The nail in the coffin - part III

According to a new Fox News poll, Americans consider the Iraq War to be part of the overall war on terror by a 58% to 33% margin, when asked if the Iraq war was part of the war on terror or a distraction. Keep in mind that the percentage of people who consider themselves Democrats is higher than 33%.

Given that the Democratic front-runners are making their names stating that this war was unnecessary, I am officially downgrading their chances to "junk".

What do you think?

You''re right, we need to go ahead and just cancel the election, it''s a pointless exercise in democracy anyway right?

Seriously though, didn''t a poll in September show 69% of respondents believed Saddam was directly involved in 911? That certainly isn''t a ''nail in the coffin'' showing he was, merely evidence that a majority people aren''t paying enough attention to the facts.

You may very well end up being right about the impact on the election, however I think it''s a little too early to call it the nail in the coffin.

You''re right, we need to go ahead and just cancel the election, it''s a pointless exercise in democracy anyway right?

Typically, you liberals have it backwards , since this seems to be a theme for Democrats these days. Every Republican with any head for politics is predicting a hard battle next year, but I see an awful lot of Democrats saying that everybody should just get behind Dean, even though the voters have yet to speak on who they want as their nominee.

Seriously though, didn''t a poll in September show 69% of respondents believed Saddam was directly involved in 911? That certainly isn''t a ''nail in the coffin'' showing he was, merely evidence that a majority people aren''t paying enough attention to the facts.

I feel the exact same way about people who claim with certainty that ""the president lied"" about the reasons for war. It''s amazing what people can get in their heads with no facts to back them up.

You may very well end up being right about the impact on the election, however I think it''s a little too early to call it the nail in the coffin.

Fair enough - I was being dramatic. However, I feel that this may be what does finally decide the election. With a very few exceptions, Republicans aren''t divided over the war in Iraq or the war on terror - the Democrats are, and deeply so. Between this internal bickering, and the fact that the public seems agree more with the Republicans, a candidate like Dean is fighting an uphill battle.

- You can label me as a liberal if that helps you fit me into a little box in your head, that''s your business, but saying it doesn''t make it true. Although I admit I''m more than likely a lot more socially liberal than you. Tell you what though, you can call me that if you like, and I will call you fascist in return, so that we can be even, ok?

- You were the one saying it was the ''nail in the coffin'' and that the Dem. candidates chances were reduced to junk, implying elections were unnecessary since the conclusion would be foregone. I make a sarcastic comment and now I have it backwards? Ok, whatever floats your boat I suppose.

- If the positions were reversed, don''t you think Republicans would be doing the same thing trying to convince voters to line up behind a single candidate in order to forestall inter-party conflict and concentrate on winning the election to regain the Presidency? Not saying it''s necessarily smart strategy to do so, just don''t see why Republicans wouldn''t be saying the same thing if they were in the same position.

- Are you so sure that the Republican base isn''t divided? I was reading this piece earlier and at the bottom saw this:

Even home in Williamsburg, he has been surprised at the reaction. ""I mean, I live in a very conservative Republican community, and people were saying, ''You''re right.'' ""

I know this is just anecdotal evidence and all, but I think it''s premature to say the Republicans are solid as a rock. A lot can happen between now and November.

- Yes it is a slow day at work and I''m extremely bored. That is all.

You can label me as a liberal if that helps you fit me into a little box in your head, that''s your business, but saying it doesn''t make it true. Although I admit I''m more than likely a lot more socially liberal than you. Tell you what though, you can call me that if you like, and I will call you fascist in return, so that we can be even, ok?

You really need to pay attention to the use of smileys... However, given that I am a pretty conservative Republican, the fact that you have positioned yourself against me on every topic we''ve discussed tells me that you are probably pretty liberal. As an aside, conservatism is pretty much the opposite of fascism - if you want to be consistent in your insults, you should call me a reactionary...

You were the one saying it was the ''nail in the coffin'' and that the Dem. candidates chances were reduced to junk, implying elections were unnecessary since the conclusion would be foregone.

I''m not sure I follow that. Just because someone makes a prediction about a game, that doesn''t mean they are suggesting it shouldn''t be played. However, many Democrats are indeed suggesting that the game be cancelled (no need for primaries) and Howard Dean be annointed.

If the positions were reversed, don''t you think Republicans would be doing the same thing trying to convince voters to line up behind a single candidate in order to forestall inter-party conflict and concentrate on winning the election to regain the Presidency? Not saying it''s necessarily smart strategy to do so, just don''t see why Republicans wouldn''t be saying the same thing if they were in the same position.

The Democrats aren''t just trying to get voters to line up, they are telling other Democratic candidates to get out of the race. Also, it''s one thing to try to close ranks during or after a conentious primary, but quite another to try and do sobefore a single vote has been cast...

Are you so sure that the Republican base isn''t divided? I was reading this piece earlier and at the bottom saw this:

All the polling shows support for Bush and the Iraq war among Republicans to be well over 80% - and that''s without Bush campaigning at all. Both parties consider this election very important, but a large portion of the Democrats agree with Joe Lieberman and the Clintons, who are on the record very clearly telling us Saddam was a threat. That will hurt Democrats.

Anecdotal stories from Clinton-era generals who have bones to pick with Paul Wolfowitz aside, there is no evidence that the Republican Party has any divide of significance on this issue.

Remember, Dean is getting between 20%-30% of Democrats supporting him in the primaries. That may be enough to win in a field of nine, but doesn''t necessarily mean that he has even a majority of support in his own party. Maybe my predictions are premature, but I think they are well-grounded, and hey - they sure are fun...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fascist

""A reactionary or dictatorial person.""

P.S. To be clear the above is meant jokingly. But in my opinion ''Liberal'' has been converted into an epithet by the Right. I recognize you used smileys and all, but if you''re going to label me with epithets, then I will do the same, whether they completely apply or not. As for the rest of it, I guess we''ll see in 11 months.

Fascism is largely the opposite of reactionary thought.

From encarta

Fascist movements usually try to retain some supposedly healthy parts of the nation's existing political and social life, but they place more emphasis on creating a new society. In this way fascism is directly opposed to conservatism"”the idea that it is best to avoid dramatic social and political change. Instead, fascist movements set out to create a new type of total culture in which values, politics, art, social norms, and economic activity are all part of a single organic national community.

The inclusion of ""reactionary"" as a secondary definition in your link is probably an acknowledgement that people use ""fascist"" as a label for people in authority, but don''t make the mistake of thinking that it has anything to do with fascism as an ideology...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=jokingly

""Something not to be taken seriously.""

But in my opinion ''Liberal'' has been converted into an epithet by the Right. I recognize you used smileys and all, but if you''re going to label me with epithets, then I will do the same,

So does that mean you agree that ""liberal"" is an epithet? I would find that funny. Republicans are conservative, Democrats are liberal. You are right, that Republicans sneer at ""liberals"", but that is because we disagree so heartily with their thinking. If the word liberal is now considered an epithet by more than just Republicans, it suggests to me that we aren''t alone in snubbing the ideology...

Additional polling information:

63% think the war in Iraq was justified even if no WMDs are found, versus 23% who disagree.

I''m sorry, but if presidential races are about electing the person who represents your thinking, the Democrats are backing the wrong horse this time around.

Nail in the coffin? Maybe not. But that climb keeps getting steeper and steeper...

Nail in the coffin? Maybe not. But that climb keeps getting steeper and steeper...

Guess it''s time for Lawyeron to profess his undying loyalty to Dean, and give his rallying cry of ""I may not be able to carry the election, but I can still carry you!""

This pointless aside has been brought to you on behalf of feline privateers everywhere.

Arghhhh! You Pirate Pussy! I want me treasure back!!

Arghhhh! You Pirate Pussy! I want me treasure back!!

You have officially been sigged, Lawyeron.

Yay!! Finally, my quest is complete! Six months worth of lame jokes has paid off!

Yay!! Finally, my quest is complete! Six months worth of lame jokes has paid off!

That means I still have about 4 more months to go...