ABC News poll

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-23-2004
ABC News poll
80
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 2:56pm




I keep hearing that polls are showing Kerry the winner, but in this poll at least, more people feel it was a tie or that Bush was the winner than that Kerry won.

Personally I thought Kerry was the better debater, but when people go back and think about his responses they'll find that he's not said anything different, just polished up the act a bit. He still wants to put the UN in charge of our national security, he still claims both that Saddam was a threat yet insists that Bush misled the American people on that very issue, he still has no plans for Iraq that differ from the president's, aside from his boasting that he will get other countries to share the burden, even though they have repeatedly said they won't no matter who is president, he still claims to be better at building alliances even as he disrepsects the very allies who supported us and disrespects our vital ally Prime Minister Allawi. He claims nuclear proliferation is our biggest threat but he wants to dismantle one of OUR nuclear programs, a "bunker buster" bomb that could be crucial to deterring nuclear strikes for the folks who actually LIVE in bunkers (aka terrorists), so I guess he's still back with those who felt a nuclear freeze was the best way to end the Cold War. After all these years he still doens't understand the doctrine of peace through strength.

Bush as usual did not express himself very well, but his positions are better for the country IMO.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-23-2004
In reply to: liveanew
Sat, 10-02-2004 - 1:29am


Sorry, despite your laughter and what the mainstream media likes to report, the fact that after every police recruiting and training center in Iraq is bombed by terrorists, even greater numbers line up th next day to volunteer, that's evidence to me that all people yearn to be free. The fact that after years of oppression more than 90% of all eligible voters in Afghanistan are registered to vote, that tells me that people yearn to be free. Scoff at those desires all you want-we in this country have the luxury of taking freedom for granted. Terror and fear certainly has the ability to dampen even the strongest spirits, but what Ronald Reagan understood, what elitist liberals have consistently failed to understand is that freedom and self-determination are UNIVERSAL human desires, they are not desires that some people care about and some just really don't all that much, they are desires that are sometimes squelched by fear but are ever present if given the hope they need to emerge. I couldn't disagree with your assessment more.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
In reply to: liveanew
Sat, 10-02-2004 - 11:06am
I don't scoff at them at all, far from it... those of you who visit the feminist board know that it is a huge issue for me... an our involvement in Afghanistan was justified based on it being a haven for terrorists. Yet we diverted resources from there, to the point a recent British report said we were in danger of it all falling apart. Voter registration is in chaos... people have registered multiple times and there are reports of voting cards or whatever being sold. In fact, I have seen reports that the number of registered voters will exceed the number of those in the country who would be eligible to vote.

We had to go play in Iraq, and it hurt our efforts here.

As for "elitist liberals" our airwaves are full of neocons who think they know best. They don't, not any more than anyone else does.

I agree that Ronald Reagan understood that. So did Kennedy. And Carter. And probably most presidents, but they had to deal with other things as well. We cannot force democracy on people, they have to want it... and again, Russia is hardly a democracy now, and it is headed down the wrong path at a fast pace... why?


Edited 10/2/2004 11:09 am ET ET by rayeellen

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-11-2004
In reply to: liveanew
Sat, 10-02-2004 - 11:57am
Excellent response! You know what you are talking about. It is refreshing to hear a level head with a clear understanding of what is happening in the world.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-11-2004
In reply to: liveanew
Sat, 10-02-2004 - 12:09pm
When you are attacked you must respond. If you do not you are setting yourself up for more attacks as you are looked upon as being weak. Why do you think the terrorists are taking hostages and beheading people? They are trying to play a mind game and if you go along and give in to their wishes they send the message that you can be controlled. We are the super power of the world and we must keep that image in everyone's mind. We are hated by so many because those people are controlled by dictators who do not let their own people think for themselves. They are totally dependent upon their government to speak for them. France, Germany, China, North Korea, Iran, Syria are all jealous and envious of our power. It is all a political mind game.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
In reply to: liveanew
Sat, 10-02-2004 - 12:55pm
I think they line up for the job, unemployment is very high. We went in & disbanded the military & the police. We are hiring outside contractors to rebuild, & they bring in workers from all over the world to do the work.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
In reply to: liveanew
Sat, 10-02-2004 - 12:56pm
If Bush had won the debate his suppoters would be jubilant. But since Kerry won, Bush supporters imply it doesn't mean much.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
In reply to: liveanew
Sat, 10-02-2004 - 1:04pm
Oy. So sayeth Romans 2,000 years ago... conquer this country, now the next border is unstable, so we conquer the next country, and the next, and the next...

There are 6 billion people in this world. We are 275 million of them, less than 5 percent. Yet some seem to think we are entitled to all the resources, and that we are worth more than everyone else in terms of human value. What next? Shall we say for every American killed, 50 Iraqis will die?

America does need to go after terrorists. Problem is, Saddam was not a terrorist. He was a brutal dictator, and there are many more of them around. And even where there aren't dictators, there are countries hostile to us... see Iran. Yet I hope this country's leaders aren't stupid enough to attack Iran... or do you wish to see a draft and an armed services of upwards of 10 million? That will do wonders for your tax bill.

And Saddam didn't attack us. I keep seeing how he violated all these resolutions... who's resolutions were they, after all? Ours, or the UN? And what was the UN's take? They didn't wish us to do it, and "they" is the rest of the world, who would be no less threatened by rogue nations.

If attacked, sure all bets are off. We are allowed to defend ourselves... but to act when you feel like it, and we did (see faulty evidence and ever changing reasons for going to war) so such conduct is of a country that scares the rest of the world all to hell.

Along with going after terrorists, we also have to show the world we are worth listening to, that we are level headed and a good role model. We have to be more impartial in our foreign policy (we could learn a lot from our neighbours to the north, whom we love to treat as our vassals) and that means helping to mediate the Israeli - Palestine issue, not take sides. Both sides have legitimate beefs, both are wrong in how they approach things, but you wouldn't know it by our conduct. And we have to interact with other nations as partners, not with a heavy hand. We created a monster in bin Laden and the Taliban, and by establishing bases in the middle east are looked upon by Arab peoples with suspicion. Even within Iraq, our conduct has been shady (big picture, not individual soldiers) because we are throwing their money around (again, see "Fern Holland's war," posted on the Feminism Today board.) We commit their government to contracts benefitting American companies... how do you think that looks to Iraqis, to all Arabs?

And that isn't all George's fault... a lot of this approach has been ongoing for decades... both Republican and Democrats have taken similar approaches.

I can't disagree with countries being jealous of power... but, do you wish to be a country that stands upon the hill and says "we are the biggest and the strongest, f you, and you'd best listen to us and do what we say, or we will make things miserable for you." Is that what you wish America to be?

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-23-2004
In reply to: liveanew
Sat, 10-02-2004 - 8:34pm


I think Kerry supporters have every reason to be jubilant. He just added new life to a race that many believed was already over. I'm not saying it doesn't mean much, I'm just saying that it remains to be seen whether his winning of the debate (as many say mostly on style and speaking ability) will translate into winning the election. I just find it interesting that as well as I believe Kerry did, only 45% in this poll actually believe he won. That's no more than were already planning to vote for him. But other polls have shown a stronger win for Kerry, so we'll have to see. Most (not all) of the polls I've seen show less than 50% declaring it a win for Kerry.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2004
In reply to: liveanew
Sun, 10-03-2004 - 2:19pm


The notion of sovereignty is a hot topic in Poli Sci these days. Is sovereignty a right deserved by all, or does it by definition mean some countries have rights over others? I find it an interesting quetion. Here's a rather balanced piece about it, in the context of the Iraq War (i.e., "Did the US invasion of Iraq help or hurt the very notion of 'sovereignty'?")

http://www.ntu.edu.sg/idss/Perspective/research_050315.htm

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2004
In reply to: liveanew
Sun, 10-03-2004 - 2:23pm
Excellent post, I enjoyed reading it. It reminded me that I appreciate articulate posts far more than some of the sass that gets tossed around (not that I haven't posted some curt, sassy retorts - but my mind is always far more open to rationale and well-articulated substance.) Thanks.

Pages