demoralizing and pathetic slap in the face).
Everything they do, everything they say is a reaction to and criticism of current events. There is no vision. There is no future. It's everything they are against, not for. They've structured themselves to benefit only when there's bad news, and when there's no bad news they invent or exagerate to create bad news. They are a wailing, kicking little baby who have to tell lies to stand out and will do whatever they can to regain power, even if their tantrum undermines national security and maliciously impunes millions of good, hard-working people.
Their vitriolic angst is the only weapon they have. They know the human psyche is such that it's easier to believe negative, bad news than good. It takes work and effort to be positive. Go to a library and you'll see many "get positive" books, but we don't have to read a book to be negative... it's our nature. But it's also the Democratic Party's foundation and way of life that they happily embrace, and they're trying as hard as they can to tap into that cynical, pessimistic bone in all of us. They want us to be angry, they want us to be miserable, they want us to believe we're bad and this country sucks.
However, there's a decent chance Bush could win... perhaps because many people don't appreciate this stodgy, out of touch, lifelong beuracrat surrendering ourselves to the interests of France, Germany, and the UN. Many more will reject Kerry because of the Democratic Party's petty, offensive assault on our common sense sensibilities by the raging left-wing kooks. I'll say it again: they learned nothing from Clinton's relative success.
Once upon a time they had all the power. They controlled Congress, they controlled the media, they dictated national debate, and they led a nice cultural shift from the mid sixties. Now, much of this has been reversed and they are going nuts in the process. You think they would have learned the lessons of Clinton, who was a moderate "new democrat" whose image was a good old boy and down with the people. Look at John Kerry: A stuffy super rich east-coast arch-Liberal like Dukakis or drunken murderer Ted Kennedy... people cannot relate to this say-anything stereotypical politician whose positions bob back and forth like a cork in the ocean. They've nominated a dud and they know it. They are more left, more liberal, more radical, and more out of tune than they've ever been.
What these people are doing is just horrible. During a war when Americans are dying they are using any issue and terribly politicizing any situation to shamelessly attack the president, attack his team, attack the military, attack the soldiers, and attack our policy in a way that's very disturbing. What does this say to the people we are at war with? (hint: it empowers them). What does this say to the US troops laying everything on the line (hint: a demoralizing and pathetic slap in the face).
Everything they do, everything they say is a reaction to and criticism of current events. There is no vision. There is no future. It's everything they are against, not for. They've structured themselves to benefit only when there's bad news, and when there's no bad news they invent or exagerate to create bad news. They are a wailing, kicking little baby who have to tell lies to stand out and will do whatever they can to regain power, even if their tantrum undermines national security and maliciously impunes millions of good, hard-working people.
Their vitriolic angst is the only weapon they have. They know the human psyche is such that it's easier to believe negative, bad news than good. It takes work and effort to be positive. Go to a library and you'll see many "get positive" books, but we don't have to read a book to be negative... it's our nature. But it's also the Democratic Party's foundation and way of life that they happily embrace, and they're trying as hard as they can to tap into that cynical, pessimistic bone in all of us. They want us to be angry, they want us to be miserable, they want us to believe we're bad and this country sucks.
However, there's a decent chance Bush could win... perhaps because many people don't appreciate this stodgy, out of touch, lifelong beuracrat surrendering ourselves to the interests of France, Germany, and the UN. Many more will reject Kerry because of the Democratic Party's petty, offensive assault on our common sense sensibilities by the raging left-wing kooks. I'll say it again: they learned nothing from Clinton's relative success.
jackschmittusa
Diamond Member
cKGunslinger
I respectully disagree with you. While I don't doubt that there are some "one issue" people that vote Democratic, the vast majority will vote Republican. To many of these people, their pet issue is based on their based on religeous beliefs that they consider to be an absolute. They are sure that God wants them to take a stand.
And "Bush is stoopid" is hardly a single issue. It is an assessment of his performance regarding many issues.
I have never seen or heard the "Michael Moore told me so" issue mentioned before.
And while I have seen numerous discussions regarding the merits of combat experience in a commander-in-chief, I have never seen such experience portrayed as an imperative.
I respectully disagree with you. While I don't doubt that there are some "one issue" people that vote Democratic, the vast majority will vote Republican. To many of these people, their pet issue is based on their based on religeous beliefs that they consider to be an absolute. They are sure that God wants them to take a stand.
And "Bush is stoopid" is hardly a single issue. It is an assessment of his performance regarding many issues.
I have never seen or heard the "Michael Moore told me so" issue mentioned before.
And while I have seen numerous discussions regarding the merits of combat experience in a commander-in-chief, I have never seen such experience portrayed as an imperative.
Steeplerot
Lifer
All I have to say Rip is bring that redneck gay bashing crap here and say it to 10's of thousands of well built gays down the street.
They would turn you out for the repressed little boy you really want your new daddys to punish your for with all that gay-hating talk.
You big brute you Rip!
Actually they wouldnt give a small minded bigot like you the time of day,
and intellegent half aware woman I bet either.
Is this why your so angry Rip?
Are you lonley?
o you miss the caress only a man coul... oops nm
They would turn you out for the repressed little boy you really want your new daddys to punish your for with all that gay-hating talk.
You big brute you Rip!
Actually they wouldnt give a small minded bigot like you the time of day,
and intellegent half aware woman I bet either.
Is this why your so angry Rip?
Are you lonley?
o you miss the caress only a man coul... oops nm
jackschmittusa
Diamond Member
cwjerome
Sorry, but I find your position here to be absolutely un-democratic, un-American, and un-patriotic.
It is the very foundation of this country to ask questions of the government and to hold it accountable. And if in the accounting you find that the government comes up short, it is your duty to call attention to it.
Blind obedience led to the Nurumberg Defence, i.e. "I was just following orders".
Sorry, but I find your position here to be absolutely un-democratic, un-American, and un-patriotic.
It is the very foundation of this country to ask questions of the government and to hold it accountable. And if in the accounting you find that the government comes up short, it is your duty to call attention to it.
Blind obedience led to the Nurumberg Defence, i.e. "I was just following orders".
Steve Guilliot
Senior member
It's by chance that the national split has been so even. Just so happens that as many support Bush as oppose him. Now, why supporters of each group are so polarized is another topic.
Bush supporters are either voting thier religion or rallying-'round-the-flag. This includes one-issue voters, who usually do so becuase of ideology (read: religion). Either reason to support Bush is mostly emotional.
Opponents of Bush (supporters of Kerry) do the same thing for almost the exact opposite reason. They desire to resist the impositions of fundamentalists, and oppose the war rather than support it. I believe these reasons are much more rational (i.e. though out, not felt).
Independents (undecided's) simply fall in neither group.
Personally, my issues of choice are international relations, supreme court appointments, and seperation of church and state. That pretty much sums up my support for Kerry.
Unlike many GOP's, I don't think calling the UN "irrelevant" is productive, and neither is calling Iran and NK "evil", whom we have to work with to stem nuke proliferation. Bush sees things in black and white, rather than seeing the complex shades of gray. His supporters are the same way, or simply don't know better.
Bush supporters are either voting thier religion or rallying-'round-the-flag. This includes one-issue voters, who usually do so becuase of ideology (read: religion). Either reason to support Bush is mostly emotional.
Opponents of Bush (supporters of Kerry) do the same thing for almost the exact opposite reason. They desire to resist the impositions of fundamentalists, and oppose the war rather than support it. I believe these reasons are much more rational (i.e. though out, not felt).
Independents (undecided's) simply fall in neither group.
Personally, my issues of choice are international relations, supreme court appointments, and seperation of church and state. That pretty much sums up my support for Kerry.
Unlike many GOP's, I don't think calling the UN "irrelevant" is productive, and neither is calling Iran and NK "evil", whom we have to work with to stem nuke proliferation. Bush sees things in black and white, rather than seeing the complex shades of gray. His supporters are the same way, or simply don't know better.
cKGunslinger
Lifer
Then you are an intelligent individual with well thought-out ideas. But you are rather partisan, whether by choice or by accident. You see faults in the "other side" but refuse to acknowledge the ones in your own. Yes, many religious people are Republican, but that doesn't necessarily make them "wrong." I know that it's currently the "cool thing" to do, bashing Christains and all, but much of it is unwarranted. I'm talking about the "Bush can't even pronounce nuclear the way I do it - huh-huh - he's a moron"-esque talking points, no true criticism of his abilities. If you don't believe that Moore's flamebait speeches on college campuses are affecting some voters, then you are disillusioned. And you are again in denial if you beleive that no one is voting for Kerry over Bush because of each candidate's service records, no matter what influence they may have on thier current abilities.
Each side has some serious issues, but it's rather fool-hardy to assume one is 10x greater than the other. I know it's easy to look at those who disagree with you and say "Well, they are just brainwashed, Christian right-winger neocons who don't know any better and won't admit the ONE TRUE WAY that is my opinion, but it doesn't quite work that way. You seem to be pretty reasonalbe, surely you see this?
Jack I'm all for open, rational, clean debate... but it seems to me there's been a lot of closed, irrational, dirty debate going on, and that's the kind of stuff that I'm talking about. When people align themselves so that everytime there's bad news they cheer, it's questionable. When people use very underhanded and misleading tactics to nefariously impune others, it's questionable. I see a lot of people around me USE anything they can -no matter the truthfulness or taste- to further their one-sided agenda and it's disgusting. I'm talking about the sheep partisans... they are incapable of honest debate. I really think Bush was (is) easily defeatable, but as I mentioned before, these blind ideologues turn off a lot of people by their constant immature and irrational words and actions.
Just look at what gets posted here. Some people's posts are 99% quote and then 1% is a one or two sentence talking point stuck on the end that's supposed to be an argument. Look how some prominent liberals and groups are getting people to call talk radio and pose as conservatives, saying all kinds of weird things. Look at how they're getting people to write letters to the editors pretending to be Republicans who are voting for Kerry. Look at the email campaign on colleges that says Bush will institute a draft, the email campaign spreading through unions saying Bush will remove all overtime pay, and the email campaign going through K-12 schools that says Bush plans to privatize public education. This isn't honest debate, this is guerilla politicking at its finest.
In my experience, arguing with these people is just as bad or worse than arguing with Christian fundamentalists. Make no mistake, these leftists are every bit as emotional and dogmatic as any Christian zealot. The difference is, instead of getting their religion from the bible, these people's bible is the DNC playbook.
Just look at what gets posted here. Some people's posts are 99% quote and then 1% is a one or two sentence talking point stuck on the end that's supposed to be an argument. Look how some prominent liberals and groups are getting people to call talk radio and pose as conservatives, saying all kinds of weird things. Look at how they're getting people to write letters to the editors pretending to be Republicans who are voting for Kerry. Look at the email campaign on colleges that says Bush will institute a draft, the email campaign spreading through unions saying Bush will remove all overtime pay, and the email campaign going through K-12 schools that says Bush plans to privatize public education. This isn't honest debate, this is guerilla politicking at its finest.
In my experience, arguing with these people is just as bad or worse than arguing with Christian fundamentalists. Make no mistake, these leftists are every bit as emotional and dogmatic as any Christian zealot. The difference is, instead of getting their religion from the bible, these people's bible is the DNC playbook.
jackschmittusa
Diamond Member
cKGunslinger
Not "bashing Christians" at all. Simply saying that a lot of them seem to think that their stance is based on the will or command of god and is therefore of supreme importance. Supporting anyone who has ideas contrary to that stance is tantamount to supporting the suppression or destruction of their religion.
I think very few people are swayed by Michael Moore alone. There are likely a number of people who have sought more information after hearing him or seeing his movie though, I grant you.
There may be a small number of people that feel that GWB used undue influence to escape full and proper service to the country and consider that reason enough to vote against him.
Not "bashing Christians" at all. Simply saying that a lot of them seem to think that their stance is based on the will or command of god and is therefore of supreme importance. Supporting anyone who has ideas contrary to that stance is tantamount to supporting the suppression or destruction of their religion.
I think very few people are swayed by Michael Moore alone. There are likely a number of people who have sought more information after hearing him or seeing his movie though, I grant you.
There may be a small number of people that feel that GWB used undue influence to escape full and proper service to the country and consider that reason enough to vote against him.
jackschmittusa
Diamond Member
cwjerome
Slimey, underhanded BS is not limited to one party. The "ban the bible" pamphlets distributed by the RNC in W. Virginia are just as discusting and only one example out of many that i might mention.
This in not a new phenomenon either, only more noticable because of the internet. I remember my parents arguing that if Kennedy got elected, he would follow the orders of the Pope, even against the the best interests of the country.
Just guessing here, but there may be many people who make short posts because they feel that their point is obvious and requires little further explaination. I wouldn't condemn all of them.
I also suspect that there are people that seem to jump on "bad news" because that is all they have come to expect. I personally don't cheer for bad news, or even hope for it, but I view so many of the current Administration's policies and actions as faulty or wrong, that good news seems to be the exception. And I consider spin to make bad news look like good news an insult to my intelligence, no matter who does it. I want an honest and transparent government that is willing to be scrutinized on the merits of its actions. There seem to be too many examples of hidden truth lately that when exposed, become a "gotcha" to those that had questions before.
Slimey, underhanded BS is not limited to one party. The "ban the bible" pamphlets distributed by the RNC in W. Virginia are just as discusting and only one example out of many that i might mention.
This in not a new phenomenon either, only more noticable because of the internet. I remember my parents arguing that if Kennedy got elected, he would follow the orders of the Pope, even against the the best interests of the country.
Just guessing here, but there may be many people who make short posts because they feel that their point is obvious and requires little further explaination. I wouldn't condemn all of them.
I also suspect that there are people that seem to jump on "bad news" because that is all they have come to expect. I personally don't cheer for bad news, or even hope for it, but I view so many of the current Administration's policies and actions as faulty or wrong, that good news seems to be the exception. And I consider spin to make bad news look like good news an insult to my intelligence, no matter who does it. I want an honest and transparent government that is willing to be scrutinized on the merits of its actions. There seem to be too many examples of hidden truth lately that when exposed, become a "gotcha" to those that had questions before.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
