The S factor explains Bush's popularity

Otter

Nothing to see here
Its folks like this guy that will destroy the democratic party, IMO

Seattle Post-Intelligencer

By NEAL STARKMAN
GUEST COLUMNIST

Millions of words have been written as to the motivations of voters. Particularly in close elections, as in the 2000 presidential contest, pundits and laypeople alike have speculated on why people voted for whom. The exit poll has been a major tool in this speculation.

But the speculation misses the mark by far. It's increasingly obvious, for example, that none of the so-called theories can explain President Bush's popularity, such as it is. Even at this date in his presidency, after all that has happened, the president's popularity hovers at around 50 percent -- an astonishingly high figure, I believe, given the state of people's lives now as opposed to four years ago.

What can explain his popularity? Can that many people be enamored of what he has accomplished in Iraq? Of how he has fortified our constitutional freedoms with the USA Patriot Act? Of how he has bolstered our economy? Of how he has protected our environment? Perhaps they've been impressed with the president's personal integrity and the articulation of his grand vision for America?

Is that likely?

Granted, there are certain subsections of the American polity that have substantially benefited from this presidency. Millionaires and charismatic Christians have accrued either material or spiritual fortification from Bush's administration. But surely these two groups are a small minority of the population. What, then, can account for so many people being so supportive of the president?

The answer, I'm afraid, is the factor that dare not speak its name. It's the factor that no one talks about. The pollsters don't ask it, the media don't report it, the voters don't discuss it.

I, however, will blare out its name so that at last people can address the issue and perhaps adopt strategies to overcome it.

It's the "Stupid factor," the S factor: Some people -- sometimes through no fault of their own -- are just not very bright.

It's not merely that some people are insufficiently intelligent to grasp the nuances of foreign policy, of constitutional law, of macroeconomics or of the variegated interplay of humans and the environment. These aren't the people I'm referring to. The people I'm referring to cannot understand the phenomenon of cause and effect. They're perplexed by issues comprising more than two sides. They don't have the wherewithal to expand the sources of their information. And above all -- far above all -- they don't think.

You know these people; they're all around you (they're not you, else you would not be reading this article this far). They're the ones who keep the puerile shows on TV, who appear as regular recipients of the Darwin Awards, who raise our insurance rates by doing dumb things, who generally make life much more miserable for all of us than it ought to be. Sad to say, they comprise a substantial minority -- perhaps even a majority -- of the populace.

Politicians have been aware of this forever; they cater to these people. They offer simplistic solutions to complex problems. They evade directed questions with non-sequiturs. They offer meaningless, jingoistic pap instead of thoughtful policy. And these people, the "S" people, eat it all up with a ladle.

I don't have a solution to this problem. To claim I did would belie my previous arguments. But I do have some modest suggestions that might provide a start for discussion: an intelligence test to earn the right to vote; a three-significantly-stupid-behaviors-and-you're-out law; fines for politicians who pander to the lowest common denominator and deportation of media representatives who perpetuate such actions.

It's well past time that people confront this issue, no matter who's offended. We are on the way to becoming a nation of imbeciles. I'm certain that a plethora of "George W. Bush" jokes is already being circulated in every capital of the world. We can stop this sapping of our national integrity but we must do it soon, lest the morons become the norm and those of us who use our brains for more than memorizing advertising jingles are ourselves ostracized from society.

Let's start talking. Let's bring the S factor out of the closet and into the daylight where we can all see it, gulp at its hideousness and finally make serious attempts to bring it to bay.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Typical liberal elitist horsesh*t. THEY (all 26 or 27 of them) are intellectuals who know what's going on. Everyone else is a moron.

God, how I'd love for Howard Dean to come out with this theory on national TV!
 

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member
I'd believe it to be real.

It would explain Jimmy Carters Presidency, 40 years of the Kennedy Klan and two terms of Bill Clinton.
 
B

Bruzilla

Guest
This guy reminds me of the writer for the Baltimore Sun who was shocked, flabergasted, "Oh Lordy... clutch the pearls!" when he saw masses of African-Americans attending a Bob Ehrlich rally in Baltimore. He actually said he couldn't understand why these people were there. This just goes to show how out of touch with reality a lot of Liberals are.

Here's why I think Bush is popular:

1. As Vrai pointed out on another string, he isn't a stone thrower. People can talk all the trash about him they want and he just brushes it aside like the dirt it is.
2. Bush sticks by his guns (literally). He doesn't care if the polls, the pundits, the press, or the World is against him... he conceives of a course of action and follows it. This helps in two ways: first, people like me respect someone who is willing to take the heat when they think they're right. And second, he won't sell out the US for short-term political gain... think of North Korea's double dealing; France, Germany, Russia, and China selling their votes on the Security Council to Iraq; and most environmental treaties that hose the US while other countries get off the hook.
3. I hate to mention Clinton, but the guy did set a new low for presidential behavior, both public and private, so even a monkey in the Oval Office would look good. Dems can try to hang the "liar" label on Bush for repeating info that was wrong, but compared to purposefully lying to the courts, your wife, your aides, and lying about lying to all of the above plus the American people... the label doesn't work.
4. Fox News Channel! FNC does a great job of getting both sides of a story out, but more importantly, they have forced the other networks to start being more balanced also. Anyone think Joe Scarborough would have a job if not for FNC? I don't think it's a coincidence that favorable ratings for Republicans have gone up alongside viewer numbers for FNC.
5. The visit to the USS Lincoln. I think that had a profound impact on people who watched it. Usually when a big wig visits a military base they shake hands with a few selected folks and then they go meet with the other big wigs. Bush spent a lot of time shaking hands with every Tom, Dick, and Harriet on the flight deck, and several reporters joked about how they didn't think he was going to leave the ship until he met every last sailor on it.
6. Dems can try to hang a racist label on Republicans all they want, but they can't deny the fact that the Bush cabinet is composed of a more diverse group than any previous cabinet... Republican or Democrat.

Guys like this editorialist, who believe that they are smarter than everyone else and that what they personally believe is what must be right, will never understand why people they believe in lose consistently. It's not the people that are dumb, it's the guy who looks back at him from the mirror that's lacking in the intelligence arena.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
Not surprised.

But something interesting to consider: exit polls from the last presidential election show that consistently it is the least educated segment of the population that is FAR more likely to vote *Democrat*. The only more educated section that does vote Democrat are those with advanced degrees, and I suspect it's because they're geeks who have no understanding of reality.

It's the "morons" who vote Democrat! How does THAT square with the theory?
 

ericw

New Member
The ones with advanced degrees voting Democratic are the so-called "intellectuals" - but the best definition of "intellectual" is "person educated beyond the level of his/her intelligence".
 

hwyman3

New Member
This editorial just points out how much the liberals don't "get it." They constantly underestimate President Bush. Think back to the debates in 2000. Before the first debate, all the press had already decided Gore was the winner. Not only did Bush debate Gore, but he refused to be intimidated. Let them go on underestimating the President. They will have 4 more years to do so. Just the fact that Dean is the front runner for the Democrats shows they have lost touch with everyday Americans and are going to the extreme left wing of the party.
 

Otter

Nothing to see here
I'm extremely disappointed that none of the resident libs offered their two cents on that editorial...:bawl: :bawl:
 

ceo_pte

New Member
"They're the ones who keep the puerile shows on TV, who appear as regular recipients of the Darwin Awards, who raise our insurance rates by doing dumb things, who generally make life much more miserable for all of us than it ought to be."


Sure sounds like a liberal to me! Most conservatives I know would not consider suing someone else for millions of dollars, just to get ahead. This and JA lawyers is what's causing our insurance rates to skyrocket. More people who want a 'free lunch.' More people who want to blame someone else for their misfortune.
 
Top