Libs complain of Bush's Simplicity....

[sagegirl]

I assume you're refering to the "nuisance" comment. In terms of the scope and magnitude of terrorism's affect on your everyday life before 9/11, many people would have likened the amount of care they gave to it as that of a 'nuisance'.

As for the domestic crime-- it was once percieved as a policable action because it was on par with other 'domestic' crimes (er, not household, which is what domestic crime denotes) in terms of its overall effect on the American people. By preaching the notion of a return to the times when you didn't NEED to worry about terrorism as anything too dissimilar from other crimes, was Kerry being too optimistic?

But yes, it is interesting that those most at risk didn't vote for Bush. Its like running on a "will fight for the poor" ticket and having 40% of the poor vote for you. I just don't understand why it happened.

This was a campaign based on several issues ne of them moral values and the other the fear of terror. (keep it simple, stupid) The message from the Bush camp was one of high moral values (against gay marriage, anti abortion, against embryonic stem cell research, patriotism, and a belief in God, and a strong portrayal of a dangerous world with lots of bad guys out to get us, so we had better get them first. Imagery was used to provoke strong emotional responses to these issues. Once an emotional response was stimulated, not much needed to be said (Karl Rove said he wanted to communicate to those who kept the volume turned down on their tvs).

I dont know what demographics has to do with your moral values or your fear of terrorism.

For those of us who wanted change, we will have to wait.

 

[phadras]

Well obviously the troops are most in harm's way, but I mean civilians and terrorism. Manhattanites remained overwhelmingly in support of Kerry, which really doesn't make much sense to me when so many other people were swayed by the issue of terrorism.

well as New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.. Traditional easy wins for the dems... And the dems don't seem to really believe that terrorism is a threat,..... 'Member Kerry's terrorism nuisance remark..... You are trying to denigrate the President's victory and it won't work... You're going to have to come up with something better..... Maybe you can just flat out state that those previously mentioned states just "did not believe Bush would better protect them", but that would be a real stretch...

Your guy lost...... It could have been much worse..... Accept it and as you libs like to say "move on".

 

[Zhukov]

Well obviously the troops are most in harm's way, but I mean civilians and terrorism. Manhattanites remained overwhelmingly in support of Kerry, which really doesn't make much sense to me when so many other people were swayed by the issue of terrorism.

I don't really understand it myself.

I would imagine that it is because the DNC does such an excellent job lying to people and pandering to minorities.

The only other explanation I can think of is they aren't that bright.

But it's Ok, New York is safe, you have bin Laden's word on that.....

 

[Merlin1047]

Bush mantra-like message was definitely what got him re-elected, but I've just been considering recently, and how big a threat is terrorism to the people who voted for Bush. Rural voters in middle America stand very close to 0% chance of ever being attacked by terrorists, so why is their biggest issue terrorism? Why do people forge their own personal economics (Bush was trusted less than Kerry, across the board, to handle the economy better) and vote for Bush on account of an issue which, for all intents and purposes, will not affect them?

You libs claim the moral high ground on compassion and concern for your fellow man. Why is it then, that you have no capacity to look beyond yourself and your own self interest?

Why does it never occur to you that true Americans have concern for issues which may not affect them directly? Liberals apparently only think of themselves and do not have the capacity to think of their country. Is it beyond your reckoning that the people in the midwest are true American patriots? Have you become so shrivelled and self-centered that you cannot grasp the concept that the folks in the heartland felt the attack on 9-11-01 just as much as those who lived in New York City or Washington DC?

Perhaps this is one of the reasons that the Democratic party has been in decline since the death of Pres. Kennedy. Perhaps you have become so engrossed in the celebration of the individual that you have forgotten than we are all simply a part of the tapestry of society. Perhaps you have forgotten that, while the individual is important, the individual is nothing without a nation to support him.

Maybe that's why you don't understand why people in the midwest care about terrorism. Maybe that's why the Democratic party and liberals need to do some serious self-examination and undergo a fundamental change in attitude. Failure to do so will make liberals and Democrats as irrelevant in America as the John Birch society.