It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Two sides prepare for Doomsday

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 5 2004 @ 01:25 PM
"Mr. Bush's political aides - speaking only on background, because no one dissects terror on the record - argue that the crazier the world gets, the more it plays to the theme of the campaign: Now more than ever, the country needs a president who has proved to be strong on terror. A worsening scene in Iraq, they believe, plays into the same instinct."

This is the picture that the Bush team envisions when they consider people going to the polls in November:

It's also the same visual that the Kerry team is preparing for. Despite there being an ample amount of issues to draw favorable comparision with Bush on, Team Kerry is nothing if not students of politcal history. They know & studied how Jimmy Carter got an "October Suprise" from the then CIA Chief Spook-promised-a-VP-slot-on-the-Reagan-ticket, with the brokered delay release of the Iranian hostages.
They have ample tape/print/records of how Al Gore was "Gored" in 2000, with the definition of his ideals & vision being painted for him. They've tried that on Kerry already with this whole non-issue on his military service.

The speculation is high on how an event will calculate politically.

"'The message the terrorists learned in Madrid is that attacks can change elections and change policy,'' a senior administration official said, talking about the new Spanish government's decision to pull its troops out of Iraq - exactly the goal some believe the train bombers had in mind. ''It's a very dangerous precedent to have out there.''

THAT, of course, is false. The Spanish Right Wing government consistently went against the will of their people & would have been voted out regardless, though it is critical for team Bush to present this narrative since the analogy with the USA is symmetrical.

“There is discussion of what are the unexpected, unanticipated [events],” said Rand Beers, Kerry’s top foreign-policy guru and a former Bush National Security Council adviser, who is a member of a loose group of advisers that the Democratic challenger is putting together. “It would be a surprise if we were not going to talk about it.”

So, given the lack of comparative strength in side by side comparisions, the trailing or equal running in the polls and the "all in" marketing of being a 'war president', can it be speculated that a terror event will be allowed to happen?

"The talk of a terror attack on the eve of the November elections is not new. In December 2003, New York Times columnist William Safire made the prediction that “a major terror attack in the US” could be the “October surprise” for this year’s election. Shortly before Safire’s column appeared, General Tommy Franks—the former head of the US military’s Central Command who led the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq—predicted that another terror attack on the scale of September 11 would result in the abrogation of the Constitution and the beginning of military rule in the US."

There has already been consistent foreshadowing from administration officials:

"Last month, US National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice gave an interview in which she warned, “I think we also have to take seriously that [terrorists] might try during the cycle leading up to the election to do something.” Rice continued, “In some ways, it seems like it would be too good to pass up for them, and so we are actively looking at that possibility, actively trying to make certain that we are responding appropriately.” Hinting that preparations to defend against a terror attack may not be successful, she added, “The hard thing about terrorism is that they only have to be right once, and we have to be right 100 percent of the time. And nobody can be certain there won’t be another attack.”

There will always be people who vote my party "right or wrong". The post 9/11 dynamic has given rise to voters who believe the inverted logic of preemptive warfare making us safer, instead of what it actually does, as evidenced in Iraq: recruiting leagues intent on our demise.

So the Analysts prognosticating how an event will flavor the election are only sure of two things: Some will be duped & believe it was unavoidable AND some will seek their pound of flesh from the Administration who failed on their watch a second time.
Let's hope it's staved off by those who are guilty from the first time around on 9/11 and if not, let's then hope that the accountability is swift & severe.

Washington weighs terror’s impact on presidential vote: A warning to the American People

Calculating the Politics of Catastrophe

Kerry gathers doomsday team

posted on May, 5 2004 @ 01:40 PM
Listen Bush is not the brightest but...

1.Kerry will raise taxes
I know he plans to do it on the rich but he will eventually raise taxes on the common man

2.Uni Med Care

Public Schools are better that Private schools?
No Private Schools and colleges are much better. Uni Med Care

3.Kerry is a flip-floper
He needs to stay on the side he is supposed to. He says things to please both sides.


War is important and I will trust Bush more than Kerry. War is neccessary with other countries to bring everyone closer to peace. It's true

Kerry through medals away.
Kerry was with Jane Fonda

Bush just isn't a fan of pretzels. What do you expect from a Texan.

Anyways Bush isn't great either with his Patriot Act and Affirmative Action (which is a form of racism.

Bush is the lesser of 2 evils.

Plus he will probably choke on ice in 2005 if he gets re-elected.

Vote for Bush! Vote for Kerry! No way!

Vote Bush! Please for the hungry children in Africa

Edit: I am not an African nor do I care about world hunger

[Edited on 5-5-2004 by Zuzubar]


log in