Convince me to vote, someone.....

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

If you look at the link I posted, Dubya derived whatever popularity he had from the (ill-fated) war(s). If it weren't for the wars, he'd have had virtually no support at all.

As for shenanigans, what goes around comes around. Wasn't it Dubya who trashed McCain in 2000 in the South Carolina primary with robo-calls saying that McCain fathered a black child out of wedlock? Classy fellow, that Dubya. It seems to me that ever since the Southern Strategy, the GOP has done a lot of shady stuff come election time.

First, please don't tell me that you believe that the GOP owns the market on push polls or other campaign chicanery. Second, I partially agree with your first paragraph. He benefited politically from the the correct handling of the campaign against the Taliban. The wheels came of the cart with the misinterpretation of intelligence data from Iraq. This severely impacted his 2nd term, along with the Dems politicization of the war effort.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Kamakiri

Didn't vote yet. And no, not with my right hand, I decided that I'm going to simply vote every incumbent the hell out, whether Republican or Democrat. You can have the best engine in the world, but if it doesn't run, it isn't any damn good.

Whatever your reason, I'm happy to hear that you're playing your part.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by whell

war effort.

what is a war effort?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

First, please don't tell me that you believe that the GOP owns the market on push polls or other campaign chicanery. Second, I partially agree with your first paragraph. He benefited politically from the the correct handling of the campaign against the Taliban. The wheels came of the cart with the misinterpretation of intelligence data from Iraq. This severely impacted his 2nd term, along with the Dems politicization of the war effort.

You correct in asserting that both parties work from the same smarmy playbook. I was reacting to your notion that somehow McCain/Palin was foisted upon the GOP. As bad a ticket as it may have been, it was their best shot at the time and they knew it.

Yep, that Tora Bora thing went swimmingly.

And his intelligence was fixed around the policy (re: Downing St. memo). It wasn't a passive misinterpretation of data.

[electronjohn]

Stopped & exercised my franchise on the way to work...#17 in my precinct to cast a ballot. As always, I wrote myself in for one office. No ditch commissioner this time...wrote myself in for state house representative. The incumbent is GOP & running unopposed...at least until I voted. Thing is, though...I've known the guy for about 40 years & he's a nice fellow. A moderate who'd never held state office...the GOP went to him while he was serving as county commissioner & asked if he'd run. The Democrats were kicking themselves...because they had about an equal chance of getting him to run on THEIR ticket....but the GOPers got to him first.

[merrylander]

Whoops, off to the polls, check in later.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

You correct in asserting that both parties work from the same smarmy playbook. I was reacting to your notion that somehow McCain/Palin was foisted upon the GOP. As bad a ticket as it may have been, it was their best shot at the time and they knew it.

Right. And the same primary process gave the Dems such all star candidates as Dukakis, Mondale, Humphrey and Gore. The only thing that this demonstrates is that the primary process does not always yield candidates that are best for the long term interests of the party, or the voters.

I disagree that it was the "best shot." I still believe that Mitt Romney was electable. Like in 1996 with Dole, I think there was some level, within the party, of a "we owe it to him" sentiment.

Originally Posted by finnbow

Yep, that Tora Bora thing went swimmingly.

Yes, I know, to some folks on the left, the Afghan campaign consists of a singular event - Tora Bora - and the Iraq war only involved Abu Grahib.

Originally Posted by finnbow

And his intelligence was fixed around the policy (re: Downing St. memo). It wasn't a passive misinterpretation of data.

Wow, then a whole bunch of folks, in a whole lot of countries in a whole lot of positions of power with a whole lot of intel resources got snookered. Bush was such a good liar that he must have been approaching the level of genius.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Yes, I know, to some folks on the left, the Afghan campaign consists of a singular event - Tora Bora - and the Iraq war only involved Abu Grahib.

I was reacting to your assertion that Dubya vanquished the Taliban. Tora Bora is simply a quick and concise way to dispel this unfounded notion. AFAIK, the Taliban isn't yet acting like a vanquished foe.

Wow, then a whole bunch of folks, in a whole lot of countries in a whole lot of positions of power with a whole lot of intel resources got snookered. Bush was such a good liar that he must have been approaching the level of genius.

I guess that's what they get for trusting us. Methinks this betrayal of trust is what left our reputation in tatters. BTW, the folks that bought into our argument were dubbed the "Coalition of the Willing." Check the list and tell me which of these have sophisticated foreign intelligence services active in the Mideast (other than our lapdog at the time, the UK) and had access to any meaningful intelligence other than what we spoon fed them:

Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lithuania, Republic of Macedonia, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Palau, Panama, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Singapore, Slovakia, South Korea, Spain, Tonga, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, and Uzbekistan.

For a fellow who likes to portray himself as critical of government incompetence/malfeasance, your role as an apologist for the greatest foreign policy blunder in several generations is a bit puzzling.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

For a fellow who likes to portray himself as critical of government incompetence/malfeasance, your role as an apologist for the greatest foreign policy blunder in several generations is a bit puzzling.

Its far less a foreign policy blunder, as our friends on the left love to portray this, as it is Monday morning quarterbacking.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by whell

Its far less a foreign policy blunder, as our friends on the left love to portray this, as it is Monday morning quarterbacking.

I don't think you can call it Monday morning QBing.

I personally was against going to Iraq from day one and wanted Afghanistan hit hard not like Dick did it.