By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Were the end of the Clinton and Bush presidencys this brazenly electioneering?

Mr Khan on 17 September 2012
ECM said:
Regarding the op: the slanting of polls is, by far, the worst case of media slanting of reality I have seen in my lifetime (I'm old enough to remember, with pristine clarity, 1984's prez election).

Obama is going to lose *very* badly, but the polls make it seem like he actually has a pretty good lead...then you look at the metrics used and Dems et al are over-sampled by many percentage points giving the illusion he's actually in good shape. Normalize the polls for actual electoral make-up (i.e. the correct number of Rs vs. Ds vs. Is), eliminate registered voters and use likely (registered, for those that don't know, is a meaningless stat, predictive of nothing), and he's looking at a Mondale-esque loss.

However, it will be interesting the day after election day when all the pundits and papers, etc. are (again) scratching their heads over how the polls could be so wrong about Obama's electoral chances because (again) they'll blame the sudden, literally last minute, shift in the mood of the electorate instead of pinning the blame for not seeing this coming squarely on themselves and their blinkered worldview.

Mondale-esque? Obama's going to lose all but 1 state and DC?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
NintendoPie on 17 September 2012

I don't even know why People dying and bombs going off in other countries gets people over here all riled up to vote for the person who made dropping those bombs an action/order...



sethnintendo on 17 September 2012
gergroy said:


I remember clinton having a lot of electioneering going on, but I don't really remember Bush doing that much. 


You are right Bush didn't have to do that much.  He only had to bring fear into the election process.  Remember a vote for democrats is a vote for terrorism aka a vote for democrats makes the nation less safe?



gergroy on 17 September 2012
sethnintendo said:
gergroy said:


I remember clinton having a lot of electioneering going on, but I don't really remember Bush doing that much. 


You are right Bush didn't have to do that much.  He only had to bring fear into the election process.  Remember a vote for democrats is a vote for terrorism aka a vote for democrats makes the nation less safe?

for sure, there is no doubt that Bush pushed fear into the election, as well as moral superiority.  I'm just thinking of using the office of president for election purposes.  



Mr Khan on 17 September 2012
NintendoPie said:
I don't even know why People dying and bombs going off in other countries gets people over here all riled up to vote for the person who made dropping those bombs an action/order...

It's called the "rally around the flag" effect. essentially, in a time of crisis, people will gravitate towards existing authority figures in a way that enhances their legitimacy. It only works if the leaders' response to the crisis is appropriate, however. If they bungle, then they're sunk more surely than if the effect weren't in play.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
gergroy on 17 September 2012
Mr Khan said:
NintendoPie said:
I don't even know why People dying and bombs going off in other countries gets people over here all riled up to vote for the person who made dropping those bombs an action/order...

It's called the "rally around the flag" effect. essentially, in a time of crisis, people will gravitate towards existing authority figures in a way that enhances their legitimacy. It only works if the leaders' response to the crisis is appropriate, however. If they bungle, then they're sunk more surely than if the effect weren't in play.


essentially the whole reason W. got reelected



NintendoPie on 17 September 2012
Mr Khan said:
NintendoPie said:
I don't even know why People dying and bombs going off in other countries gets people over here all riled up to vote for the person who made dropping those bombs an action/order...

It's called the "rally around the flag" effect. essentially, in a time of crisis, people will gravitate towards existing authority figures in a way that enhances their legitimacy. It only works if the leaders' response to the crisis is appropriate, however. If they bungle, then they're sunk more surely than if the effect weren't in play.

But we aren't really in a crisis overseas... right? So why would Obama do this?



outlawauron on 17 September 2012
gergroy said:
Mr Khan said:
NintendoPie said:
I don't even know why People dying and bombs going off in other countries gets people over here all riled up to vote for the person who made dropping those bombs an action/order...

It's called the "rally around the flag" effect. essentially, in a time of crisis, people will gravitate towards existing authority figures in a way that enhances their legitimacy. It only works if the leaders' response to the crisis is appropriate, however. If they bungle, then they're sunk more surely than if the effect weren't in play.


essentially the whole reason W. got reelected

Coupled with the fact John Kerry was an horrific candidate who didn't do very well in debates.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.