Posted on 09/23/2002 8:54:20 AM PDT by Hillary's Lovely Legs
An excellent observation and I think you're right!
Ganske had a bitter primary race with a young Marine, Bill Salier. The Salier supporters have been slow to come on board the Ganske campaign. None the less, Ganske's numbers were rising last week, here is an exerpt of a weekend email from the Ganske campaign:
NEW POLL SHOWS HARKIN PLUMMETING
A new poll conducted by Public Opinion Strategies shows Harkin at his lowest point yet this despite millions of dollars spent attacking Greg Ganske on television for the past 6 months!
The new poll shows Harkin falling to 45% -- extremely problematic for an incumbent.
The poll revealed that Harkin has a scant 4 percentage point advantage over Ganske: 45% for Harkin and 41% for Ganske.
I do not know what the margin for error is on Public Opinion Stategies work. I'll go see if I can find this info in another article.
Oh this one is good, really, really good!
Couldn't that take forever and past the elections? Those poll numbers are encouraging.
About Salier, what makes these guys so bitter that they're willing to help out the enemy with their slow to get on the band wagon stance? So confusing.
Don't they understand we HAVE to get the senate back and put little Tommy back in his high chair? Sheesh!
You'll have to forgive me, I'm not very savvy about these things. :-)
Schröder sacks two in bid to heal rift with Bush
From Roger Boyes in Berlin
ONE day after his election victory Gerhard Schröder moved to repair an increasingly fraught relationship with the United States by sacking two senior politicians who had offended President Bush.
The Bush Administration made clear, however, that Herr Schröder, who campaigned on his opposition to war in Iraq, is still out in the cold. Other world leaders telephoned the Chancellor to congratulate him, but not Mr Bush.
Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, said that the German election campaign had been notably unhelpful and he had no intention of talking to Peter Struck, the German Defence Minister, during a Nato session in Warsaw today. [snip]
You're going to have to play a prettier tune than that Mr. Schoeder!
Look at the bore. Don't most people that look this crazy live in rubber rooms?
Something strange is going on in these pictures, besides albore and tipster. Either bad photography or a filter so we can't see his flop sweat. Is that lipstick he's wearing in the last pic? On TV it looked like he had on blush and was trying to do the Reagan thing again. Scary!
Just thinking about it sends a shiver up mine spine! When "it" happened at the convention my mouth hung open so big a trout coulda swam in there.
U.S. President George W. Bush gestures while meeting with Kyrgyz Republic President Askar Akayev (L) in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, September 23, 2002. REUTERS/Hyungwon Kang
Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction/ The Assessment of the British Government
There will be lots of traffic there this morning. If you can't get it with the link provided try one of the links at 10 Downing Street.
A great thread on this from MadIvan.
On questions that concern policy, I've come to expect anything President Bush is for, Al Bore is against.
I cannot watch AlBore give a speech without needing 12 cups of coffee to keep awake, if you're watching, you're a brave, brave soul.
And look what I got in my email this morning. (I signed up so I could get all their propaganda)
Democrats.com Action Alert: Al Gore's Historic Anti-War Speech is CENSORED
On Monday, September 23 2002, Al Gore gave a major speech on Iraq at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco.
Al Gore called the war on Iraq a distraction from the war on terrorism, warned against unilateral action and Bush's new Doctrine of Global Domination (a.k.a. preemptive strike policy), and addressed the timing questions of Bush's war in Iraq.
How did the networks cover Gore's historic speech?
FOX News - No Coverage
CNN - Broadcast the first few minutes - then went back to Talk Back Live.
MSNBC - Broadcast a portion of the speech - then Buchanan and Press talked over the rest of it.
These are the same networks that routinely interrupt programming with "breaking news" of press conferences concerning kidnappings, child abuse, and baseball riots. And yet a major anti-war speech by the WINNER of the 2000 election does not warrant coverage in their opinion. But these same networks carry just about every pro-war speech by Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney.
We must demand equal time from the media. We CANNOT let them conduct the hatchet job they did during campaign 2000.
We demand that Gore's speech be aired in prime time - and we demand full coverage for the anti-war movement, which represents the MAJORITY of Americans.
The media stole the Presidency from Al Gore in 2000 - it's time to get justice for Al Gore.
Act now!
*********************
Also in the message are telephone numbers so you can call the various news outlets and voice your concerns.
These people are completely clueless. I do hope news outlets broadcast algore's speech, over and over. It isn't helping the dems running in the next election and only helps show just how blessed we are that GWB is president!
I would like to know why they consider the anti-war movement a majority opinion of the American public. According to recent polls, didn't at least 60% of Americans (Conservative estimate) favor the use of force to oust Saddam? What math class did they attend?
I'm off in a few minutes to walk a group of kiddos to school, then I have a board meeting. I'll be back to discuss matters of international importance later this morning. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.