SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: calgal who wrote (515426)12/24/2003 10:13:05 AM
From: calgal  Respond to of 769670
 
Jonah Goldberg



Bah, humbug: Blame uninformed voters

newsandopinion.com | You may recall that a mere 72 hours after Saddam was captured alive, the president of the United States gave an exclusive interview to Diane Sawyer. Big news, big guest.

"Big deal" quoth much of America.

Paris Hilton was on another channel at the time. Hilton, while lacking the intellectual candlepower to toast bread, has certain other assets - she's rich; she's good-looking; she has a certain Internet-porn come-hither look around the eyes (and around everything else).

The George Bush interview was watched by 11 million people, mostly older. The Paris Hilton reality show, "The Simple Life," was watched by 11.8 million viewers, mostly younger. Perhaps more astonishing, "The Simple Life's" ratings were fairly typical for such drek. The Diane Sawyer interview with President Bush received the highest ratings of any presidential interview all year, including Tom Brokaw's plum interview after the end of the Iraq war.

Now you might think this might be a good reason for Howard Dean to pick Paris Hilton as his running, uh, mate. But that's not my point.

I bring it up for another reason: Americans have a tendency to think the problem with politics lies with their candidates and not themselves. The truth is Americans deserve the blame for the state of our politics and the state of our media. I know it's not savvy to criticize the customers, but perhaps especially at Christmastime, we should still have a few scrooges left.

First of all, if you only get your news from television, I can speak freely because that means you're probably not reading this. Second, you're an idiot.

OK, maybe not technically an idiot in the sense that you're only qualified to be an assistant spellchecker in an M&M factory. But, to the extent you take being an informed citizen seriously, you get a failing grade. Whether you are liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, if your only news source is the boob tube you are simply underinformed, though not necessarily misinformed.



Unfortunately, most Americans are underinformed. If current trends continue, only 1 in 4 households will buy newspapers by 2007, according to Peter Francese, the founder of American Demographics magazine. This is a trend with roots that predate the rise of the Internet, and, I'm afraid to say, the Internet will not solve the problem. If huge numbers of people believe they are too busy to read newspapers, there's no reason to believe they'll have enough spare time to sit at a computer.

The ignorance of the typical American when it comes to politics is often staggering. For example, just one week before the GOP convention in 2000, the Vanishing Voter Project conducted a survey revealing that three out of four Americans didn't know when the convention would be held. One in four Americans don't know who their governor is and one in two don't know who their congressman is.

This ignorance is the real reason special interest groups and demagogues have the success they do (though it's a wonder they don't have more). For example, we are constantly told by extreme leftwing groups and more than a few rightwing groups that there's no difference between the political parties.

As anyone who pays attention to politics knows, this is monumental nonsense on stilts; informed people understand that a Dean administration will be very different from a Bush administration.

But if you get much of your news from late-night comics - as is the case with nearly half of young voters, according to the Pew Research Center - it makes complete sense that you'd think there's no difference between the parties, in much the same way people who don't understand physics think protons and electrons are pretty much the same thing.

But Americans don't like being told they're the problem. So when they eventually tune into politics they tend to blame the candidates, as if it's the actors' fault you don't understand the play when you arrive for the last five minutes.

For example, during the last campaign, the news networks convened "undecided voters" to watch Gore-Bush debates. Invariably, these average Americans complained that the candidates didn't provide "enough information" to help them decide between the two candidates. That's right, it was the candidates' fault. They only put out position papers, speeches, commercials and Web sites for a year, while those poor undecideds watched Jay Leno.

Now, as a conservative I don't mind that Americans aren't consumed with political fervor. In fact, I tend to like low voter turnout on the principle that the people not voting are probably the people I don't think should vote.

My problem is with a political culture that tells everyone they're bad citizens if they don't vote but doesn't care if they don't know why they're voting. In other words, I don't really mind if you'd prefer to watch Paris Hilton over George W. Bush - or Howard Dean. That might even be healthy. But spare me your opinion on either of them and, if possible, spare me your vote, too.

Bah, humbug.



To: calgal who wrote (515426)12/24/2003 10:15:07 AM
From: calgal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Majority Believes Bush Economy Is Taking Off

Monday, December 22, 2003

WASHINGTON — President Bush is getting good marks on the economy (search) from a clear majority of the public at a time when consumer confidence has risen to its highest levels since early 2002, an Associated Press poll finds.



People are increasingly optimistic about the economy in the next six months and feeling more secure about their jobs, according to the poll conducted for the AP by Ipsos-Public Affairs (search). The uptick in Bush's rating comes on an issue certain to be central to the 2004 presidential campaign.

In all, 55 percent of registered voters said they approve of Bush's handling of the economy and 43 percent disapproved, according to the survey. That is Bush's best number on this measure in Ipsos polls since the third quarter of 2002, though he briefly came close to this level - at 52 percent - last July.

A month ago, 46 percent approved and 51 percent disapproved of Bush on the economy.

In the new survey, 23 percent said they strongly approve of Bush's handling of the economy, 19 percent said they somewhat approve and 13 percent initially reported mixed feelings but leaned toward approval.

The public's overall feelings on the economy have risen steadily over the past few months.

"Confidence has improved sharply since the spring, when we were all worried about the war with Iraq," said Mark Zandi, chief economist with Economy.com.

The economy, primed by low interest rates (search) and tax cuts, is showing mixed signs of recovery.

There are projections of rapid growth for 2004, signs of an improving job picture and a rebound in the stock market. But the nation has lost more than 2 million jobs, economists are uncertain about the turnaround in employment and states are reeling from revenue losses.

The AP-Ipsos index of consumer attitudes, a composite measure of opinions about the economy generally and consumers' own personal finances, reached 100 in December.

That is the same level as the baseline number at the start of 2002, when Ipsos' index of consumer attitudes and spending by household, known as the CASH index (search), was set up. It stayed close to that level through May 2002.

At that time, the economy was starting to bounce back from the shock of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. In the months preceding the attacks, the economy was faltering and other surveys found that consumer confidence was down, too.

According to the Ipsos consumer index, confidence dipped sharply into the 60s in early 2003 leading up to the Iraq war and rallied in April during the war.

Since October, consumers have grown increasingly optimistic. They are more upbeat about their local economy in the next six months, more comfortable making a major purchase and more confident about their job security, according to the poll.

"There is a general sense that some of the geopolitical uncertainties in the world are abating," Zandi said. "Those concerns are not as much on our minds as a year ago."

Groups that have shifted toward approval of Bush on the economy in the past month in the poll are less-educated women, suburbanites, swing voters and Republicans.

Bush's overall job approval rating was 59 percent, boosted by the rising confidence and the capture of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein on Dec. 13.

"I'm optimistic, things are starting to turn around a little bit," said Jan Polendey, a mother of four from Canby, Ore. "Gas prices have gone down a little bit."

While some people are gaining confidence the economy will grow stronger, many are not convinced.

Nearly four in 10 respondents, or 37 percent, said they expect their local economy to get stronger in the next six months. But half, 51 percent, said they think it will stay the same.

"Here in this part of the state of Kentucky, the economy's about the same as it was," said Steve Abner, an electronics plant worker who lives in Annville in the southern part of the state. "But as a whole, I think the economy might be coming around."

The AP-Ipsos poll of 1,001 adults was taken Dec. 15-17. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points, slightly larger for subgroups like registered voters.