shadowrelm wrote:
while true what you say, and true, he is not very smart, he IS still alive which makes him smarter than Bush.
Lol. You know something the rest of us don't? Last I heard Bush was alive too...
Yeah. I know that's not what you were going for, but that's how I read it, so nyah! Quote:
not to mention his approval rating for the job he is doing is somewhere around 90 percent amoung the people in the middle east, while Bush,s approval rating at home is hovering around 40 percent, and almost zero throughout the rest of the world, including some of our closest allies.
Yeah. I'm sure Al-Z's approval rating is around 90%. Sure...
Oh. And while I know you'd like to pretend that Bush's approval rating does and will eternally stay at it's lowest point.
That dog don't hunt. I'm pretty sure that 47 is closer to 50 then 40, but then it's been awhile since I took a basic math class.
Some interesting points (cause this topic's boring enough already, no offence to Joph's attempts to make it interesting):
Specifically, belief that the United States is making significant progress toward establishing a democratic government in Iraq has jumped dramatically, by 18 points, to 65 percent. A sense of progress in establishing civil order similarly is up, by 16 points, to 60 percent. Each is its best since these questions first were asked in the spring of 2004.
Moreover — in a view held by majorities across party lines — 71 percent of Americans believe the Iraqi elections have moved the United States closer to the day U.S. forces can be withdrawn. Fifty-four percent express optimism about Iraq in the year ahead, eight points more than at this time last year. And 56 percent think the United States is winning the war, a recent theme of the president's, up slightly from 51 percent in August. Hmmm... Funny that. I'd like to take an aside and point out that once Bush finally put together a campaign to inform the public about what was really going on (and what their goals and plans where) instead of allowing the Liberals free reign to control the discussion about the war, the numbers have jumped up significantly. Kinda what I (and a number of other people) said he needed to do. If there's one common theme in my arguments on this subject, it's that there's a huge disconnect between what is actually going on and the public perception of what's going on.
Another interesting bit:
Even with his gains, the president faces considerable skepticism. Despite his recent speeches, culminating in Sunday night's national address, 60 percent of Americans say he has not done enough to explain the reasons the United States is in Iraq and 59 percent think the administration does not have a clear plan for handling the situation there. (This poll was conducted Thursday through Sunday.) Views on the lack of a clear plan have been steady since spring 2004; what helps the president politically is that even more — 74 percent — think the Democrats in Congress don't have a clear plan for Iraq, either. Hah! Yet another point I've made recently. The Dems (and general Liberal arguments as well) are too focused on critisizing Bush, but with no "plan" as to what they'd do differently. This is the "arguing against an ideal" that I mentioned about a week ago in a different thread. It's one thing to list off things that are wrong about someone else's policy, but then you're just constrating that to an unobtainable ideal solution. But if you don't provide a real solution to contrast, then you aren't really going to sway votors.
This last poll stat shows this in action. 59% don't think the Administration has a clear plan for Iraq. But 74% don't think that the Dems do. That's a critical number. Probably more important then any other. If you have to choose beween someone that has a plan (whether you agree with it or not), and someone who doesn't, which name will you mark down on a ballot? That's a 15% swing right there, in what is undoubtably the biggest issue in terms of any national election. If the Dems can't come up with a foreign policy, they're going to continue to spiral downward in terms of control at a federal level.
One last thing (because it's sooo easy):
Quote:
al-zawahiri is stupid, but he is a BETTER statesman than the president of the united states of america.
Exactly what definition of "statesman" are you using?
Edited, Tue Jan 31 21:47:32 2006 by gbaji
Nice reference Nad.