Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (34476)	3/15/2004 9:42:12 AM
From: carranza2	of 793876

why does one politically smart and (unfortunately) successful attack follow two years of politically witless attacks? I think the assumption that it was a smart attack is questionable. If Aznar's government had not responded by initially blaming ETA, there is little doubt in my mind that his party would have won. The fact is that by blaming ETA, Aznar alienated enough voters to make a difference. AQ got lucky, is all. If Aznar had used the attack to buttress his party's position on Iraq and terrorism, arguing that the fact that lots of citizens who presumably were opposed to his policies were killed in the blasts, he may have very well convinced a number of them to vote for his party. By blaming ETA without a bit of evidence, he undoubtedly pissed not an inconsiderable number of Basque voters and others who might have been wavering or undecided. I wouldn't say that AQ acted brilliantly--its pattern is to act witlessly. Handled differently, it had the potential to be another witless act. It was Aznar who was stupid. AQ could not have possibly predicted Aznar's assinine reaction.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next