Here We Go Again – Bush Supporters Still Stoopid
The New York Times continues its tradition with this latest story by Bob Herbert calling into question – again – the intelligence of Bush supporters. We begin by laying the foundation that the election was a real squeaker and so close that if someone’s grandma and another’s neice had shown up and voted for Kerry, he’d have won. Let’s listen in:
| :::::::: | Last week’s election was extremely close and a modest shift in any number of factors might have changed the outcome. If the weather had been better in Ohio. …If the wait to get into the voting booth hadn’t been so ungodly long in certain Democratic precincts. … Or maybe if those younger voters had actually voted. … | :::::::: |
Well, here we have a whole cornucopia of baseless assumptions and “facts” sans attribution or proof. First, 4 million votes isn’t “extemely close” even in an election with 115 million voters. Florida in 2000 was extremely close. This wasn’t. Saying it was is a pretty weak attempt to assail the legitimacy of the vote, but it’s all Mr. Herbert has. And then to blame the weather? It was raining, not a blizzard. He makes it sound like thousands of people grabbed their keys, walked over to their doors to go vote, took a look outside and said, “Oooo, man, lookit that rain. I can’t go out in that. Guess I better skip voting and catch the next one four years from now.” It’s extemely likely that there were some people who did just that, but to think that it amounted to tens of thousands is just more wishful thinking. As for the “ungodly” wait in certain Democratic precincts, which ones? Precisely? I saw plenty of waits for the voting booths out here in Virginia and we supported President Bush for re-election pretty decisively. What, our waits for voting were simply “godly”? Other bloggers have shown pretty clearly that the younger voters did, indeed, turn out for the vote. It’s just that 1) they didn’t all vote for Kerry, as Michael Moore would like you to believe and 2) higher percentages of all the other groups showed up, too. The “young vote bloc” only works when the rest of us decide to skip voting.
And here’s for those people telling me with a straight face that the members of the media aren’t saying Bush supporters were stupid, or dumb, or just brainless.
| :::::::: | I think a case could be made that ignorance played at least as big a role in the election’s outcome as values. A recent survey by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland found that nearly 70 percent of President Bush’s supporters believe the U.S. has come up with “clear evidence” that Saddam Hussein was working closely with Al Qaeda. A third of the president’s supporters believe weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. And more than a third believe that a substantial majority of world opinion supported the U.S.-led invasion.
This is scary. How do you make a rational political pitch to people who have put that part of their brain on hold? No wonder Bush won. |
:::::::: |
Yeah, old Bob here’s really making us wish we’d voted his way. Yessiree, nothing like a good insult and a dose of arrogant condescention to make me really believe the speaker is someone whose opinon I should give a rat’s ass about.
The University of Maryland hasn’t exactly been a bi-partisan paragon of objectivity in the years I’ve lived here. While Mr. Herbert doesn’t deign to provide details, or a link to where we can get them, he implies one of the survey accepted responses in his prose. Note the use of the term “clear evidence.” What is clear evidence is a matter of subjective judgement. (If you’re interested in a Clinton-era take on whether there was such collusion, look here.) I think there’s clear evidence that the media is, generally speaking, so liberally biased they can only make left-hand turns while driving. Others looking at the same stories I do say that’s “nonsense”. So who’s right? Any survey question that allows for an response of “clear evidence” is flawed – the answer cannot be compared apples-to-apples to the same answer given by other respondents. Flawed questions, flawed survey. Flawed survey, flawed conclusion. Note that hasn’t slowed Mr. Herbert down much. Oh, and a news bulletin for Mr. Herbert: chemical weapons have been found in Iraq. More than once. The fact that we haven’t yet found 4 gazillion containers marked (in English) “Danger! WMD inside! Hide from UN and American inspectors!” on a big label with hazmat symbols does not detract from the fact that we’ve found chem weapons. And there are things being discovered all the time. Lastly, the “substantial majority of world opinon” comment. Same issue as “clear evidence.” It’s completely subjective and points yet again to a flawed survey.
This is the kind of “rational pitch” Mr. Herbert’s talking about? I suggest that the fact someone feels that way about this kind of commentary is the scary thing. Oh, but old Bob’s not done yet.
| :::::::: | Traumatized Democrats are wringing their hands and trying to figure out how to appeal to voters who have arrogantly claimed the moral high ground and can’t stop babbling about their self-proclaimed superiority. | :::::::: |
Funny, we Republicans are having the same issue with people who voted for Kerry. Here’s something I don’t claim and no other Bush supporter I know has claimed: Democrats aren’t stupid. They haven’t “put that part of their brain on hold”, either. They have different views and that’s OK for my fellow citizens. I don’t agree with them and I voted that way. Their views weren’t convincing to the majority of American voters. Funny how that’s “clearly” all our fault.
