The results of the Pew Center's survey raised my eyebrows. Although President Bush's approval rating has plummeted, he has maintained healthy support among religious Rep's. This is not terribly surprising, I guess, but the strength of the support is eye-popping when compared to the national numbers. I wonder what the numbers look like if the RR's are pulled from those statistics. The gap is likely even greater.
The real message here is what RR's are saying to their '08 candidates...and it's not "don't be like Bush." In fact, the message may be "four more years," at least in policy matters.
So, which is more important for Republican presidential hopefuls? To be like Bush, or to NOT be like Bush? Within their party, it may be the former if they want to win the nomination. Nationally, it may be the latter if they want to be President. At the very least, trying to be both should prove to be entertaining.
5 comments:
Wow, that really surprises me. I just can't imagine objective people reaching that conclusion. That Bush is good and Iraq was right.
Until I'm proven wrong, I think the paranoia that we all felt after 9/11 made the Iraq war happen. Not a lust for oil or anger toward Saddam. But I'm very open to the thought that I could be wrong.
That being said, no one should look at the bloody aftermath and reason that it was the right thing to do. Especially not that large a number of people.
I think what the poll might reflect is that 80% of RRs who are Christians dislike liberals enough that they are still willing to side with Bush. Maybe that's just my conspiracy theory because I can't believe that's their honest thought.
I don't see any viable candidate for the Republican nod who is "like Bush." And frankly, I'm very glad. As a Christian, as a conservative, and as a registered Republican.
I may have to agree (for my sanity) that many are conservatives who just will not vote or approve a Democrat to save their lives.
Come on, brother and sister RRs. I really need one of you who thinks this to show me why you think this in stats & numbers. Because Nothing I've seen or read (and I've been seeing and reading a lot) makes me think deep down that really GW has been doing a good job as our president. Granted, you can't trust popularity polls, so I'd like to hear it from the horse's mouth.
I think the truth can set us free here. If our vote didn't turn out the way it should've, that's ok. That's the way democracy works - or doesn't work, sometimes. Not just with Bush, but his whole administration. But not to acknowledge that the Prez hasn't done a good job makes me feel there is a lack of accountability here, an gaping absence of truthfulness. And vying for another term of the status quo is at this point for me morally questionable.
derek,
I think these people are made up. Or they don't have computers. Or they are all brain dead. Or something.
A new mythological being. Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and Bush supporters.
I can honestly appreciate a different point of view and I love a good debate. But if you actually knew someone who still thinks Bush has done a good job and still thinks invading Iraq was a good move, chances are that debate wouldn't be very fun.
It might be akin to continually hitting yourself in the head with a tack hammer or massaging a cactus.
I meet plenty of people who think that... unfortunately, it seems these people are the "know-nothings" of the 21st century.
I just finished reading "State of Denial: Bush at War Part III" by Bob Woodward. And you can't read that book and say "Well done, Mr. President!" It's a total cluster---- in that White House... the parallels between the way thing work there and the way things work at my own job (an indecisive, helpless leader; apathetic middle managers; do-as-little-as-possible employees) are astounding.
It's a bigger problem with Christianity in general, that we accept some party line and never question it. Especially in politics. Take the embryonic stem-cell research huff, for instance... how many Christians actually understand what the process even is? I'm not endorsing it, necessarily, but neither have I decided it would destroy civilization... because I simply don't know enough about it. And I read A LOT!
Post a Comment