August 10, 2006
War on Terror: No. 1 Election Issue?
I wonder, with today's terror events, which Democratic nominee from Tuesday, Lieberman or Lamont, the voters of Connecticut would trust more to protect their interests in the war against terror.
If the election were held next week rather than last Tuesday, maybe some people would have waken up to the terror threat and switched their vote. At least Lieberman will give them another chance with his independent run.
Instead of having thousands of deaths this week, intelligence stopped the planned attacks and have kept us from another 9-11 at home. Give appropriate credit for that and worry if we change direction. I highly suspect that Lamont would cater to the radical left who supported him, which would weaken our intelligence and cripple our fight against terrorist thugs.
When November arrives, maybe a lot of people will look around and decide that the war on terror takes priority over other issues and that the Republicans, with all their faults, offer the best choice for protecting our nation--as they did in the cold war.
Posted by Woody M. at August 10, 2006 09:30 AM | TrackBackI was wondering the same thing: Do the voters of Connecticut now regret how they voted in the primary which ousted Lieberman from the Dem ticket?
I just got back from seeing the movie "World Trade Center." A bit unusual for Oliver Stone. My only complaint is that he glossed over how many Muslims rejoiced on 9/11. This was a deliberate slight by Stone; he showed the world reacting in horror--including Muslim states.
Nevertheless, the movie was quite good. And the movie made me proud, once again, to be an American. How brave those responders were on 9/11!
Posted by Always On Watch at August 10, 2006 12:41 PM
If we're talking about the same voters, I don't think the outcome would have changed.
As far as I've read, I don't think this event would have made any difference among the Lamont voters, since their major concern was attacking Bush and the Iraq War. Indeed, in their system of thinking (?), this abortive attack would be viewed either as a conspiracy by the all-powerful Bush administration or viewed as a consequence of Bush and his foreign policies in Iraq, Lebanon, and/or any other pet whipping post. In other words, this event would only have strengthened their convictions.
On the other hand, this event one week before the election might have resulted in bringing out more voters to support Lieberman, and if enough of these voter had turned out, they could have put Lieberman over the top.
And now its time to leave alternative reality and face our own, in which the Democratic party of the postwar (WWII) era is under a final assault -- and most of the politicans are scurrying for the evacuation helicopters.
Posted by civil truth at August 10, 2006 07:19 PM
Woody, I have just discovered why you think like you do.Confirmation Bias.
The following is a pqrtial quote from Scott Adams.
"Researchers discovered that when people hear an argument that opposes their viewpoint, the rational part of the brain takes a coffee break and the emotional side takes over. The irrational part of your brain then reinterprets reality in a way that lets you keep your dumb viewpoint against all common sense and evidence."
Posted by James Melbert at August 12, 2006 09:37 AM
James, I wish I'd see more scientific studies presented the way you've presented Scott Adams' narrative. This would certainly strip away much of scientific mystification and pseudo-omniscence ingrained into the usual research report and let us see what the researcher is really thinking.
Let this also be a good reminder to all of us to check which direction the muzzle is pointing before commencing fire...
Posted by civil truth at August 12, 2006 02:03 PM
James, was Scott Adams describing me or describing you?
While you and I may have different preferences--for instance, I might oppose unions while you support them, we ought to be able to come to the same conclusions on factual matters if given the same information. But, we often won't because we analyze information differently--me being left-brained and you being right-brained. As we know, the left brain is logical and, therefore, correct.
If I am ever wrong, I will consider Scott Adam's study.
Posted by Woody at August 12, 2006 03:53 PM
