• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is George Bush a meglomaniac?

milkrun

New member
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Location
Brandon, Florida
Seriously, is George Bush going to plunge the American economy into an abiss, and therefore the World economy as well, by his insane foriegn policy?

Sure, things look good now because of only one factor, the greatest run-up in home equity in history> Once the cash is spent on SUV's and HDTV's, what is going to sustain any economic growth in America?

The "war" in Iraq is a disaster for both America and the Middle East due to the insurgents who will never quit.

He has no domestic agenda other than huge deficits.

I have five children in their 20's. What's their future? Huge debt and low wages, even for college grads. And no real job security with so many jobs being eliminated to boost stock prices for the rich.

What's the good news about Bush? He'll be gone in a few years?
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
149
Reaction score
0
Location
BEAUTIFUL Ohio, BEAUTIFUL USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
milkrun said:
Seriously, is George Bush going to plunge the American economy into an abiss, and therefore the World economy as well, by his insane foriegn policy?
There was a "problem" with the economy before Bush went into office. His foreign policy is not helping but it isn't the cause of the recession.

milkrun said:
Sure, things look good now because of only one factor, the greatest run-up in home equity in history> Once the cash is spent on SUV's and HDTV's, what is going to sustain any economic growth in America?
The workinhg class like always. That's one thing that will not change, the working class will continue to work. There will always be a working class. It will be impossible to get along without it.

milkrun said:
The "war" in Iraq is a disaster for both America and the Middle East due to the insurgents who will never quit.
Neither will we!

milkrun said:
And no real job security with so many jobs being eliminated to boost stock prices for the rich.
What? There is no way this would happen. The system set up between the Unions and the managment wouldn't allow this to happen. The unions keep the management in check and visa versa.

milkrun said:
What's the good news about Bush? He'll be gone in a few years?
I know darn. Don't worry we have over three years left so get used to him!

And Bush can't be a megalomaniac. Iraq now has it's own goverment and while Iraq will depend on us for a while it is a independent nation. You can't be a megalomaniac if you don't take anything over. We didn't take Iraq over, Saddam did. We set it free.
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
milkrun,

Sure, things look good now because of only one factor, the greatest run-up in home equity in history> Once the cash is spent on SUV's and HDTV's, what is going to sustain any economic growth in America?
So your saying the market of "Sport Utility Vehicles (SUV)" and "High Definition Televisions (HDTV)" are saving economic growth? What planet are you from? First of all SUV's are loosing value (IM SUPRISED YOU AREN'T CELEBRATING!), it is so hard to sell an SUV, that locally here in North Carolina they are offering $11,000 rebates on SUV's, so I don't understand how your saying they are saving us? Second of all HDTV will not turn up much profit because of high prices and regular Business Economics. If Price is low = more will sell, If Price is high = less will sell. Simple Business "Supply and Demand", I suggest you take a "Entreprener Class" to see how to run a business and only making about %5 profit a sell. Trust me, you want to sell low! I sell Computers to College students, and you have to cut corners just to make a slight profit.

So SUV's and HDTV's are not saving our economy, but I am open to some more suggestions of what will save our economy!

The "war" in Iraq is a disaster for both America and the Middle East due to the insurgents who will never quit.
So you believe Kennedy? You think we should set a time table? Um, WWII wasn't won over night, nor did we want to engage in it. But we did, because we wanted to get Hitler before he got us. So set your time tables to that!

He has no domestic agenda other than huge deficits.
What you think war is cheap? Try equiping, feeding, training soldiers on a shoe-string budget, wanna know what you get? A small Military force, which will not provide much protection, Congratulations! ;)

I have five children in their 20's. What's their future? Huge debt and low wages, even for college grads. And no real job security with so many jobs being eliminated to boost stock prices for the rich.
Only if your childern get access to "Credit Cards" and spending more than they are making. I am a College student and I go to school on a Pell Grant (Barelly pays for classes, books, and gas), and your blaming "Bush" for a College students overspending? Thats wrong to attack "Bush" for a College student who spend lots of $$$$$ on a Prada Handbag, and a new Car! Serously, you are welcome to my campus, and I will be happy to show you, that even the rich kids are broke, even for reasons that are their own fault, not Bush's! Spend more time on College Campuses!

What's the good news about Bush? He'll be gone in a few years?
I'm glad your already celebrating Bush is leaving the White House in 2008! But I do have to say this. He is not going to be like Clinton and slack off. Personally, Clinton not that bad, but he was mostly a "Lame" President, Lame = saying that he didn't do much, but I still praise him that Clinton and Bush Sr. are good friends :mrgreen:

Back to the point, Bush is not going to slack. Their is too much "Media" waiting for him to even look the wrong direction, and accuse him of something. Bush will always be on his toes, and will work with it when even he is in a high stress situtation. By the way did you watch his last speach, where he invited any senator/congessman to visit Gitmo, and see it for themselves! I'm just checking. :mrgreen:
 

GarzaUK

That European Guy
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
3,682
Reaction score
625
Location
Belfast, Northern Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
guns_God_glory said:
Iraq now has it's own goverment and while Iraq will depend on us for a while it is a independent nation. You can't be a megalomaniac if you don't take anything over. We didn't take Iraq over, Saddam did. We set it free.
You see I keep hearing the same thing over and over again - Iraq is free, but I don't see an improvement in the war or Iraqi lives at all. I mean how long can you keep on repeating the same line over and over again without thinking "hmm, maybe everything isn't as rosy as Bush said it was."

Just because Iraq has its own elected government, doesn't mean it is free, uncorrupt and stable. You seem to forget this government hasn't made a constitution yet.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
149
Reaction score
0
Location
BEAUTIFUL Ohio, BEAUTIFUL USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
GarzaUK said:
You see I keep hearing the same thing over and over again - Iraq is free, but I don't see an improvement in the war or Iraqi lives at all. QUOTE]

Yeah freedom of speech, a democratic goverment, voting, most importantly rights for women. Looks like their life has gotten better. Go ask a woman living in Iraq right now if her life has gotten better since we came in.
 

GarzaUK

That European Guy
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
3,682
Reaction score
625
Location
Belfast, Northern Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
guns_God_glory said:
GarzaUK said:
You see I keep hearing the same thing over and over again - Iraq is free, but I don't see an improvement in the war or Iraqi lives at all. QUOTE]

Yeah freedom of speech, a democratic goverment, voting, most importantly rights for women. Looks like their life has gotten better. Go ask a woman living in Iraq right now if her life has gotten better since we came in.
Bombs going off everyday killing civilians, soldiers. Oh yeah I'm living there, sounds like paradise. Everything is like you said "hunky dory".
 

Comrade Brian

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
0
Location
NE, Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
guns_God_glory said:
GarzaUK said:
You see I keep hearing the same thing over and over again - Iraq is free, but I don't see an improvement in the war or Iraqi lives at all. QUOTE]

Yeah freedom of speech, a democratic goverment, voting, most importantly rights for women. Looks like their life has gotten better. Go ask a woman living in Iraq right now if her life has gotten better since we came in.
Yep, so much better, they went from a soveregn country to an occupied country, and the US has killed thousands upon thousands of Iraqi's
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
"If Bush is a Megomaniac, then Ted Kennedy is a wanna be!"
 

PopeyeAtheist

New member
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Location
Illinois
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Is George Bush a ?

I my opinion, he is one of our most arrogant presidents. I am tired of seeing his smirk.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Guess who put the Baath party in power. Come on, take a wild guess.
The Baath party put themselves in charge. They led a coup, and Sadaam Hussein became Number Two for a few years.

Bombs going off everyday killing civilians, soldiers. Oh yeah I'm living there, sounds like paradise. Everything is like you said "hunky dory".
Yep, so much better, they went from a soveregn country to an occupied country, and the US has killed thousands upon thousands of Iraqi's
And we Liberals wonder why we get a bad rep.

I've talked to people who are in Iraq. The most common attitude among the people is, "my heart wants you to go, but my brain knows you should stay." The most common complaint has to do with the lack of security because militants are killing Iraqi civilians. There is a general agreement that the country is better off now than it was with Hussein in power. The only exception is the security crisis. The Iraqi people don't call us "occupiers", the militants do. And most of them aren't even Iraqi!
 

josh

New member
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Total amount of international aid given to Africa 1960 - 2005 = $1 trillion.
Economic cost of the Iraq war 2003-5 = $1 trillion.
Amount of money needed to stop 50,000 people dying of poverty every day for 1 year = $80 billion.
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
galenrox, I understand that. I'm also not a liberal.

But also know that 51.2% of Iraqis oppose the US occupation (31.3% strongly), while only 39.5% support it.
But there is merit in what you say about them not wanting us out immidiately. Only 15.1% of Iraqis want us gone now, and 29.5% believe we should be out of there within the next year.

Link Headline:
HOW IRAQ FEELS ABOUT THE OCCUPATION
The Second National Opinion Poll in Iraq
JNV Anti-War Briefing 56 (19 March 2004)
Add the percentages it equals 105.8%, the poll is fake!

52.2%
39.5%
+15.1%
-------
105.8%
 
Last edited:

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
stsburns said:
Add the percentages it equals 105.8%, the poll is fake!

52.2%
39.5%
+15.1%
-------
105.8%
I hate to burst your analysis bubble, but polls test multiple opinions sometimes. And since the responses were not mutually exclusive (ie. the 15.1% who want us gone now are probably some of the same 31.3% who stongly opppose the occupation) that is probably what happend here. Now if 62% wanted us gone immediately and 48% wanted us to leave within the year, you would have a point.
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Kelzie said:
I hate to burst your analysis bubble, but polls test multiple opinions sometimes. And since the responses were not mutually exclusive (ie. the 15.1% who want us gone now are probably some of the same 31.3% who stongly opppose the occupation) that is probably what happend here. Now if 62% wanted us gone immediately and 48% wanted us to leave within the year, you would have a point.
Error was calculated in? So show me mathmatically how it all adds up! I want to see!
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
galenrox said:
Are you stupid, they were two different polls!
If im stupid, your stupider for posting a response! :lol: Once again I ask you too add them! Can you do that, cause you didnt prove your point on this post! :lol:
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
stsburns said:
Error was calculated in? So show me mathmatically how it all adds up! I want to see!
I'm going to give a little example of how this pole might have gone. The poler (is that a word?) calls up the polee. The poler says "do you have a minute, I'd like to ask you a couple questions. Do you oppose the US occupation strongly, moderately, or not at all?" Now, see here, 31.3% said strongly, 19.7% said moderately (which would add up to the 51.2% total saying they opposed it), and 39.5 said they supported it. The remaining percentage probably said something like "no comment"

Now pay attention, here's the tricky part. The poler asked another question. He said "how soon do you want the US to leave? Right now, in a year, in ten years, etc." So 15.1% said right now (which I'm assuming is some of the same people who strongly oppose the occupation), and 29.5% want us to leave in a year.

You see, same people, two different questions. So, in theory, the percentage points should add up to 200%. I'm guessing there was a "no comment" option, and they didn't include the people that choose that when reporting the scores. See? Nothing about error added in.
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
Kelzie said:
I'm going to give a little example of how this pole might have gone. The poler (is that a word?) calls up the polee. The poler says "do you have a minute, I'd like to ask you a couple questions. Do you oppose the US occupation strongly, moderately, or not at all?" Now, see here, 31.3% said strongly, 19.7% said moderately (which would add up to the 51.2% total saying they opposed it), and 39.5 said they supported it. The remaining percentage probably said something like "no comment"

Now pay attention, here's the tricky part. The poler asked another question. He said "how soon do you want the US to leave? Right now, in a year, in ten years, etc." So 15.1% said right now (which I'm assuming is some of the same people who strongly oppose the occupation), and 29.5% want us to leave in a year.

You see, same people, two different questions. So, in theory, the percentage points should add up to 200%. I'm guessing there was a "no comment" option, and they didn't include the people that choose that when reporting the scores. See? Nothing about error added in.
I believe the word you're looking for is pollster.

Sounds logical to me.
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Kelzie said:
So, in theory, the percentage points should add up to 200%. I'm guessing there was a "no comment" option, and they didn't include the people that choose that when reporting the scores. See? Nothing about error added in.
Yes but your relying too much on a theory of 200%. Can you prove your theory?
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
stsburns said:
Yes but your relying too much on a theory of 200%. Can you prove your theory?
What theory? Statisitcs aren't theories... What are you talking about?

They were DIFFERENT questions!
 

PopeyeAtheist

New member
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Location
Illinois
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This **** is making my brain try to eat itself just to stop the pain of trying to comprehend WHAT THE **** YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!
[/QUOTE]
galenrox said:
This **** is making my brain try to eat itself just to stop the pain of trying to comprehend WHAT THE **** YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!
I like the old saying... "Statistics don't lie, but lier's use statistics".

It is all in how a person asks a question. This (at times) depends on the outcome.
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
galenrox said:
This **** is making my brain try to eat itself just to stop the pain of trying to comprehend WHAT THE **** YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!
Calm down! :2wave:
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
stsburns said:
Is this supposed to make me not trust polls? The first sentence is "Polls provide the best direct source of information about public opinion."

What's the deal? Don't like what the poll says? That's life.
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Kelzie said:
Is this supposed to make me not trust polls? The first sentence is "Polls provide the best direct source of information about public opinion."

What's the deal? Don't like what the poll says? That's life.
If it were only that simple! First of all, you didnt read more than the first paragraph, if you would have read the next it said:
The only polls that should be reported are "scientific" polls. A number of the questions here will help you decide whether or not a poll is a "scientific" one worthy of coverage – or an unscientific survey without value.
Unscientific pseudo-polls are widespread and sometimes entertaining, but they never provide the kind of information that belongs in a serious report. Examples include 900-number call-in polls, man-on-the-street surveys, many Internet polls, shopping mall polls, and even the classic toilet tissue poll featuring pictures of the candidates on each roll.

One major distinguishing difference between scientific and unscientific polls is who picks the respondents for the survey. In a scientific poll, the pollster identifies and seeks out the people to be interviewed. In an unscientific poll, the respondents usually "volunteer" their opinions, selecting themselves for the poll.
What gal sited as a source was a political spin website.
Headline from source:
HOW IRAQ FEELS ABOUT THE OCCUPATION
The Second National Opinion Poll in Iraq
JNV Anti-War Briefing 56 (19 March 2004) Gal's Source
An obvious Anti-war website, that is using the poll results to spin a political view. (Also take the date down you will need it later.)
NCCP states:
In recent years, some political campaigns and special-interest groups have used a technique called "push polls" to spread rumors and even outright lies about opponents. These efforts are not polls, but political manipulation trying to hide behind the smokescreen of a public opinion survey.

"Push polls" are unethical and have been condemned by professional polling organizations.#16 from NCCP
This poll was being used as a "Push poll" from the source in which gal cited.

Next to debate how was this poll taken? Gal cited it from BBC -> which sourced their source to "Oxford Research International", which on the Oxford Research stated:
All interviews will be face‑to‑face in respondents’ homes.Read Interviews and Quality and Control
NCCP States:
There are four main possibilities: in person, by telephone, online or by mail. Most surveys are conducted by telephone, with the calls made by interviewers from a central location. However, some surveys are still conducted by sending interviewers into people's homes to conduct the interviews.

Some surveys are conducted by mail. In scientific polls, the pollster picks the people to receive the mail questionnaires. The respondent fills out the questionnaire and returns it.NCCP
With a mail poll, you have more time to think about the question, and your answer.

Next I would like to criticize both polls that are used on this thread. Both Channel 4's and Oxfords. Oxfords poll was taken Feburary 2004 (must have pdf reader) with a sample size of 2500 as used in article. Channel 4's poll that was cited from ->YouGov polls, was taken back in "8th - 10th July 2003" and sample size 798 {Refer to gal for poll results sheet}(keep this you will need it), which is also out of date. Rember the date in which gal cited this poll, was one year out of date the article was published online, and 2 years out of date being in the year. 2005. But thats a mouthful, lets talk about YouGov. First of all YouGov does internet polls, which if you read the top of this page, are proven unscientific (about internet polls)#10 NCCP. YouGove stated:
YouGov is a research company using online panels to provide research for public policy, market research, and stakeholder consultation.YouGov
. Also another interesting feature was how they conduct polls. Read this statement off the same page:
Because of the efficiencies of automated fieldwork (panel respondents - incentivised by cash payments - complete surveys online on receipt of an email), significant cost-savings are passed on to the client.
Enough said. Next to criticize sample size of the polls. Oxfords sample size which was the most accurate of the 2 polls. Their sample size was 2500 people interviewed, 2700 needed for it to be proportionate to the population, to be considered as a scientific poll. Read Sampling Now the YouGov poll had 798 people who had taken it online. Now you can see the obvious difference between the two polls. 798 is no where near proportionate to the 24,683,313 (July 2003 ) Iraqi Population during YouGov Poll Iraqies that live there, thus this is NOT a scientific poll.

So we have some polls that pay people to take them, both were found in some way unscientific, both were out-of-date, and both were used by the source cited by gal for political spin, which in turn is called a "Push Poll". So my argument isn't about the knowledge you thought you gained off of it, but not to trust them period. Polls only support the views in which they are used and not what they are originally meant for, much less can be used as credible as evidence as a source.

DONT TRUST POLLS, AND I MEAN ANY OF THEM!
 
Top Bottom