![]() |
|
Welcome to the TeakDoor.com forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. |
| |||||||
| US Domestic Issues Topics which focus on issues within the US or concern those who come from or live in the US. |
|
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
| | #441 (permalink) | |||
| Gone Off Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: shelf
Posts: 8,051
| Yes, "change." The term "change" has been studied a lot and still is. "Change" resonates, statistically. In 1992, Clinton and Perot used "Change." It works. But it's not real. It's fake. But....as long as the term/slogan "change" is statistically effective, it will be used. And in reality, there won't be any real change IMO. In the future, a GOP candidate may may use the slogan "change" if the polling is consistent with positive perceptions from the American public. MM: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, the majority of "almost all" voter are low-info voters - but this means voters with "education." "Education," meaning they have a certified BA/BS at the least. "Low-info voters" include high school grads, and those with BA/BS degress and even MA/MS degrees. "Low-info" just means they follow politics only 1. casually, but 2. they have high voter turnouts at the polls. Presidential campaigns always have been, and still are now, targeted towards the low-info voter. And it always will be. You can go back in history.
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. _____________ | |||
| | |
| | #442 (permalink) |
| Farang phoot mak Last Online: Today 07:02 PM Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Nong Khai
Posts: 7,399
| You've convieniently evaded the question. Link patriotism or nationalism to education or being a highly-informed voter. I personally think you're highly-informed, but quite subjective. I've got a few years of graduate-level polysci experience under my belt so my skepticism isn't mere speculation. Tossing about degrees is quite unendearing. Show me some stats where patriotism isn't a virtue and I'll shut up. |
| | |
| | #443 (permalink) | |
| Koh Kut Last Online: Today 05:18 AM Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 608
| Quote:
"The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals’ primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely." The Hazards of Watching Fox News | AlterNet Summary of Findings: Public Knowledge of Current Affairs Little Changed by News and Information Revolutions | |
| | |
| | #444 (permalink) |
| Koh Kut Last Online: Today 05:18 AM Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 608
| I don't want to suggest from my previous post that liberals have a monopoly on political truth. I've found that many of the best informed political writers and commentators, especially those with a strong sense of history, come from the old-line conservative movement. I would include people like Pat Buchanan and perhaps George Will. It's just that the neo-conservative Republicans and their strange version of patriotism seem to be either ill-informed, dishonest or denial-ridden when it comes to displaying political knowlege |
| | |
| | #445 (permalink) |
| What the Dormouse Said Last Online: Today 11:09 AM Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Rabbit Hole
Posts: 5,671
| ^ I'd be surprised if any low-income folks watch any political news broadcasts, especially on PBS. And only the diehards watch C-SPAN. I think many folks just catch a few phrases, ideas and/or scandalous issues and those stick in their heads in regards to the candidate. Lower-income moms watching PBS? I doubt it. Soaps, the shopping channel and as MM noted, the talk shows. Oprah, Dr Phil and those other so-called self-help trash shows are the lifeblood of many a housewife. In this campaign, race, charisma, and what are you gonna do about gas prices and my high shopping bills will be key. Then, taxes and Iraq. IMO. I think most older folks recognise that nothing much will change, same ole sh*t, different leader. I think the younger set like Obama coz he has charm, charisma, good looks, and the possible hope for a new US image. Dat's all. They'll be mad when taxes go up, tho. |
| | |
| | #446 (permalink) | ||||
| Gone Off Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: shelf
Posts: 8,051
| I did not intend to. Let me further clarify and I'll answer your question below regarding a) nationalism and b) patriotism. Quote:
Nationalism is used also. This is why symbols and imagery. Nationalism can also be related to economic policy: protectionism and "protecting jobs." Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No need to "shut up." Discussion is good. | ||||
| | |
| | #447 (permalink) | |
| Born Again Pagan Last Online: Today 11:05 AM Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Roiet
Posts: 5,288
| Quote:
These so called patriots need to be reminded the people they all claim to be the prototype patriots were people like George, Thomas, Benjamin and the lot that founded the country. All were critics of the ruling government and expressed their criticism verbally, followed by armed resistance to what they believed injustice.
__________________ Eat right, exercise daily, live clean, die anyway. | |
| | |
| | #448 (permalink) |
| What the Dormouse Said Last Online: Today 11:09 AM Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Rabbit Hole
Posts: 5,671
| ^ Ruling govt? You mean the Brits? Unfortunately, Sabang, and as I think you mentioned before too, Norts, the GOP will need to flock off and rebuild. Basically, just let the dems muck up for a couple of years and then retake Congress. Shoe-in for a new prez. They better find a good posterboy/girl next time around. But, I won't give up yet if Obama keeps reneging on his pledges. Heard another commentator say BO was noted as being an elitist snob at Harvard, but hey, that was yesterday and I don't remember the dam broadcast. |
| | |
| | #449 (permalink) | |
| Born Again Pagan Last Online: Today 11:05 AM Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Roiet
Posts: 5,288
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #451 (permalink) | |
| Gone Off Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: shelf
Posts: 8,051
| Quote:
The GOP is different that it was in 1994. The '94 Repubs are long gone - this was 14 years ago. Dems muck up? How is the GOP any different? The current National Debt is $9 Trillion. SS and Medicare is starting its roll downhill as the first boomer started collecting on Jan., 1, 2008. As I've said before: both parties are more similar than different and basically support the same major foundational things. | |
| | |
| | #452 (permalink) | |
| I am in Jail Last Online: 30-06-2008 09:59 AM Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 111
| Quote:
I notice Michelle often wears sleeveless, Elizabeth Montgomery (Bewitched)- 60s style dresses, as she did on Colbert and on the View. At 5'11" she is statuesque and would look good in anything. Her arms are, as you say, not petite, and at 44, she is probably past her sell-by date to wear those sleeveless numbers. But, those styles do make her sexy and desirable, and she still pulls it off. At the same time, Cindy gets away with wearing stuff that Pat Benatar might have worn on stage. Michelle hasn't learned how to carry herself yet, nor how to define her style. She also stoops apologetically, as tall girls often do. This is bad. As far as facial expressions, her smiles do look contrived, and, sort of in a French way, she sports a smile, but the top half of her face and eyes look stern. I think her basic personality shows through all of this. She needs work. At the same time, after wearing this number on The View, the dress sold out nationwide within hours. ![]() Last edited by FayeQuarry : 28-06-2008 at 11:53 AM. | |
| | |
| | #456 (permalink) | ||||
| I am in Jail Last Online: 30-06-2008 09:59 AM Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 111
| Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
![]() Hardly humble: Michelle's childhood home in Chicago Quote:
All contrived..... | ||||
| | |
| | #457 (permalink) |
| Watching the Wheels Last Online: Today 05:53 PM Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: east of Pattaya
Posts: 7,262
| Here are 10 quick facts about Mrs. Obama: Quick Fact Number 1: She was born January 17, 1964 and grew up on the South Shore area of Chicago Quick Fact Number 2: Michelle Robinson majored in sociology at Princeton University, after she graduated from Whitney Young High School Quick Fact Number 3: She is a Harvard Law School graduate Quick Fact Number 4: She is Vice President for Community and External Affairs for the University of Chicago Hospitals Quick Fact Number 5: Michelle Obama is a devoted supporter of the Women's Treatment Center located on the West Side of Chicago. The facility is for the treatment and detox of women dealing with substance abuse. The facility also takes care of children while their mother's go through detox and offers a program where children can live with their mothers during recovery. Quick Fact Number 6: She enjoys early morning work outs Quick Fact Number 7: The founding executive director of the Chicago office of Public Allies, President Bill Clinton's AmeriCorps 1993 Quick Fact Number 8: The Obama Family travels mostly every year to Hawaii to visit Senator Obama's grandmother and sister Quick Fact Number 9: Craig Robinson, Michelle's brother is head coach of the men's basketball team at Brown University Quick Fact Number 10: And like most little girls she enjoyed playing with her Barbie Dolls and Easy Bake Oven as a child 10 Quick Facts About Michelle Obama - Associated Content Can't really fault her resume' as First lady. No doubt they'll have fashion consultants on the job to make her look the part.
__________________ East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet, Last edited by sabang : 28-06-2008 at 01:57 PM. |
| | |
| | #458 (permalink) |
| I am in Jail Last Online: 30-06-2008 09:59 AM Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 111
| In the years Michelle went to Harvard Law, there were about 3 ways to get in. 1. Have long standing monied family connections and fairly passable LSAT scores & GPA, but nothing exceptional. 2. Have LSAT scores and GPA in the top 1-5% of all students nationwide. In other words, be a genius. 3. Find a way in through affirmative action, with passable LSAT and undergrad GPA. Otherwise, normally, the best one could obtain would be entrance to a decent State University. There were a few other categories of people who got in because of exceptional life circumstances. Those are few. You figure out how she went to Harvard. |
| | |