October 19, 2004

The Inevitable Bush Blowout

[Republished from American Digest, July 29, 2004 as a Homage to Hugh "It's gonna be a blow-out" Hewitt]

kansas-4 2.jpg
Democratic Party Electorial Prospects Post-Convention: Pick One


  • It will cause my DITS (Democrat Induced Tourette's Syndrome)to kick in and I will have to be put in restraints.
  • It will induce coma and I shall become one with millions of other sufferers
  • It will be a waste of life because, no matter what is said or done by Kerry or his true believers, there's no way to delay that Bush blowout coming every day.

    Yup, it doesn't matter what he says or does from this point forward. Kerry and the Democrats are about to transform themselves from people into smouldering slabs of toast come November. The good part is that they're going to spend lots of money doing it.

    So before the formal canonization of Kerry, I'd like to go on record as saying, along with a few other brave souls, that it is no longer a question of Kerry and the Democrats losing in November, but only one of how great and lasting their humiliation and degredation is going to be.

    As far as I can see it is going to be massive: a Tsunami of rejection; a battering of the Bozos with no ref to stop the fight in the sixth round; a comet impacting dead center in the Democratic Fantasy World and smothering all but the deepest burrowing small rodents in a layer of ash half a mile thick; a landslide in which the entire north face of Mount Everest decides to take a vacation on the shores of the Indian ocean; a blowout equal to the hotspot under Yellowstone deciding to displace Krakatoa as the loudest implosion heard in recorded history; an "L" branded on the forehead of the Democratic party so large and so deep that travel agencies from Japan will divert a whole season of Grand Canyon tours to the nearest Kerry Compound just so they can marvel and photograph themselves standing at the brink.

    Did I say the Democrats were going to lose? Why, yes, I think I did.

    Why? Well, the long form is at American Digest: Jumping the Gun, but here's the laminate card version:

    1) 95% of everybody who voted for Bush in 2000 is going to vote for him again. The other 5% will proclaim they won't but will split 60/40 for once they're in the booth and confronted with the name "John Kerry."
    2) A significant number of Libertarians outside of the hard core is going to vote for Bush.
    3) Some of the people who voted for Ralph in 2000 are going to vote for Bush, out of sheer dementia.
    4) A jumbo chunk of those "swing' voters are going to vote for Bush. You can swing in your lifestyle but not in the voting booth. That's an either/or.
    5) The most significant block of new votes will be the "stealth" Democrats who are now, or shortly will be, lying about voting for John Kerry. There are going to be a lot of these and neither the polls, nor the party, nor the friends or family of these voters will be detect them. Remember that the essential nature of the ballot is that it is "secret." You think they'll tell the exit pollers? Think again.

    To explain "5:" There are millions and millions of citizens who are registered as Democrats and who talk the Democrat talk but do not always walk the Democrat walk when push comes to shove. You might be in a union-- Trade, Government, Teachers, etc. -- that could harm you if you announced for Bush. You might be in a family with deep Democratic roots. You might be a member of a minority in which you would be ostracised if you confessed you would vote for Bush. You might be of a sexual persuasion where you're chances of dates would be severely curtailed if you said you were voting for Bush. You might be working in an office or in a career where you chances for advancement might be crippled if you voted for Bush. You might be at a school where even your grades would be impacted if you said you were voting for Bush.

    In short there are hundreds of situations in which millions of people find themselves where a declared preference for Bush would not be a wise thing to announce. Much better to simply nod vaguely and stay out of the way of any negative consequences. The idea that everybody is going to vote the way they say they will is very oversold, particularly by the media or the pollsters who have a vested interest in declaring the race "tight." The "stealth vote" is especially relevant in an election where the single most pressing question that will come into a voter's mind after the curtains close behind him or her and they stand ready to vote is: "What's it going to be? Issue X, Y, Z, or my life?"

    Sensible people, no matter what they may or may not say, choose life. And sensible people know that that is what this election is about.

    Add the large X factor of "5" to "1,2,3,4" and it becomes clear that the only reason for the Democrats to continue in this Presidential Campaign is to provide lots of money to the bottom lines of those that accept their advertising. Go long on media companies, short the DNC.

    Other than that it is: "Say goodnight, Johnny."

    Posted by Vanderleun at October 19, 2004 9:24 PM
    Bookmark and Share

  • Comments:


    "It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.

    before the formal canonization of Kerry...

    Kerry - from Democratic canonization to Democratic cannon fodder. OK.

    Posted by: Tom Maguire at July 29, 2004 5:36 PM

    From Jim & Ann Sullivan, two 70+ seniors in San Antonio, Tex.:
    We agree with Vanderleun re impending BB(Bush Blowout)but are worried about the Hillary/Obama ticket in '08. With luck we'll still be here when it happens.
    Will someone please comment? Thanks.

    Posted by: Jim Sullivan at July 29, 2004 5:57 PM

    A sensible person would not vote for Bush. A vote for Bush means you think, like Bush, that he is God's instrument. Or that you agree with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Gingrich, Perle,etc., that this is the time to establish American hegemony. Or that increasing national debt is the path to national prosperity. Nonsense, complete, utter nonsense.

    Posted by: R. Parsons at July 29, 2004 6:18 PM

    Couple of points -

    1. I paid $1.89 for gas today. That price keeps going down. If it is about $1.75 around November - then the economy is off the table as an issue.

    2. We keep getting top level Al Quaeda operatives. The war is being won and their ranks are being decimated (the literal meaning BTW).

    3. Look for the Russians to send troops to Iraq - this takes away the "all the world is against us" argument Kerry makes at every speech. Putin has much to lose from a Kerry victory (just as France has much to gain). Putin and Bush are on excellent terms - come September - look for Russia to commit to 40,000 troops.

    4. The "stealth vote" is so true but so is the "stay at home vote". Democrats may just find something better to do on election day.

    Posted by: chris at July 29, 2004 6:19 PM

    Jim and Ann,

    Please don't waste a lot of time worrying about that. We're headed for four boom years with greater tax cuts. Even if the Dems do win in 2008, which they won't, they won't be able to undo much W's accomplishments.

    If that doesn't help, just remember that we survived eight years of Clinton, and came out of it doing just fine.

    Posted by: david at July 29, 2004 6:21 PM

    Dear Jim and Ann,
    "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof..."

    Posted by: Gerard Van der Leun at July 29, 2004 6:21 PM

    Hillary and Obama can go Cheney themselves for the next 3.5 terran orbits. One step at a time; we'll have somebody ready by then. We'll probably have our own Obama moment next month.

    Remember Reagan at the '76 convention? Yeah. Just like that.

    Posted by: ExGeeEye at July 29, 2004 6:24 PM

    Only because I am a Vietnam Vet, and therefore hate John Kerry worse than death, could I vote for George Bush.

    But it is Bush that I will hold my nose and vote for.
    If the Great Satan himself was the only choice against that phoney Kerry, Satan would get my vote.

    Posted by: Mike Strickland at July 29, 2004 6:26 PM

    Dearest R.,

    1. Yes.

    2. Yes.

    3. No. But once #2 is handled, we can fix it.

    BTW, join Leahy.

    Posted by: ExGeeEye at July 29, 2004 6:29 PM

    Thanks for saving me the keystrokes.

    Posted by: Gerard Van der Leun at July 29, 2004 6:35 PM

    The Lingering Spirit of John Kerry will trouble this earthly plane no more. :)


    Posted by: Xiaoding at July 29, 2004 7:35 PM

    I am a worried Bush supporter who nevertheless often announces into the thin blue air that W. is going to win in a 40+ state landslide. Having said that, I was looking for more substance/facts/stats/anything in your post to back up your prediction...

    Posted by: sol at July 29, 2004 8:29 PM

    hope you're right, especially that there exists such a thing as "a significant number of libertarians"

    Posted by: steve l. at July 29, 2004 8:35 PM

    I'm sorry but substance and facts aren't really what I do when I write this small essays. I'm sure I could go off and do sevreral days of research, phone calls, interviews -- I have done so in the past and I do know how these things are done. But I'm just one man with other interests and other matters on my plate and my New York writing and magazine and book editing on hold for now.

    I think you can find substance and support and facts to buttress any position, but that's really beside the point.

    Taking what I've learned from 58 years of being an American and observing how Americans react and think not just on the coasts but across the country, I think I've got instincts as good as any other persons about how the country works. Call it intuition, call it going with your gut, it is still, at the end of the day, what I've got to go on. What any of us have to go on.

    As is wisely said, "Tomorrow is not promised." The future will tell whether I'm right or a fool. Either way, I'm satisfied. But I don't feel I'm wrong about the "stealth vote." That's just extrapolating from human nature.

    Posted by: Gerard Van der Leun at July 29, 2004 9:17 PM


    1. Obama is an interesting character, but don't get ahead of yourselves. He still hasn't yet been elected to the Senate. This guy still hasn't held national office. He's got quite a ways to go before that. Additionally he's on record as being a socialist, which is a pretty significant amount of baggage. The center part of America is pretty tolerant of most things but socialism, and socialist, aren't really one of them.

    2. The one thing that neither Kerry nor Edwards explained in anything but the most vague and uncertain terms is how they plan to WIN the WoT! Excuse me?! Kerry droned endlessly on how he'll restore faith, hope, allies and heal the sick. He droned on how he'll secure our airports and sea ports and respond to terror attacks.

    WTF? Respond? You can't win by responding!

    I live 45 miles from WTC. I watched the plumes of smoke rising into the air. I spent hours calling friends that worked in that area trying to see if they were all right (luckily they were). A local town not more than 8 miles from where I'm sitting lost over 200 residents in the WTC.

    Respond? F-That!

    3. Frankly I think I finally understand Kerry and Edwards. They're all sugar and no substance. In relative terms they're Count Chocula and Frankenberry. The fact that they're trying desperately to out-Republican the Republicans is laughable.

    Does anyone think that this "unity" in the DNC won't last 5 seconds beyond the victory speech? The DNC has serious faults and flaws. There are an extraordinary number of divergent opinions, agendas and desires. And many of them are mutually exclusive.

    Looking a Count Chocula Presidency all I see is chaos and irresponsiblity. And I can see a really long distance.

    Posted by: ed at July 29, 2004 9:18 PM

    37 to 40 states!

    Posted by: Keith at July 29, 2004 9:29 PM

    If you are looking for more substance, check out this story about the "stealth democrats" of Canada.


    Posted by: Gerard Van der Leun at July 29, 2004 9:42 PM

    Yeah. From your keyboard to God's eyes. (or would that violate the Constitution) (Or maybe God outranks the Constitution)

    Posted by: San Diego Ed at July 29, 2004 9:52 PM

    I didn't mean to sound critical. I mean I get the spirit of your post, but I really would like to see some wonk just show with some numbers or anything how it's built in to the foundation of the electorate that Bush will win in a walk (then again I really might not want to see that because, you know, why believe it couldn't change?...I'll go with intuition).

    I was nervous about Arnold S.'s chances on election day in California (still can't bring myself to try to spell his name) while at the same time I 'knew' he'd win the moment he announced. Perhaps Nov. will be a similar result. Sort of intuitively knowing W. will win, yet nervous just the same, and then - landslide win.

    The left really is off the deep end in this one...(in case anybody needs that pointed out to them)...

    Posted by: sol at July 29, 2004 10:01 PM

    So that's what it is called, DITS. My wife will be happy to know it has a name.

    Posted by: Cryptomaniac at July 29, 2004 10:12 PM

    And I thought I was the only person predicting a Bush landslide...58/42, thats my estimate.

    For those looking for some reasons...

    1. Consult not what people say, but what they do; home sales are skyrocketing and military recruitment in in great shape...ie, people are confident about the future and are willing to fight for the cause in the War on Terrorism.

    2. Kerry is a liberal Massachusettes Senator.

    Posted by: Mark Noonan at July 29, 2004 10:40 PM

    I hope it's a Bush blowout. After hearing his no pre-emptive strikes line I can't see how how anyong in NY can vote for him. Lemme get this straight -- if he knew that some Taliban-like foreign gov't was in the advanced stages plotting to destroy an American landmark on the Eastern seaboard & kill thousands of people he'd wait for the first strike before taking them out?

    Posted by: velocette at July 29, 2004 11:37 PM

    I pretty much predicted this over at Winds of Change on 16 May.


    That is the good news.

    The bad news is a post election Republican crackup.

    Bush is not going to get enough Senators so that his Judicial problem will remain. This is good. Judges ought to be extending rights and limiting government power to the maximum extent possible. This is not a nation of laws. It is a nation of rights. When laws conflict with rights the laws must go.

    The cultural conservatives are just going to have to get over it. RINOs will be running the nation. Because it is what America wants. Government from the center.

    The big winners in the coming election? The small "L" libertarians. The RINOs, the Lieberman Democrats.

    The biggest losers - the Democrats. Second biggest - Republicans.

    Posted by: M. Simon at July 30, 2004 12:25 AM

    The Democrats are getting no bounce from the convention. Zip. Bupkis. Nada.

    BTW 9/11 saw about 40% of the Libertarians leave the party over its(pacifist) stance on the war. The same strains exist in the Democrat Party in about the same proportions for the same reasons.

    Bush in a landslide.

    Governing will be much harder his 2nd term. Fewer carrots and sticks every day.

    Posted by: M. Simon at July 30, 2004 12:41 AM


    I'm from Illinois. We elect stealth communists from time to time and then don't re-elect them. Carol M. Braun fit that mold. We are liberal but sensible. Mostly.

    Obama is a flash in the pan caused by a Republican administration that was, for a change, actually more corrupt than the Democrats. This might take another two or three election cycles to correct.

    Socialism is dead. The people who believe in it are dying and there are not enough replacements. The colapse of the USSR has barely begun to affect American politics; it will accelerate.

    In '08 Hil is going to wish she had remained a Goldwater Republican.

    Sleep well. I have a libertarian son going to the University of Chicago. I'm told that the kids these days could be said to be South Park Republicans. Perhaps not culturally conservative enough for you but it ought to be heartening that the communists are losing ground.

    Posted by: M. Simon at July 30, 2004 12:54 AM

    Mike Strickland,

    Why couldn't the Ds have gone Lieberman? I feel about the Bush/Kerry match up about the same as you do for the same reasons (Tonkin Bay Yacht Club '66). It is worse for me. In '71 I believed his Winter Soldier testimony. Then came Cambodia, the re-ed camps, the boat people. I got to tell you I was one sorry fool back then. I have wized up. Kerry has not. And that is exactly what I hold against him. Not the folly of youth, but the inability to acquire wisdom with age.

    Reminds me of what Churchill said about Stalin when he heard the USSR had been attacked. "If the devil himself came out against Hitler I'd give him at least an honorable mention in Parliament".

    Well Bush can't even get an honorable mention from me. But he will get something better. My vote. Followed by my post election opposition to his domestic policies. BTW the man understand war like no President we have had for a very long time. So I will give him that.

    I expect that the Ds that support him in this election will pretty much take the same post election position as I have announced. Qualified support. Bush will have an easy time winning re-election. He will have a hard time governing.

    Posted by: M. Simon at July 30, 2004 1:24 AM

    I'm with Mike Strickland. I'm a lifelong CA Democrat and Vietnam vet. I will vote Bush because my hatred of Kerry for what he said in the "Winter Soldier" book and before Congress overrides any other option. End of story, and I hope, of Kerry.

    Posted by: George Atkisson at July 30, 2004 4:52 AM

    M. Simon wrote:

    "Bush is not going to get enough Senators so that his Judicial problem will remain. This is good. Judges ought to be extending rights and limiting government power to the maximum extent possible. This is not a nation of laws. It is a nation of rights. When laws conflict with rights the laws must go."

    Dude, this is a nation of laws. Judges ought to be interpreting law. Judges do not extend rights, as rights are inherent in men and women. This nation has never been a nation of right; it is a nation of liberty and freedom, under the law. Without the rule of law, we have nothing. Without law, judges are free to impose their personal beliefs upon all of us. Legislatures enact laws, not judges. And the people elect legislatures.

    Again, we have never been a nation of rights, we have been a nation of law and liberty.

    Posted by: Nathan Hale at The Commons at July 30, 2004 5:56 AM

    Dear Americans

    Even though I am not a US Citizen, I really feel sorry for Bush with all those Democrats bashing for personal political gains. The hatred of the Democrats towards Republican is really disturbing. John Kerry not indeed not fit to be the Commander in Chief. George Bush on the other hand is a real gentleman. This is what the traits of a President should the Americans look for.

    As for John Kerry, his economic policy of protectionism will only be a short term relief. Japan failed miserably during its years of closed protectionsim ideology and subsequently realised that they need to outsource. Some jobs have to go in the process of outsourcing to ensure competitiveness and continued economic growth. No country in the world can guarantee 0% unemployment rate. Even in the most developed economies, we do see unemployment. So Kerry's promises to create more jobs for every American is an outright blatant lie!

    Posted by: Billy at July 30, 2004 7:09 AM

    Dear Americans

    Even though I am not a US Citizen, I really feel sorry for Bush with all those Democrats bashing for personal political gains. The hatred of the Democrats towards Republican is really disturbing. John Kerry is indeed not fit to be the Commander in Chief. George Bush on the other hand is a real gentleman. This is what the traits of a President should the Americans look for.

    As for John Kerry, his economic policy of protectionism will only be a short term relief. Japan failed miserably during its years of closed protectionsim ideology and subsequently realised that they need to outsource. Some jobs have to go in the process of outsourcing to ensure competitiveness and continued economic growth. No country in the world can guarantee 0% unemployment rate. Even in the most developed economies, we do see unemployment. So Kerry's promises to create more jobs for every American is an outright blatant lie!

    Posted by: Billy at July 30, 2004 7:14 AM

    Sign me up as #5.
    Life Long Democrat.
    Voted Gore.
    Have Kerry Bumper Stick on Office Door.
    Will vote Bush in 2004.

    Posted by: icantsay at July 30, 2004 7:44 AM


    I would like someone to explain why Hillary Clinton would be such a good candidate in an election. Half the country hates her even more than her husband. I'm amazed that some people think that women will vote for her because she's a woman. Any woman who would do such a th9ng for that reason is, beleive me, already voting Democrat.

    There are still plenty of union democrats who can't stand liberals, and will find it very difficult to vote for Mrs. Clinton. Add this to the fact that she has won only one election in her life, and has yet to be re-elected, and that win was in New York. If this woman ever gets her nomination, she would lose very badly, worse than Kerry will lose in November.

    The same is true with Osama. What, because the TV media says he's a star, makes him a star? This isn't the America of H.L. Mencken. People are a lot better informed that they used to be, and they won't vote for someone without substance. Right now he's simply negligible.

    David Farkas
    Flyover country, America
    ( Cleveland, Ohio)

    Posted by: David at July 30, 2004 7:56 AM

    This may sound strange, but perhaps the decisive factor in Kerry's defeat will be the loathing the rest of the country seems to have for Massachusetts. As you may infer, I am from Massachusetts and in the past have been somewhat put out by this, but now with the fate of the nation resting on this election, I'm counting on it. So, to my fellow Americans, hate away, but make it count this time!

    Posted by: nobody important at July 30, 2004 9:57 AM
    Or that increasing national debt is the path to national prosperity.
    It worked nicely for Clinton Posted by: h0mi at July 30, 2004 10:30 AM

    Jim and Ann:

    Until recently I couldn't even think of '08; I was too worried about '04. Not so much anymore. Watching the convention last night cured what ailed me. They dragged out Albright and Cleland and hamster CPR. Then Kerry said nothing. I counted maybe two concrete things he said he'd do. One of them was increase troop strength by 40,000. The other? I forget.

    Anyways, as I wrote on another blog, there's a Bible verse that says "Where there is no vision, the people perish." John Kerry has no vision. as for the Democratic party, it has hallucinations.

    I don't expect any dramatic changes in the polls in the runup to election day. I do expect W. to win handily. Agree with him or not, he has a vision for this country. A strong one. Even though he screws up a lot.

    Posted by: growler at July 30, 2004 10:52 AM

    In NYC, the left-wing, liberal capital of America, no one on the Upper West Side would admit to voting for Guiliani, but he carried it twice.

    Same with President Bush. Senator Kerry does not give Americans a sense of security.

    I predict President Bush getting 53-58% of the vote.

    Posted by: patch at July 30, 2004 11:49 AM

    I am a Zell Miller Democrat here in West Virginia and I can tell you that this whole state will go Bush again because we have had it with liberal Democrats who want to take away our guns and want to raise our taxes. Remember that Kerry was Dukakis' Lieutenant Governor, so whatever Williehortonitis that Dukakis suffered from Kerry has the same strain. He is against the death penalty, and thinks that unless France agrees to defending this country we should just accede to them and let bygones be bygones with Jacques Chirac.

    Chirac will be out of office soon, but let us pray the rest of this country gets some smarts and votes Bush in 2004. Otherwise we will be a colony of France and have to smell like their women.

    Josh O'Banion

    Posted by: John O'Banion at July 30, 2004 9:08 PM

    Man, I hope Mark Noonan's right with his 58-42 prediction (mainly because the Democrats need to be utterly humiliated before they can start rebuilding themselves from the ground up as a decent party), but I just don't think it's possible anymore.

    I'll be happy if Bush gets 53% nationally. That I think is doable because, for probably the first time, we're going to outdo Dems at the grassroots. Come November, Republican precinct leaders are going to squeeze every Republican vote out of every precinct in every battleground state (and I figure there will be at least one surprise state in the Bush column).

    The Dems have no idea what's coming.

    Posted by: ScottM at July 30, 2004 9:21 PM

    Here is how I see it play out.

    With two weeks before the election polls will show Bush winning by about 6 to 8 points.

    This will still make many republicans nervous so they will come out in droves. Remember what Carl Rove said about 2000. 3 million conservative christians stayed home.

    Democrats will make to fateful decisions. A big number of them seeing defeat will just stay home out of sheer disgust know Bush will win. There will be a significant number that will suddenly decide to vote for Bush simply to feel like winners. If hate is all they have, principles is what is needed to overcome that hate.

    So in the end we will see 60% for Bush and 40% for Kerry.

    Posted by: op at July 30, 2004 11:27 PM

    someone please help me sleep! just saw some poll data showing kerry ahead by 5 points during the convention. while i know that it is "normal" to get a bounce, i am still worried about this. some other data suggesting kerry leading in swing states. will someone comment on this and alleviate my concerns? how is it possible that these scheming losers are even leading?? do most of america not see through their shallowness?

    Posted by: i-h8-trial-lawyers at July 31, 2004 1:23 AM

    We (my mother and I, two Bushies living in Heart of Darkness Hollywood) have the same poll-induced icks as does iH8triallawyers . . we would also welcome some explanation and encouragement on the poll data. Love to all Bushies around the nation. Thanks.


    Posted by: wendy forward at July 31, 2004 10:36 AM


    I've followed a link on a UK news discussion board to get here.

    I think Bush will win in November but I really hope he doesn't. I think he is taking you lot down a very dangerous path and much as I am totally underwhelmed by Kerry I think he is the lesser evil.

    you probably know this but most people in the UK (from Right or Left) have an extremely low opinion of Bush. one of the reasons Tony Blair has lost public support is that he is seen as too close to and supportive of a president that most Brits distrust and/or dislike.

    Posted by: Tom at July 31, 2004 12:43 PM

    Thank you for your sincere comments. I saddened but not surprised by your report of the current British attitude.

    Saddened because it will, I assure you, reverse itself the day after one of your many Islamic citizens or aliens detonates himself and about 5 pounds of C4 and six pounds of ten-penny nails at noon in Picadilly Circus.

    I shall wait here for your return.

    All the best.

    Posted by: Gerard Van der Leun at July 31, 2004 1:03 PM

    Never fear you worrywarts; for those of you needing proof ( I reccomend it to everyone. );go to www.pollingstation.com/ they are an independant, non media-centric, orginization with an entirely different & unique methodology.
    There take on '04 is heartwarming. Tell all of your friends!

    Posted by: DickieO at July 31, 2004 1:14 PM

    Hi Gerard

    don't forget we've had some 30 years' experience of terrorists trying to blow us up in London, only they've generally been catholics as opposed to muslims. the IRA fired mortars into Downing Street and onto the roof of Heathrow airport, and blew up two huge bombs in the City all in the last 10 years.

    I understand why you rally round your president in the circumstances, I just think he's done damage to the US internationally. anyway like I said I think Bush will win it. Kerry seems like a charisma vacuum.

    PS despite not beimg pro-Bush I think Michael Moore is awful!

    Posted by: Tom at July 31, 2004 3:52 PM

    Re: Obama - Check out http://www.roadsassy.com/spicedsass/
    she has a post up on how Soros is funding Obama along with Kerry, Dean, Daschle, Hillary and others.
    That alone should discredit him for all the Bush voters.
    I've been sticking my neck out all year saying Bush will bury Kerry, the trick to predicting elections is to figure out which of the two is a loser. That simple really.

    Posted by: tony at July 31, 2004 6:47 PM

    I am dismayed at what I just read, being of such utterly biased and hate filled venom toward the Democratic party it can not be taken seriously. I don't agree with most of the Democrats policies but this piece is an insult to anyone intellectually minded person. Learn how to write and commuinicate without having to slander. With such slander comes emotion and so I leave everyone with this thought:

    The fewer facts you have in support of an opinion, the stronger your emotional attachment to that opinion.

    Posted by: Publius at July 31, 2004 11:29 PM

    "she has a post up on how Soros is funding Obama along with Kerry, Dean, Daschle, Hillary and others.
    That alone should discredit him for all the Bush voters."

    what is so bad about George Soros? he's a successful capitalist and active in the defence and promotion of democracy. if you read what Soros has written it is clear that he believes that the choice of party in US elections has not been of that much significance in the past (since the US is an "open society"). it's only in this election that he has chosen to be so forcefully on one side as he belives the re-elction of Bush will harm America.

    personally I find him a very honest and pragmatic thinker. his outlook is formed by hostility to totalitarianism (which he personally experienced) and is based on the view that in the field of ideas humans repeatedly get it wrong.

    his book is worth a read. you won't like the anti-Bush stuff but the appendix where he sets out his general views is well worth reading for those who find it haard or do not try to be objective.


    Posted by: Tom at August 1, 2004 1:37 AM

    "you probably know this but most people in the UK (from Right or Left) have an extremely low opinion of Bush."

    You may not know this, but Bush's role model is a man named Winston Churchill.

    I love Great Britain, but they and the rest of the Euro-whiner really need to get over it. The last time I checked he was our United States President.

    I frankly think Chirac is an a-hole and France is selfish and arrogant towards us. Schroeder and all the Socialist clowns (now in Spain and Greece) are jerks who are taking Europe on the path to ecomonic oblivion. Europe is making itself irrelevent by sticking with socialist welfare-state low-birth-rate and cave-to-terrorists-and-dictator policies. But we dont get our knickers in a twist over Europeans voting in their foolish leaders (although spain's voting in socialists was clearly a disheartening victory for al qaeda).

    Our President turned a recession into growth, two tyrannies and 50 million people into countries on the path to freedom and democracy, has stood up to the clown show internationalist power-grabs like Kyoto and ICC - as ANY DECENT PRESIDENT WOULD - and has destroyed 2/3rds of Al Qaeda. And besides this has done wonderful things on domestic policy too.

    To oppose bush's successes as menacing is to expose the hypocrisy of your own inadequacies.
    You dislike Bush for doing things he should be doing for USA. You fear our power, when in fact you should be *grateful* for it. Bush was right on Iraq and right on Afghanistan, he's right to criticize palie terrorists and Europe is wrong to cater to Hamas terrorists.

    Europeans hate Bush for doing what they are unwilling to do out of moral cowardice: Stand up for your national sovereignty, come hell or high water. This defense of the nation's interests scared the bejeesus out of the one-world-socialist weenies in Europe. So in their hate they have used the media to trumpet utter lies and myths.

    They did the same to Reagan 20 years ago. Then Reagan called for the wall to come down. And it did.

    What Europe needs is not to whine about our George W Bush. What Europe needs is their own George W Bush. Help us defeat Jihadist terrorism, and quit whining from the sidelines, mate!

    Posted by: Patrick at August 1, 2004 10:15 AM


    your post is well wide of the mark.

    I don't hate or fear America, and I genuinely value the world leadership role the US plays. the US has been a tremendous force for good in the world for many decades. I also agree that Reagan had a major role in the collapse of communism - an unquestionabley good thing. and I think Chirac is a posturing crook.

    but does that mean I should just shut up when I think you are doing something wrong? how is it that the huge sympathy for the US that existed post 9/11 has bveen squandered? how has it gone so wrong?

    it is a major tactical mistake (not to say rather arrogant) to misread European views about Bush as cowardice, envy or fear. anyone with a brain can see that a) the US is and will be for the forseeable future the most powerful country in the world but also b) that in day-to-day life this has very little meaningful impact on Europeans. what many of us fear is that ideological radicals in both Europe and the US will drive a wedge between us. I believe those radicals come from the Left in Europe and the Right in the US.

    as I posted above we have some experience in fighting terrorism ourselves, and we have some ideas about how to combat it. it is easy to repeat Churchil quotes, or stress "might is right" as a solution. it is a bit more difficult to deal with real scenarios. I for one struggle to see the parallel between WWII and the war on terror. in one case a group of industrial states fought each other is specific geographical arenas, in the other a loose network hits all kinds of targets in all kinds of places. just repeating Churchill quotes isn't a strategy.

    for the record I supported the war in Afghanistan 100%. I opposed the invasion or Iraq because a) I didn't believe the WMD line b) the UN would not back it and c) there seemed little explanation of why it needed doing immediately, or what would come after. I don't think anyone can really claim to have called Iraq right, but I would question your bald assertion that "Bush was right on Iraq" given the ongiong problems there. it is simply too early to say anything and I suspect we will be there a long time.

    all the best.


    Posted by: Tom at August 1, 2004 12:53 PM

    "Bush Blowout"? I don't think so.


    Posted by: Winston Smith at August 2, 2004 4:53 PM

    Kerry is going to blow Bush out in the Electoral College. The best thing that is happening now is that the media still shoves national polls down voters throats, so people think the race is too close to call, therefore nervous liberals, disaffected Republicans, etc. stay jacked to vote.

    Posted by: martyn at August 5, 2004 9:46 PM

    There are a variety of people who voted for Bush last time who probably won't this time. 5% is an underestimate. Consider 1) anti-war evangelicals, 2) Democrats voting against Clinton's moral issues, 3) people who were upset with Clinton's violent extremes in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Sudan, 4) Democrats who just didn't like Al Gore, 5) people upset with Tipper Gore's anti-Hollywood crusade, 6) evangelicals and conservative Christians upset with Abu Ghraib, 7) home-team Catholics, 8) pro-lifers upset with Bush's lack of progress, 9) admirers of John & Teresa Heinz, 10) National Guard spouses, et al.

    The blowout fantasy is just too simplistic. There are probably more folks who will switch to Bush than Kerry for a host of other reasons, but I don't expect a blowout.

    Posted by: jj at September 5, 2004 7:19 PM

    Great comment on stealth voters. I'm pretty sure there's a LOT more pressure to talk pro-Kerry than pro-Bush -- and the fear of honestly supporting Bush is the sickness of PC.

    Posted by: Tom Grey - Liberty Dad at September 7, 2004 1:39 AM

    I just finished reading John Lewis Gaddis' "Surprise, Security and the American Experience," which is destined to be a classic historical work. The book makes clear that Bush and his team have a thoughtful, consistent and well-publicized national security strategy. The strategy is bold and is solidly grounded in historical experience. Kerry, in contrast, has nothing to offer but worthless soundbites and a craven desire for French and German approval. That makes this election a no-brainer.


    Posted by: Jonathan at October 20, 2004 7:58 AM

    Hillary and Obama in 2008?

    Two more Democratic Senators (if he is elected)? Yes, thank you, more of the same, please.

    Posted by: Philip at October 20, 2004 10:19 AM

    Nice analysis. I have experienced what you describe. The LLL's get so exercised that it is unpleasant to even try to discuss the issues. You certainly have drawn out the barking MB's in the comments.

    Posted by: Geoffrey de Boullion at October 20, 2004 11:29 AM

    Nice little vanity press ya got going here. So polite to people who stop in to listen to the blather.

    Posted by: princehal at October 25, 2004 4:22 PM