Reporters and supporters alike ask me that question.
Why is it even close if George W. Bush is the visionary, positive, successful, bold, and strong leader his supporters say he is?
Why is he so "polarizing?" they want to know.
I don't have time now to share with you all my thoughts on this question, but the simplest answer is that greatness doesn't always translate into popularity, especially in the short-term. And the leaders I immediately think of as great were polarizing figures: Lincoln, Churchill, Reagan, and Thatcher to name a few.
Some of them enjoyed re-election, some didn't. With war ongoing and an opponent who can't close the sale, we're headed toward victory for a great leader.
Easy, Tucker. Likely voters don't include first-timers, pollsters don't call cell-phone-only RVs, and the toothless HAVA gives most pollsters pause enough to consider the effect of expected, massive, unreviewable voter fraud efforts by the GOP.
Sounds like a Bush win if the Dems don't counter. But as a wise man once said, if not the ballet box, it's the ammo box. Amen.
.
Posted by: Jeffraham Prestonian | October 26, 2004 at 08:12 PM
Last post before turning in. Wasted potential: have a look at that National Opinion Research Center's page on the Florida data. The report on the Florida ballot was published in an article in 2003 American Statistician. Its a massive file (59 MB, pdf), with a lot of technical discussion about counting. Skip past all that to Table 11. The message here is that Bush would have won under a variety of scenarios for the contested counties. Gore would have won most statewide recounts.
The point here is not to refight Florida 2000. The point here is to determine whether an injustice was done to those who voted but were not counted. This isn't about Republicans and Democrats, its about democracy.
http://www.norc.uchicago.edu/fl/index.asp
Posted by: Ronald Reagan | October 26, 2004 at 08:32 PM
Well, I now need to watch Hardball to see how well you did. We are well on our way to a second term. I wish we could have won by more but it will be well below the 58% I was hoping.
Posted by: op | October 26, 2004 at 08:51 PM
I'm ready to file for an injunction to stop the vote for president unless or until we can have an honest vote. A simple ballot with the name of the candidate hand printed of the one you want to be president worked well back in the begining of our country. Under the 2000 Supreme Court Ruling American Citizens are to vote in the same manner. I would almost bet that by using Federal Common Sense Law I could makr the case. Wouldn't that throw a monkey into the pot.
Posted by: Henry Schlatman | October 26, 2004 at 09:01 PM
Someone on blogs for BUSH said:
SOMEONE, ANYONE, GET THIS TO THE BUSH CAMPAIGN, WE NEED TO PUT THIS ONE FRONT AND CENTER:
So here goes and here is the link: http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/835wicnq.asp
Kerry said:
"I have no doubt, I've never had any doubt--and I've said this publicly--about our ability to be successful in Afghanistan. We are and we will be. The larger issue, John, is what happens afterwards. How do we now turn attention ultimately to Saddam Hussein? How do we deal with the larger Muslim world? What is our foreign policy going to be to drain the swamp of terrorism on a global basis?"
Posted by: Moni Mac | October 26, 2004 at 09:04 PM
Jeffraham Prestonian - GOP voter fraud? Who was it that paid a guy in crack cocaine to register Mary Poppins and Michael Jordan in Defiance OH? The NAACP, hardly a puppet of the GOP.
Once again, I hope you are joking about the "ammo box." I was upset for 8 years of having to watch Bill Clinton destroy the presidency with his financial and sexual scandals, but I did not take up arms against the government.
If you cannot beat your political opponents in the arena of ideas, you are destined to lose. What ideas does John Kerry have that really grabs people and makes them want to vote for him? Higher taxes on the "rich?" If you lose in the arena of ideas, change your ideas. Don't take the life of your neighbour.
Posted by: wasted potential | October 26, 2004 at 09:08 PM
wasted potential: "GOP voter fraud?"
Yes, such as sending thousands of "challengers" into poor and minority polling places in OH & FL, in order to slow down voting, cause long lines, and discourage voting. Luckily, there is a counter-strategy for that as well, including assault and arrest, as well as volunteers with cell phones, who will hold places in line for those who cannot wait for the thugs to be neutralized by the assault/arrest teams.
Interesting times...
.
Posted by: Jeffraham Prestonian | October 26, 2004 at 09:21 PM
georgyboy is a miserable failure...
to quote a 'catholics for (s)Kerry' bishop regarding chimpy's claim to religious attributes, "Lies, all lies"...
Amen. " will deceive even the faithful.". it what my Bible says. God said it, taht settles it. Right?
Posted by: son of BJU grad | October 26, 2004 at 09:25 PM
I would comment with one fact. All over the world, people don't want USA to be led by Bush. They sometimes even consider Bush to be a greater threat for world peace than North Korea! If there is anything unusual in the USA, it's definitely that 48% of voters are still willing to vote for him after now that they know the truth about WMDs and Abu Grahim scandals.
Sailom
Posted by: Sailom | October 26, 2004 at 09:29 PM
You are seriously mentioning bush in the same breath as Churchill, Lincoln & Reagan?? gw can clear all the brush he wants, he is still not a pimple on Reagan's behind. President Reagan brought down the Berlin wall essentially without firing a shot. Little geroge has us in a quagmire in Iraq, our boys are dying, and we are throwing billions down a rat hole while America's infrastructure falls apart and we close firehouses.
Meanwhile bin laden and the mullahs in Iraq (who are developing real, not fantasy WMD's) are laughing their asses off and plotting against us.
Posted by: Anjin-San | October 26, 2004 at 09:32 PM
Check out Wednesday's New York Times...
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/27/politics/27bomb.html?oref=login&oref=login&pagewanted=print&position=
White House officials reasserted yesterday that 380 tons of powerful explosives may have disappeared from a vast Iraqi military complex while Saddam Hussein controlled Iraq, saying a brigade of American soldiers did not find the explosives when they visited the complex on April 10, 2003, the day after Baghdad fell.
But the unit's commander said in an interview yesterday that his troops had not searched the facility and had merely stopped there for the night on their way to Baghdad....
President Bush's aides told reporters that because the soldiers had found no trace of the missing explosives on April 10, the explosives could have been removed before the American invasion. They based their assertions on a report broadcast by NBC News on Monday night that showed video footage of the 101st arriving at Al Qaqaa.
By yesterday afternoon, as Mr. Bush made his way through Wisconsin and Iowa, his aides had moderated their view, saying it was a "mystery" when the explosives disappeared. They said that it could have happened before or after the invasion and that Mr. Bush did not want to comment on the matter until the facts were known.
.... and they're going to make sure to get all the facts together sometime after Nov. 2.
Time to fire the incompetent son of a bitch.
Posted by: Michigan | October 26, 2004 at 09:34 PM
Ah, the greatness.
Clinton told Bush that bin Laden would be his major concern. Bush did nothing. Ashcroft cut terrorism funding. Bush was warned by people whose 'hair was on fire.' Bush did nothing. Bush received a briefing: Osama determined to strike in the U. S. Bush did nothing. On 9-11, Tenet remarked 'I hope that wasn't those guys in flight schools.' Bush remarked, 'That's one terrible pilot.' 3500 Americans died.
On 9-11 Bush ran like a scared rabbit instead of returning to Washington and consoling a frightened nation. On 9-12 Hillary Clinton visited Ground Zero. Bill Clinton returned to the U. S. from Australia and visited Ground Zero. A couple of days later, George W. Bush finally visited Ground Zero. What a hero!
Recently, it was discovered that Bush was warned about the flu vaccine supply. Bush did nothing. There is not enough flu vaccine for Americans. Thousands may die. What a hero!
Yesterday, it was revealed that the Bush administration was warned to guard the al QaQaa munitions dump. Bush did nothing. Thousands of Americans have been wounded and killed by the looted explosives from that source. What a hero! American can't afford four more years of Bush. By then we will have trillion dollar annual deficits and no one will have a job.
Posted by: Mike | October 26, 2004 at 09:38 PM
Jeffraham - the reason these "challengers" are going there is due to likely voter fraud being perpetrated by the democrats in those areas (ie, false registrants voting, voting more than once, coaching people who to vote inside areas where this is not allowed, etc ...). This was instituted by the Daley machine in Chicago decades ago and has been attempted to be copied by democrats elsewhere.
I simply reject the presupposition that Republicans will somehow physically intimidate the poor from voting for Kerry on election day. If you have hard evidence of this taking place in the past, please share it with all of us. If not, please share that with all of us as well.
I go back to the arena of ideas. John Kerry's candidacy is bankrupt of good ideas. He is only capitalizing on the secularist, leftist hatred for George W Bush.
Posted by: wasted potential | October 26, 2004 at 09:39 PM
Michigan - before you "jump on the bandwagon" for another bogus accusation made by the leftist media, read the article below.
Tuesday, Oct. 26, 2004 10:33 p.m. EDT
Feb. 2003 UN Report: Saddam Moving Explosives From Al-Qaqaa
The United Nations nuclear watchdog group first reported that Saddam Hussein had begun moving stockpiles of explosives from his Al-Qaqaa nuclear weapons facility a month before the U.S. invaded Iraq.
The February 2003 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency, first reported Tuesday by the Fox News Channel, severely undermines claims by the New York Times, CBS News and the Kerry campaign that the Al-Qaqaa explosives went missing only after the U.S. gained control of the facility.
Fox correspondent Bret Baier detailed the chronology of events at Al-Qaqaa for "Special Report with Brit Hume":
* "In January 2003, inspectors with the International Atomic Energy Agency went to the Al-Qaqaa storage facility, tagging and sealing the large stockpile of powerful conventional explosives, HMX and RDX.
* "In February 2003, IEAE chief Mohamed ElBaradei reported to the United Nations Security Council that some explosives had been removed from Al Qua Quaa - 377 tons remained.
* "On March 8, 2003, IEAE inspectors made their last check of the facility before the war. The IAEA said that included a spot check on some - but not all - of the sealed explosives.
* "The war started March 19. After the Army's third division moved through here on their way to Baghdad, the first US troops stopped in to Al-Qaqaa on April 9.
* "A Reuters camera crew embedded with the Scouts from the 101st Airborne Division arrived at the storage facility, did a quick search noting a number of bunkers filled with explosives - but nothing marked by the IAEA.
* "On April 10, the Second Brigade of the 101st arrived there and spent the night.. An NBC crew was with them. A cursory search was conducted. Again, nothing marked or tagged by the IAEA was spotted. The Second Brigade left the next day, pushing forward to Baghdad.
* "US weapons inspectors, the Iraq Survey Group, arrived at the site on May 27, conducting a full search of the 32 bunkers - and they did not find any of the IAEA-marked explosives."
Baier's report continued:
"If one large truck contains ten tons, US commanders say it's highly unlikely that insurgents managed to take 38 truckloads worth of explosives out of the facility in that time.
"The roads were filled with convoys pushing to Baghdad, clogged with supplies and communications lines stretching all the way back to Kuwait - all being watched closely by unmanned aerial vehicles like the Jointstars and the Predators to protect the troops rear flank and to spot unusual activity.
"Defense Secretary Rumsfeld - asked about the missing explosives in a radio interview today - said the specifics are under investigation by the Iraq Survey Group. But he chose to point out that Saddam Hussein moved many weapons and explosives before the war."
Posted by: wasted potential | October 26, 2004 at 09:49 PM
Sailom: What you mean when you say "people all over the world" don't want President Bush re-elected is really the secularist Europeans and the Islamist Fascists of the Middle East. Those in the Eastern European countries think very highly of Bush, as does Vladmir Putin of Russia, Israel, Afghanistan, Japan and other areas of the world.
The real reason for the hatred of Bush boils down to this: The secularist/leftist people in this country and in our supposed European allies regard social conservatives and Evangelical Christians as a great threat to their way of life than the Islamic fundamentalist and terrorist organizations. That is why they call of them (going back to Reagan) slow, dim-whitted, stubborn, etc ...
In the secularist world, the idea of moral absolutes is a threat to their belief in moral relativism. Anyone who would have the world view that we are created beings with a responsibility to that creator obviously lacks the ability to reason in a logical way, they would argue. President Bush is such a man and he offends the world by saying that certain actions are "evil," as evil does not exist in a morally relativistic world.
Posted by: wasted potential | October 26, 2004 at 09:58 PM
Hey Tucker this ought to clear up Kerry's most recent lie-his back firing October Suprise:
U.S. Searches 'Suspicious' Iraqi Site
NEAR BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 4, 2003
(note the date)
CBS News reported it:http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/04/04/iraq/main547667.shtml
(CBS) U.S. troops found thousands of boxes of white powder, nerve agent antidote and Arabic documents on how to engage in chemical warfare at an industrial site south of Baghdad. But a senior U.S. official familiar with initial testing said the materials were believed to be explosives.
Col. John Peabody, engineer brigade commander of the 3rd Infantry Division, said the materials were found Friday at the Latifiyah industrial complex just south of Baghdad.
"It is clearly a suspicious site," Peabody said.
CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin reports that the hunt for weapons of mass destruction continues at sites where the U.S. thought chemicals weapons might be hidden.
"And although there are no reports of actual weapons being found, there are constant finds of suspicious material," Martin said. "It obviously will take laboratory testing to find out exactly what that powder is."
The senior U.S. official, based in Washington and speaking on condition of anonymity, said the material was under further study. The site is enormous and U.S. troops are still investigating it for potential weapons of mass destruction, the official said.
"Initial reports are that the material is probably just explosives, but we're still going through the place," the official said.
Peabody said troops found thousands of boxes, each of which contained three vials of white powder, together with documents written in Arabic that dealt with how to engage in chemical warfare.
He also said they discovered atropine, used to counter the effects of nerve agents.
The facility had been identified by the International Atomic Energy Agency as a suspected chemical, biological and nuclear weapons site. U.N. inspectors visited the plant at least nine times, including as recently as Feb. 18.
The facility is part of a larger complex known as the Latifiyah Explosives and Ammunition Plant al Qa Qaa.
During the 1991 Gulf War, U.S. jets bombed the plant.
Troops also discovered what they believe is a training center for nuclear, chemical and biological warfare in Iraq's western desert, Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks said Friday.
One bottle found at the site was labeled "tabun" — a nerve agent that the U.S. government says may have been used during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. The soldiers found only a small amount of the chemical, indicating the site was meant for training, not storing or deploying chemical weapons, Brooks said.
"In that particular site, we believe that was the only sample," Brooks said. "That's why we believe it was a training site. Our conclusion is that this was not a (weapons of mass destruction) site ... it proved to be far less than that."
Photos of the site showed shelves of brown bottles with yellow labels. Brooks said troops did not understand some of the labels and were collecting the bottles for examination by experts.
On April 1, Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan, in a statement on Iraqi television, repeated Baghdad's position that it had no weapons of mass destruction. Referring to reports that gas masks and other chemical gear had been found elsewhere in the country, he said the coalition might plant weapons of mass destruction to implicate Iraq.
"Let me say one more time that Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction," he said.
"The aggressors may themselves intend to bring those materials to plant them here and say those are weapons of mass destruction," he said.
©MMIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Posted by: Moni Mac | October 26, 2004 at 10:00 PM
i'll be so glad when the election is over. The Liberals have been making my life miserable. When I meet someone at a social gathering I am almost afraid to say I am a conservative. Once I had someone yell at me and order me to see Farenheit 9/11. Even the guy I was dating was a Kerry donor who even went to the DNC. Needless to say he turned out to be a jerk and we split on bad terms. I have met plenty of nonRepublican people in the past . But never had this kind of expriences. This election is having a strange effect on people. Hopefully things will calm down fter the election.
Posted by: Rose | October 26, 2004 at 10:00 PM
wasted potential,
NewsMax, huh? Couldn't you find anything on WorldNetDaily or MensNewsDaily?
Why not use a story from www.ijustpulledthisstoryoutofmyass.com -- everyone outside freeperville knows that's all NewsMax is.
Posted by: wtfwjd? | October 26, 2004 at 10:03 PM
wasted potential -- That last post was from Fox News? I'm surprised they made no mention of Col. John Peabody and the 3rd Infantry Division, who arrived at al Qaqaa on 4/4/2003 -- six days PRIOR to the 101st. That omission makes the accuracy of this report somewhat suspect. Or do you think Col. Peabody's team's testing of the explosives FOUND at al Qaqaa on 4/4/2003 is a figment of Google's imagination?
.
Posted by: Jeffraham Prestonian | October 26, 2004 at 10:06 PM
Wasted Potential: "Once again, I hope you are joking about the "ammo box." I was upset for 8 years of having to watch Bill Clinton destroy the presidency with his financial and sexual scandals, but I did not take up arms against the government."
Hell, yeah. I mean, sure we didn't find any actual financial scandals capable of holding up after we threw millions of dollars into the effort, but we know, KNOW, they were there. And the way Clinton forced, FORCED, the entire media and political establishments to focus on his blow-jobs day after day, week after week, month after wearying month - damn, that man is evil. EVIL I say.
God, apart from that whole fiscal surplus, economic success and global leadership bit, Clinton's regime was a complete and and utter disaster. We're so much better off with a true Christian leader like Bush.
Why, I bet there's liberals that wouldn't even CARE if the man in the White House was getting nookie on the side as long as he did the job properly! Elitist immoral swine!
Posted by: Phoenician in a time of Romans | October 26, 2004 at 10:09 PM
Tucker,
Along with this explosive missing, do you think Bush will allow "The CIA 9/11 Report" to be released? I can hardly wait for "The Report" that gives Americans the Names of those responsible for 9/11.
Posted by: Henry | October 26, 2004 at 10:11 PM
If you carefully read the article and many others being posted, you will find just the opposite - that the explosives in question were not there. Due to the low amount of items found, it was viewed as a training area.
By the way, to remove 380 tons of expolosives, they would have needed 40 tractor trailers and heavy liftin machinery to clear it out. Does anyone really believe this could have been pulled off just outside Baghdad with our forces in Baghdad? Do the leftists really have such disdain for our men and women in uniform that they could believe such a thing?
This whole story will be dead by Thursday, debunked in the same manner as the 60 minutes National Guard story.
Posted by: wasted potential | October 26, 2004 at 10:14 PM
wasted potential -- You're wishing Col. Peabody and the 3ID away, and whistling past the graveyard. Good choice; stay happy.
.
Posted by: Jeffraham Prestonian | October 26, 2004 at 10:20 PM
Phoenician in a time of Romans - Cool name ...
If Bill Clinton had been a "leader in the world" he surely would have had the wherewithal to apprehend Osama Bin Laden before he left office. I mean, he supposedly told President Bush he was the biggest threat he had to worry about. Instead, he passed on more than one opportunity to apprehend him when he was offered to us because we didn't have enough "evidence" to indict him in a court of law. But Osama was just shaking in his boots when we took out that aspirin factory in the Sudan!
Also, he would surely have had the intestinal fortitude to keep Saddam from throwing out the weapons inspectors in 1998, or at least been able to get them back in. Alas, he did not.
How could he not have succeeded in the economy? During the age of the .com explosion, he had the inventor of the internet as his Vice President, carefully orchestrating the wonders of his new technology for the betterment of America and the world.
Frankly, if Mr. Clinton would have worried less about chasing skirts and focused more on chasing the axis of evil, our country would have been a different place today. I don't believe he was an evil man. I believe he was a talented poltician who wasted his potential while in office.
President Bush has had to deal with the worst attack on our homeland since Pearl Harbor, perpetrated not by a country, but by an ideology. I believe his answer is the right one: If we succeed in transforming the middle east into a stronghold of democracy and captilasim, we will weaken this ideology of hatred against our country and thereby weaken the enemy. If the Bush doctrine succeeds, he will go down with Reagan, FDR and others that defeated the enemies of America with his policies. If we fail, the consequences for us and the rest of western civilization will be graver than we could imagine.
Posted by: wasted potential | October 26, 2004 at 10:28 PM
Jeffraham - lets post on Friday and see where the story is at. By the way, even though we probably disagree on almost everything politically, I do find the whistling past the graveyard statement a pretty cool metaphor (I'll have to remember to use it on my liberal friends sometime!)
Posted by: wasted potential | October 26, 2004 at 10:32 PM