1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Seymour Hersh report: WH lied about Bin Laden raid

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, May 11, 2015.

  1. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    We've been playing a game with Pakistani government officials for years where they scream about how pissed off they are to appease elements within their constituencies. It happens every time we drone some militant out of existence in the Northwest frontier. IF it turns out there was some amount of subterfuge to give people political cover relative to Bin Laden's death, I'm ok with it.
     
    heyabbott likes this.
  2. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    That number would be astronomically high if the previous president was still in office.
     
  3. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    The previous president had a 90 percent approval rating right after Bin Laden's attack. You sure about that statement?
     
  4. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Know your audience. If the president did lie, the great majority don't care. Unless it's the previous president.
     
  5. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    That's because the "great majority" voted for this one, while the previous president actually lost the popular election. So it would make sense that popular opinion would fall that way.
     
  6. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Even some Democrats actually professed their love of the U.S. in the days weeks after 9/11. Those were very unusual times.

    But to answer your question, I'm 100% sure about that statement.
     
  7. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Not in 2004.

    And since when is 52.9% the "great majority"?
     
  8. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I'm just saying that it would make sense that the majority of Americans would tend to take the president's side here and not the prior president's side in a similar situation, as this president won the popular vote twice whereas the previous president lost the popular vote once in two attempts.
     
  9. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Yeah, numbers can be a pesky thing.

    Bush got 12 million MORE votes in his second run, Obama got 3.5 million fewer votes in his second run (and only 51.1%).
     
  10. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I'm just saying that this president won the popular vote twice, while the prior president won the popular vote once, but lost it to Al Gore another time. Nothing more, nothing less.
     
  11. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    So you're saying Democrats don't love their country. Hmmm, interesting.
     
  12. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    And Bush never carried fewer than 30 states, Obama never more than 28. Lots of ways to look at things.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page