Why do people still support Bush?

Originally posted by seagullYou, and mostly you alone, have been doing the name calling. You are the one comparing Mr. Bush to Adolph Hitler, the comparison is not valid by the bye.

Wrong on both counts. The first I've dealt with (repeatedly...). As for the second, where did I call anybody names?

Interesting. Again we see evidence of Bush supporters seeing attacks where there are none. More evidence of seige mentality/paranoa? Is this how their minds work? It appears they perceive/create attacks on themselves to give themselves something to fight against.

Originally posted by seagullWhy did you start the thread if all you wanted to do was start a flame war with us?

Again, I've dealt with this one too. Please see the first page. The purpose of this thread is to investigate the mental processes of those who continue to support an obviously disasterous president. I'm not asking why they think they support Bush. I'm asking what are the causes of their extreme disconnect from reality.



[edit on 15-6-2006 by rizla]

Originally posted by rizla

Originally posted by seagullYou, and mostly you alone, have been doing the name calling. You are the one comparing Mr. Bush to Adolph Hitler, the comparison is not valid by the bye.

Wrong on both counts. The first I've dealt with (repeatedly...). As for the second, where did I call anybody names?

Interesting. Again we see evidence of Bush supporters seeing attacks where there are none. More evidence of seige mentality/paranoa? Is this how their minds work? It appears they perceive/create attacks on themselves to give themselves something to fight against.

Originally posted by seagullWhy did you start the thread if all you wanted to do was start a flame war with us?

Again, I've dealt with this one too. Please see the first page. The purpose of this thread is to investigate the mental processes of those who continue to support an obviously disasterous president. I'm not asking why they think they support Bush. I'm asking what are the causes of their extreme disconnect from reality.



[edit on 15-6-2006 by rizla]

No rizla it is you who sees the need to attack others for merely having differing points of view. You claim to be seeking understanding but that is totally untrue. If you wish to understand reread the posts with an open mind not a mind that is looking for a reason to attack. You might even suceed in changing people's minds if you state your arguements with clarity and logic instead of name calling and insults. Once again scamper have a nice day.

Originally posted by gallopinghordes
No rizla it is you who sees the need to attack others for merely having differing points of view. You claim to be seeking understanding but that is totally untrue. If you wish to understand reread the posts with an open mind not a mind that is looking for a reason to attack. You might even suceed in changing people's minds if you state your arguements with clarity and logic instead of name calling and insults. Once again scamper have a nice day.

Why won't you answer the question?

Okay scamper which question are you referring to? I'll try one more time to answer in a manner that you may actually understand tho I'm not sure how much clearer you need your answer to be.

Originally posted by gallopinghordes
Okay scamper which question are you referring to? I'll try one more time to answer in a manner that you may actually understand tho I'm not sure how much clearer you need your answer to be.

Are you reading the replies at all? Here goes for the fifth time: Would you support Hitler if he were your president?


[edit on 15-6-2006 by rizla]

Already answered scamper. I believe that most reasonable people would have assumed from my answer that I was sure that Hitler is roasting in a special corner of hell that the answer was no. Is this finally clear enough for you? Are you by the bye trying to accuse me of being an idiotic white supremist?

[edit on 15-6-2006 by gallopinghordes]

Well, I'll give you some of my reasons...since I am still a Bush supporter. I will not, however, return to the thread and argue my points. Partly because this board is primarily anti-Bush which puts me in an extreme minority and partly because arguing politics is and has always been pointless. Nobody ever changes their political ideals, they just turn red and get mad.

My primary reason for supporting Bush, I trust him. When I see him speak on television, I know that he is a down to earth human being, just like me. I was tested in high school and found to have a "borderline genius" IQ, but I do not perform well speaking in front of large crowds. This, I think, applies to President Bush as well. I've seen his test scores, he is not an idiot, he just isn't often good at getting his point across in the "elite speak" that people are used to hearing from the President. The way he speaks is just fine with me though.

I completely support the war on terror, I don't buy any of the conspiracy theories about 911 being an inside job. I'm as upset as everybody else that so many Americans had to die, but I truly believe that fifty years from now, the war on terror, including both Afghanistan and Iraq, will be seen as a great triumph that saved our nation. In short, the Iraq war is a necessary sacrifice to secure our future wellbeing, as well as that of the rest of the world.

As far as the comments that Bush has bankrupted the country, it's bunk. What Bush did was cut taxes, which has boosted our economy tremendously. The signs and reports are everywhere, but you have to dig deep into alternative news sources to even see them. As another poster mentioned, unemployment is extremely low and I don't buy the theory that these are all bad jobs. Without going into details, I will say that my job situation has improved dramatically in the past 5 years and I certainly don't work at McDonalds. I see it all around me as well, my place of employment didn't even exist 5 years ago. It was opened, staffed, and began booming all while Bush was supposedly destroying the country and shipping off the high paying jobs.

I am, however, at odds with President Bush on the illegal alien situation, but hey, if I agreed with everything he did, I'd be a BushBot.

With that being said, I think you folks are in for a huge surprise come November. What you don't see in the Presidential approval polls is that if those polled that voted for Bush in 2004 were asked if they would rather have Kerry in there, the numbers would climb right back up. Conservatives are still conservatives, even if they're dissatisfied with Bush, they wouldn't think of putting a liberal in the job. My prediction, the Republican lead in the house increases in November. The senate will stay roughly the same. People around the country are getting fed up with all of the PC stuff and it's going to show.

Have fun tearing me up folks. Good day.

Originally posted by gallopinghordesRizla at the riskof being rude I really feel you yourself need to calm down. I didn't notice anyone attacking the Dems for your information I don't believe we Americans are idealistic about our presidents most of us know them to be people who are trying to do a tough job the best way they can and I can respect that whether you can or not. You constant challenge to me as to whether I would support Hitler is absolutley stupid which is quite surprising since you don't appear to be stupid. You are comparing two completly different people so here and now please be statisfied no I think Hitler is most likly roasting in a very special part of hell for his actions. I do not compare Bush to Hitler but you scamper off and have a great time doing so.

Originally posted by gallopinghordes
Already answered scamper.
[edit on 15-6-2006 by gallopinghordes]

I stand corrected. You previously answered 'No'. In my defence, it was hard to spot because of your poor punctuation (see above).

In any case, you're not making sense. You said you support Bush because he is your president, yet you would not support Hitler if he were your president. You are contradicting yourself. Do you see that?

Oh, and I think calling me scamper is meant to be derogatory. You accuse me of attacking you, but you resort to name calling. You appear to be unconcious of what you are doing, and project it onto me entirely. You did a similar thing earlier when you told me to calm down. You're angry and you don't realize it.


[edit on 15-6-2006 by rizla]

Wow Rizla you really need to calm down. No I'm not contradicting myself because there is no logical comparison between Hitler and Bush no matter how much you want there to be. As for name calling scamper is only demeaning if you make it so. As for me being angry your views don't mean enough to me to cause that strong an emotion. I reserve my anger for things that are a)meaningful to me and b)a situation that I can improve. So suggest you answer my questions before you continue your attacks on me. I do however find you mildly amusing.

[edit on 15-6-2006 by gallopinghordes]

Blue Triangle I applaud your willingness to stand for your views. I may not agree with them all but your post was interesting to read. Of course, you realize that you are going to join the rest of us mindless Bushbots getting flamed. I definatly agree that Bush's immigration policy needs to be changed.

Originally posted by gallopinghordes
Wow Rizla you really need to calm down.

Rizla is being perfectly calm, it seems to me. You're the one getting bent out of shape here.

No I'm not contradicting myself because there is no logical comparison between Hitler and Bush

Since the question was "would you support Hitler if he were the president," yes, in the context, there is. The comparison is that both of them are "the president."

Here's the point Rizla was making. You said you support Bush "because he's the president." Yet you would not support Hitler if he were president. So the reason you're giving for supporting Bush cannot be the real reason. You must support him for some other reason, not just because he's the president. I mean, if it were just that he's the president, then you'd support anyone in that office, right? Even Hitler. And yet you say you wouldn't.

So what's the real reason?

I think Blue Triangle has given us some good stuff to work with here.

Originally posted by BlueTriangle
My primary reason for supporting Bush, I trust him. When I see him speak on television, I know that he is a down to earth human being, just like me.

This explains a good bit of Bush's support all along, I think. Other politicians (in both parties) often appear very much as what they are: members of an elite. Bush seems very good at conveying the misimpression that he's an ordinary guy. It's not true, of course; he's very much a member of an elite himself: rich family, educated at Yale, never held down an ordinary job, etc. But he comes across otherwise.

Reagan was pretty good at that, too. His origins, of course, were much humbler and less elitist than Bush's. But no movie star/governor is "plain folks." Interestingly, Reagan's background was very similar to Arnold Schwarzenegger's, but Schwarzenegger doesn't come across as "plain folks" while Reagan did. I really think it's a learned skill.

I completely support the war on terror . . . In short, the Iraq war is a necessary sacrifice to secure our future wellbeing, as well as that of the rest of the world.

This is likely another reason. Bush has a vision of America as an imperial power, with the government and the military aggressively used to support the interests of U.S. corporations abroad, in ways that previous administrations have eschewed. The so-called "war on terror" is a justification for that position for popular consumption.

I agree that, however convenient Bush found the 9/11 attack, we have no proof that he orchestrated it. But there were a number of possible responses to it. An invasion of Afghanistan, freezing bin Ladin's assets, tightening anti-terrorist security in this country, these were actions Bush took that anyone with a brain holding his office would have taken. But the logical response on top of this would have been to call for an international police effort to capture the al-Qaeda leaders and bring them to justice, using the international good will and sympathy our victim status had temporarily created, while examining what we could change in our own policies to make ourselves less hated in the Muslim world and so deny the bin Ladins of that world popular support. Declaring a "war" on terrorism, using that "war" on the flimsiest of connections to justify invading Iraq (something Bush wanted to do before 9/11 ever happened), and also to justify violating the Bill of Rights at home -- this is not a logical response to the attack, but rather an opportunistic one.

That said, however, there is a segment of the U.S. citizenry that delights in American military victory, and wants to see the country "stand tall" by kicking other folks' tushes. The ease with which we kerblobbered Saddam gives a thrill like a shot of coc aine. Bush's militaristic, aggressive stance feeds the need for that thrill. And that I think is the real underlying reason why the war had such a high initial level of support. The current grind in Iraq is less thrilling, of course, and that is why the support has dropped.

As another poster mentioned, unemployment is extremely low and I don't buy the theory that these are all bad jobs. Without going into details, I will say that my job situation has improved dramatically in the past 5 years and I certainly don't work at McDonalds.

That does prove that the new jobs aren't "all" bad ones. There's at least one exception. Make that two; my own job isn't bad either. But statistically, a lot of the new jobs are worse than the ones they're replacing, as our manufacturing continues to migrate to overseas sweatshops.

Still, I can see this as another reason for Bush support. If one's own economic situation has improved, one may be uninclined to blame Bush for, or even to acknowledge the existence of, the problems other people are encountering, especially if one has other reasons for supporting him.

With that being said, I think you folks are in for a huge surprise come November. What you don't see in the Presidential approval polls is that if those polled that voted for Bush in 2004 were asked if they would rather have Kerry in there, the numbers would climb right back up.

Hmm. I have my doubts about that, but it's not really relevant, since nobody is running for president this year. I'm undertain what impact Bush's low rating will have on the Congressional elections. It all depends on how much the voters link Bush with his party. Also on whether the Democrats get their collective noggins out of their behinds and actually start standing for things the way they used to. We'll see.

Have fun tearing me up folks. Good day.

See ya. And thanks for the insights and windows into the mind of a Bush supporter.

But, on the other hand if all you are willing to do is rant and call names then you are right you won't be able to influence any one.

I haven't ranted or called anyone names on this board. If you thought the initial quote was harsh, it wasn't meant to be an attack on you. The only reason I posted that quote was to make the point that supporting the president just because he's the president isn't a good enough reason. This is also the point rizla was trying to make by asking you if you would support Hitler, but that's already been discussed quite a bit on this thread, so I won't go on about that.

It seems most people that support Bush, do so because they trust him.

I have but one question for this: How many lies does it take to make a man dishonest?

What lies? Iraq(WMD) for starters, or how about the phone tapping. this list can go on but theres really no need as these two alone are sufficient for my example.

Please understand that Im not trying to start a fight here. I genuinely wish to hear peoples answers here(not knock them down for it) I will not judge anyone(not that im fit to) for their answers

personally i support bush because i agree with almost everything that he has done so far. the only thing that i really disagree with is his immigration policies. i think that we should have much stricter control, station people every at most hundred yards or so to keep them out.

but as i said, other than that i support bush in what he has done.

btw, gallopinghordes you seem to be the one calling people names with this "scamper" business although I don't really understand what it means. And also to clarify my position, I don't think it's right to oppose the president simply for some honest mistakes, but only if the president is engaging in harmful actions.

[edit on 16-6-2006 by Rock Lobster]

Okay folks Scamper was a cute little squirrel in one of the books I used to read to my daughter and her friends. Nothing mean in it. Scamper at least believed what he believed right or wrong. Does that clear it up. The comparision of Hitler and Bush is still a strange one and is sort of like comparing apples and oranges still doesn't make sense. Two different people two different times. You will notice that we have not elected a Hitler in this country. Hitler came to power at a time when the people he was leading needed to feel pride again. Do I agree with how Hitler acted good grief of course not. He was wrong in oh so many ways. By the bye when and if I get really bent you will know it and that isn't now sorry. However, I do feel that Rizla is still trying make me out to be some sort of idiot white supremist if I'm wrong on that Rizla sorry. Have a great day I certainly have.

Do I agree with how Hitler acted good grief of course not. He was wrong in oh so many ways.

Yes, exactly. I can't speak for anyone else (rizla - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), but I think this is the reason rizla chose Hitler in the question he posed to you. The point being that you would not support Hitler because of his terrible actions, despite the fact that he (in the hypothetical situation) is your president. Therefore, someone does not automatically warrant our support simply because they are the president.

Also, I want to state again that the Roosevelt quote I posted was not intended as an attack on you. I posted it in an attempt to make the same point about unconditional support of the president. I probably should have included some further clarification in that post, but unfortunately I can't change the past.

Thanks RL as I explained to you in the U2U after 9-11 I was attacked by people because I absolutly would not agree that citizens or legal residents of this country should be thrown out of the country based on ethnic background. To quote them "throw them bleap bleap out. That type of action is wrong. The people who accused and attacked me had never voted or served their country in any capacity such as military service or Peace Corp. Therefore, when it appeared that you were calling me not only servile but unpatriotic it was annoying. I still say comparing Hitler to Bush is odd. I also never said I unconditionally supported the Prez. When he does things that I believe to be wrong I write letters both to him and to my other elected reps to voice my beliefs and opinions. That is hardly unconditional support. It is however, a way to work within the system to try and improve things. At the very least, the elected officials know my opinion then at the next election I further speak with my ballot.

gallopinghordes, thanks for the U2U. After reading it and also reading your recent posts, it seems that you are a reasonable person and a patriotic citizen. The quote I posted was in response to one of your posts where you said:

As a matter of fact I didn't vote for Clinton either time he ran but once he won the election I supported him as my President as is right and proper.

When I read this, it seemed to indicate some level of unconditional support, but looking back I can see this probably wasn't the case. I agree that it is right and proper to support the president all things being equal. I suppose that's all you meant by this statement. I still stand by my assertion that unconditional support of the president is wrong, but obviously you're not one of those unconditional supporters.