Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: willcousa who wrote (38667)	10/25/2000 7:37:36 AM
From: Lone Star	Respond to of 70976

As an Austinite, I can guarantee you we are better off now with Dubya vs. Ann ( who I enjoyed as a personality, but not a guvnah ).As to the public being ignorant, that is unfortunately exactly the problem. What, 40% or so vote, and of that percentage how many really delve into what government is, how it works, what the jamokes they vote for do vs. what they say, etc. No, ignorance is rampant.

To: willcousa who wrote (38667)	10/25/2000 2:48:57 PM
From: mitch-c	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

OT - politics I live in Austin; I've met George W. There's a lot more substance there than gets reported. I'm seeing great similarities in strategy to his first campaign for governor. 6 years ago, he ran an underdog campaign against an incumbent gov - Ma Richards. He telegraphed his campaign strategy. He picked a few issues - education, crime, and taxes - and hammered them positively and exclusively. He publicly committed to "no negative personal attacks," even though Ann was vulnerable. (Several hushed-up DWI incidents while Gov, for example.) Ann's campaign didn't believe him, and prepared personal counterattacks. The "polls" ran neck-and-neck until Ann dropped a few points back two weeks prior to the election. Her people panicked and began the first series of personal attacks with what had been prepared as counters. When Bush's campaign refused to respond in kind (as promised), her numbers plummeted, and he won with high 50% returns. Bush has milked the "lightweight" and "underdog" images before. He's currently getting great help from the pundits who want to "show" how dumb he is - and they do so by pointing out the things they think he "should" be saying ... if he were a "smart" campaigner. Thus, media egos point out Gore's negatives, making them stickier and harder to counteract - and they're free. Great media jujitsu. It worked against Ann; it's working against Al. Watch for poll divergence as the undecideds pick the "nicer" guy. I called the debates draw-Bush-draw on substance, but Gore lost too much yardage in #1 and #3 due to personal fouls. Watch Bush's answer to the death penalty question in #3 ... THAT is the character and intensity under adversity that we've seen in Texas. - Mitch