I don’t like polls, which is why I’ve never written about them before. Even when George Bush is ahead, I don’t get excited.
Random telephone polls are the worst. While Kerry’s suspiciously high numbers make him look good, one thing big media polls can’t fake is his lackluster personality and hollow campaign rhetoric. According to an ABC News/Washington Post, Kerry has lost ground on the big issues:
The critical convention season begins with John Kerry losing momentum at just the hour he’d like to be gaining it: President Bush has clawed back on issues and attributes alike, reclaiming significant ground that Kerry had taken a month ago.Kerry has lost support against Bush in trust to handle five of six issues tested in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll, including terrorism, Iraq, taxes and even health care. And Kerry’s ratings on personal attributes — honesty, strong leadership, consistency, empathy and others — have softened as well.
Big media’s own poll shows that Kerry is a dud. 
There is nothing “dead heat” about Bush and Kerry.
I have some problems with Bush. For instance, I don’t like the way he’s running the war in Iraq or his big government policies or his capitulation to the Democrats on judicial nominees. I think he should be more aggressive in his policies, especially since he has a Republican Congress. He’s not conservative enough for me. But he’s what we’ve got right now, and I wouldn’t vote for John Kerry even if he offered me water in a desert.
I don’t know who ABC is polling, but Kerry shouldn’t be as close as he is. For example, Republicans are traditionally stronger on national defense. In an age of Islamofascism, which is here to stay, who would trust a mealy-mouth liberal to protect America?
In a land of freedom and opportunity, why would anyone allow a man, let alone a rich one, to goad them into believing they can’t make it in America without the government’s help? Every day scientists are finding more and more proof that life growing in the womb is indeed human and precious, yet people calling themselves Christians will vote for a man who thinks women have a “right” to snuff out that life.
Those who want to hold on to socialistic paternalism will be voting for John Kerry. Those of us optimistic about our country and its opportunities will be voting for George Bush.
Socialism has slipped into the mainstream so subtly that we don’t realize a lot of what the government does is not what it’s designed to do. It’s function is not to guarantee low-cost health care and prescription drugs or college tuition. It’s role is to protect us from enemies foreign and domestic and otherwise stay out of our affairs.
Speaking of optimism, ABC grudging admits: “[M]ore see Bush as an optimist (72 percent) than Kerry (55 percent). That makes it a tricky path for Kerry — delineating the nation’s problems, economic and otherwise, without sounding more negative than the public itself.”
Tricky is the right word. For Kerry to win this election, more American soldiers have to be killed and the economy has to tank. More government schools have to fail and Bush hatred has to grow more caustic. That’s the entire Democratic platform.
Liberals must really think people are stupid at heart. If anyone believes that John Kerry’s concerned about their well-being is crazy. Liberals hate being called liberals for a reason. It’s an epithet. Why? Because they know that mainstream America doesn’t share their pessimistic views, and extremism doesn’t win elections.
I am confident George Bush will win in November. Democrats can soft-pedal it in Boston this week all they want. Their efforts will be fruitless.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 30 comments }
La Shawn,
As always, your assessment of the two presidential candidates is right on. I have been very disappointed with the way Bush has handled the aftermath of major combat in Iraq. While we handily had enough force in place to pursue a victory against well identified and concentrated military force, we have not had what has been needed in the way of manpower or equipment deal with the occupation of a still partially hostile nation.
I have also been very disappointed with the way Bush has expanded entitlements in such a large way. This was basically a form of appeasement to the left which they have ignored or dismissed as not going far enough.
The alternative presented to us in John Kerry simply makes me cringe. Should Bush win, I think we might see him return to his conservative roots and push his agenda a little harder since he won’t have to even think about re-election and making nice with the left.
In my novel _Wolf Time_ a minor character, a news reporter, takes pride in saying that it has been a long time since America fought a sustained war, because, thanks to people like him, Americans no longer have the staying power to make long-term sacrifices. I think the Republicans (in their imperfect way) are the Grownup Party, while the Democrats are the Kiddie Party. The Republicans believe that life is about work, sacrifice and responsibility. The Democrats believe that life is about partying. The Democrat’s argument is, “Hey, we know an awful thing happened, but that was because those mean grownups made mistakes. If we fix the mistakes (by placating our enemies) we can go back to partying.” Who wouldn’t rather party than fight a war?
LaShawn & Montie, I agree.
We all know about the media bias, and now I hear there is pollster bias. Who saw the Reagan landslide in ‘84?
If Bush was holding back because of the mandate issue and 2002 elections, he has no reason not to roll up his sleeves and go for broke conservatively. I think the “coattail” will be there, not so much because of Bush himself, but because of the general shift. Politically, one of his biggest mistakes was supporting Spector. But I’m heartened by how Georgia politics is shaping up
What are Bush and the military leaders doing wrong in the war in Iraq. Terrorists numbers are going down and a government has been formed.
I agree with you Dex. I keep hearing all this criticism of the Iraq war and how it has gone yet I don’t hear anyone offering anything but token arm chair quarterbacking.
The way to judge this war is to make a list of the things that did NOT happen.
House to house battle of Baghdad. Remember that scenario folks? How bad would that have been?
1) Oil field destruction
2) Mass exodus of Refugees
3) Environmental Disaster
4) Mass casualties of Iraqi army
5) Use of WMD, causing mass death and environmental distruction.
6) Destruction of existing infrastructure(albeit not much there to begin with)
7) Shite uprising and or support for a theocracy.(excepting one wacko that nobody in Iraq supports)
9) Mass recriminations by Iraqi factions against Sunnis and Baath party members.
So what has gone wrong? Well nothing. What was expected is happening, the neighboring countries are meddling but not successfully. The Iraqi army has been difficult to reconstitute. Crime has been a huge problem, and is inexplicable.
What went right is the Iraqi people for the most part are on board. Would this be true if the MORE TROOPS people had their way? I doubt it. Even Iraqis have pride, they don’t like soldiers everywhere and you wouldn’t either. The American people at home are not on board, thanks to poor reporting and negative leftist politics.
Vanyogan, you make an interesting point regarding the war in Iraq. I’ve monitored some of the news coverage over the past week and it hasn’t been that bad, although there has been more kidnappings, terrorists threats, murders of Iraqi cabinet members, and numerous explosions across the country, yet inspite of this, it appears that the Iraqi people are beginning to come around and support the effort, especially since they are starting to see a genuine effort made by their own police forces to protect them.
I shy away from harshly criticizing Mr. Bush’s strategy of war simply because of my own ignorance of foriegn policy and military tactics. I do agree with Miss Barber on the issues of government spending and the fact that Mr. Bush has not been conservative enough for my tastes as well. I would still vote for him rather than Kerry any day.
There’s a view of Bush’s political tactics that seems to have some truth to it. He’s said to be the kind of poker player who plays his cards close to the vest, forces the other players to raise their bets on the assumption he’s bluffing, and then lays down a “read ‘em and weep” hand. He’s done this in the past, and I’m hoping he’s doing it now. But it looks as if he’s missed so many opportunities. Maybe he’s saving his good stuff for a big finish. I hope so. “These are the times that try men’s souls.”
I hope that Bush wins this election handily, gets some coattails and a mandate. Then, hopefully, he’ll turn more conservative in gov’t manners. La Shawn, we do have to be careful about the Republicans and “big gov’t” policies. That’ll throw me to another party quicker than almost anything.
I dunno Bloggies, but please, someone set me straight along these lines:
Is this not the same type of wishful thinking, not to mention ploy to trick the “followers” in the electorate to vote with the supposed front-runner………that took place in 80 & 84 just prior to Presient Reagan just DESTROYING those two weak liberals that dared try to equate themselves with him?
I suppose anything can happen, but what’s changed in the last 4 years to indicate that? I will vote Bush & wait to see what the swing voters do.
From where I’m sitting, Kerry might as well be Dole with nothing truly better to offer. So, we dust him off in a few months then start sharpening our blades for Hillary in 2008.
Get us Bill Owens/Condi Rice ticket & proceed to decapitate liberalism once & for all – put it out of it’s doom & gloom misery.
After that, funeral in 2-3 weeks, on or about Thanksgiving 2008. Happy trails, Hillary.
Me thinks people need to put themselves in the Bush shoes for about a week. Let’s take a look at his agenda.
1st, domestic security, meeting every darn day, then there are the TWO wars, Afghanista and Iraq, then thgere is N. Korea, and Iran, OH, and the economy, if that doesn’t improve forget the rest of it. Now there is the Judiciary, how many judges have been turned away without a vote, and then if he makes a fight of it, nothing else gets done, blah, blah, blah.
Remember missle defense? That is still moving forward. There are political and diplomatic fronts all over the world to make that missle shield work These are all things being done to keep us safe that nobody talks about.
My point here is that there are only so many things a president can focus on at one time. I submit that security and basic economic numbers are about all he can do right now.
Then there is politics. If you want to get those judicial appointments through then he has to win some more Senate seats.
Folks, all this stuff takes planning, people, and excution. You don’t just write a memo and makes these things happen.
Frankly I think Bush has accomplished more items in 3-1/2 years than any Presid3nt in recent memory. Maybe ever.
Vanyogan – That’s why I limit my criticism of Bush and hate to do it at all. But I think he should be less concerned with what mainstream media think of him and more about his base and protecting our nation, starting with our southern border. His amnesty plan has me seeing red. Why in the world would he grant amnesty to illegals? Without getting into all that, I’ll just say that regardless of what I don’t like, his being a fellow follower of Christ is a large part of the reason I support him.
Read Steve DenBeste’s essay on this.
So far all of the above are on track with the meaty issues. Bush the poker player is apt. When I vent, it’s just my frustration that Bush is in the predicament he’s in that he has to play it so close to his heart, instead of being more “forthcoming”. In any case, being a Christian, I’m more likely to give him the benefit of doubt for “holding back” from us, over Kerry being 100% open any day.
Let’s hear it for Condi in 2008. Is there anything to stop Cheney and Condi from swapping places either before or after the elections?
Seems to me that if this National Security Czar thing goes forward, Cheney would be the logical pick allowing Condi to move up. A win-win all around.
Beau, Condi taking it in ‘08 will indeed be the final nail in cHillary’s coffin.
La Shawn, I’ll take a shot at immigration without writing the book. I’ll admit that it’s a big problem, what I won’t admit is that Bush has the wrong plan. I’m an inventory control specialist among other things. The first thing I can tell you about immigration is you can’t fix it until you can account for everyone. There are approximately 10,000,000 illegals in this country. Repeating myself, you can’t write a memo and just round all these people up and deport them. There are not enough people courts, funding, etc. to do that. You have to come up with a plan that compells them to register and gives new entrants a way to enter legally. The first clue is a job. If people can work here legally, then they can easily get registered and we actually will know who is here. Employers would see that this happens. As of now it’s don’t ask don’t tell. The first thing you do to solve an inventory problem is locate and count everything. That’s what Bush’s plan would help us to do.
Security is completely separate from this. It’s the same as gun control, terrorists won’t register on the way in to kill Americans, it’s not likely anyway.
The second phase of immigration control is simple. Require everyone who rents a room, buys an airline, bus, or train ticket, eats at a restaurant, or rents an apartment, or buys property to SHOW PROOF THEY ARE HERE LEGALLY. Most countries do this already. They require a passport as an ID. The reason it’s so easy for illegals and terrorists to thrive here is once you get here, all you need is cash to move around completely undeterred. If you had to have a visa/passport to rent a room and all the other things I mentioned, that would be a start. It would be much harder to live here illegally
Respectfully,
Vann
La Shaw, keep it coming, I love your views.
As a fellow Christian, as well, I find Bush’s policies on par with my beliefs. However, I’d like to see more judicial nominations get passed (who was the recently shot-down nominee from California that had the Dems quaking in their boots because she was, dare I say it, a female black Republican Christian?!)
But also on that subject, I like Bush’s focus in this war on terror, because God know bin Laden is focused. Lest we forget, read his own words, from 2002. What can we do to get him to stop attacking us? Become radical Muslims: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,845725,00.html.
I just can’t understand Dem friends of mine who cry over “reproductive rights” when a vote for Kerry is a vote for the Taliban!
vanyogan,
Unforunately, the mass exodus of Christian refugees has begun. The U.S. government has once again sided with the moon god worshippers against Christianity.
Vann,
You are right that Bush has a lot on his plate and really has done well with the war in Iraq, all things considered. In hindsight though (which is always much clearer than looking ahead) there are many things that could have been done which may have made us a little more effective in the aftermath of the invasion. I feel that those things weren’t done due to political pressure from the liberals and Democrats, and I wish that he could find a way to ignore that pressure.
As to the illegal immigration problem, as an Oklahoma law enforcement officer, I can tell you that we are being swamped by it! We are overrun with people who cannot speak English, do not have driver’s licenses or insurance, and are constantly doing things that bring them in contact with law enforcement. We are not allowed to pursue the issue of whether they are in the country legally or not, even if we determine for a fact that they are not. This is because the Feds will not respond to local or state law enforcement contacts with illegals. While the stroke of a pen is not going to fix things, or round them all up for deportation, at least deporting the ones who are chronic law breakers might make the amnesty of the rest a little easier to take. This is certainly within the capabilities of the present system.
I thought INS was supposed to be fixed after 9/11, but in actuality there has been little or no change. Right after 9/11 we got cooperation for a couple of months, when there was some publicity in this area about the INS/Border Patrol blowing off state and local law enforcement who had picked up illegals but after awhile it was back to business as usual.Bush COULD fix this with a memo.
Regardless of all this, he will still get my vote because I think he tries, and for the most part does, the right thing in any given situation and because he filters things through the lens of his faith, just as I am inclined to do.
Vann, I wasn’t going to touch the immigration issue. But since you did, I concur with your assesment.
Security and Immigration are not part & parcel of the same issue. As an open society, we will always have a security risk. But for me, that’s the way it must remain.
Personally, I’m for throwing the doors wide open. But–Big BUT, once someone comes here, they must be prepared to integrate with this society–lock, stock & barrel.
I know this will be an unpopular concept with most.
My rational is that we’re a country of immigrants and by what right do we close the door behind us.
The counter-arguments, such as overpopulation or economic damage is frankly a canard. This country is quite capable of support twice the current population and more. And if these immigrants come seeking a better life, self-determination and are willing to pull their fair share, it would be our gain and their homeland’s loss. Believe me, when enough people freely vote with their feet and future, even the most tin-potted dictatorship will have to sit up and take notice.
That’s my 2 cents.
Here’s a very amusing article on the real, phony John Kerry.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;sessionid=20VNR4MM0WLLFQFIQMGCM5OAVCBQUJVC?xml=/opinion/2004/07/27/do2702.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/07/27/ixopinion.html
Howdy Andy,
For REAL, my man. The black voter would have some serious thinkin to do with her on the ticket…….I say republicans would get 20%, hands down, if not more.
Here’s a better one, bro. Bill Owens declines, and we slam the liberals even harder with a – get this – Jeb Bush/Condi ticket. They’d have bad dreams. Nightmares & ulcers. All the way thru to 2016.
Hey, I’ve helped elect him twice here in Florida and the man has done great things for this state, especially with 9/11 messin up the tourist industry as it did.
Or, we could lock Dr. Rice & Hillary in room, ’cause I think Miss Condoleeza knows her some Bruce Lee, Kung Fu Jeet Kun Do stuff. Hi-Yaah!!! She’d be runnin on walls, flyin across the room & just layin the smack down — okay, figuratively.
Still, lights out. Party over. Conservatism rules.
I’m gone, Andy. Later.
Kiki!! What up???
I hope it hasn’t escaped anyone’s notice that I was referring to illegal immigration, not lawful immigration. It’s important in these discussions not to change the argument when responding.
I remember when I could apply for a job without proving my citizenship. I was told that the way to control illegal immigration was to force everyone applying for work to PROVE they were citizens. Well, we all see how that worked out. Now Vann wants us to extend that stupidity to renting motels rooms, etc. etc. Sorry, that dog don’t hunt anymore. The only way to control illegal immigration is to send each and everyone back.
La Shawn, why is illegal immigration illegal? There is no moral or natural law behind it. I think this hubris over “illegals” is nothing less than self-righteous anger and venal politics at worse.
Generalizing “illegals” as shiftless, gangsters, theives, troublemakers, taking-jobs-away-from-us is only shifting our “bane-of-our-existence” stereotypes from a group once distinguished by the color of their skin or ethnicity to a group who are politically undocumented. For all the adjectives we ascribe to illegals, they were once ascribed to Blacks, Irish, Poles, Italians and so on.
The problem we have is with the truly criminal element(drugs, theivery, gangs etc) which is compounded in part to the illiberal ideas that once here, they have full access to the benfits and rights normally reserved for citizens. Let criminal justice deal with the real criminals. If deportation is necessary, I have no theoretical problem with “branding” them so they can’t come in again.
What Vann and Bush are pointing out is that “illegals” are here and there is no practical way to round them up and ship ‘em out. Believe me the blow to the economy would be felt if that were to happen. And at what cost to our own liberties?
So here we are; laws that say one thing, but wink-wink, we’ll bend the rules to accomodate everyone—that’s fine as long as everyone does their part not to attract negative attention. However, human nature being what it is, we have bad apples amongst them and as a result, the “illegals” take the rap as a whole and get kicked around like a political fotbol.
Amnesty, rehabilitation, engagement, who cares what it is called. What’s clear is that our war on illegal immigration has been going on for nigh 2 decades with nothing positive to show for it and plenty of dead victims. Anyway we slice it, there is no easy solution, but go forward we must, by first having a real discussion on immigration in and of itself.
What’s wrong with Bush trying a different approach. Bottomline, life sucks back home and they will do anything to get to the promised land. We may as well come up with a workable solution, the better to achieve a win-win situation for all. I’ll dare say that his approach is more Christ-like as opposed to keeping them out. Building wider and higher walls only comes at our expense with nothing really to show for it, except another bureaucracy.
Stemming the “illegal” route by formalizing a provisional process for temp/seasonal migration is a worthy 1st step. If by dint of individual effort and fortune, they can show that they are productive members of society, then naturalize them and allow them access to the benefits thereof. This is how it works in some countries.
Furthermore, the kind of passport/ID control that Vann referred to is rather common in most countries, the question is whether or not this is how we want to live our lives in the US.
Now Andy, this is what I’m talking about when I mentioned how people change things up when they directly respond to someone. I didn’t call anybody a shiftless thief. I don’t know whether they are lazy thieves or not. If they are here illegal, they are breakers of US law.
The laws are on the books for a reason. If the people don’t like it, they are free to lobby their legislators to change the law. We are not free to break the law because we think it’s unfair; however, I believe we can do so the law is immoral.
In my view, there doesn’t need to be a “moral” or “natural” reason behind any law. A country has the authority to regulate it’s own borders. I would argue that the US does have a moral obligation to regulate its borders. It’s called national security and protecting national sovereignty, something that used to be near and dear to the American people.
If people want to come to this great country, they need to follow our laws, whether they or any American likes it or not. If those who are here illegally don’t like our system, there is one right they definitely have: the right to leave.
La Shawn,
Sorry, I thought I was responding to “His amnesty plan has me seeing red. Why in the world would he grant amnesty to illegals?”
I have no argument with following the laws of the land once they’re here. I’ll wait until you dedicate a post to this topic. Till then.
No problem, Andy. You’re still one of my favorite commenters
Thanks, La Shawn, and the feeling is mutual.
Plus I like the way your smiling face pops up front and center before scooting to the side, as each page loads.
All I can say is AMEN and AMEN:)
Good post, but I wouldn’t be so confident of a win in November. In politics, money makes all the difference. Out of the top 25 doners to political organizations (parties or 527s), 23 are for Democrat or socialist causes. The Dems are the party of the ultra-rich and the ultra-poor, and they are working with 527s in a coordinated attack this year.
It will get uglier and it will all come down to Florida. God help us.
Comments on this entry are closed.