With at least 70% and more like 90% of public approval of the wiretapping, what makes you sure that the NY Times would have swung the election? If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism.
"With at least 70% and more like 90% of public approval of the wiretapping, what makes you sure that the NY Times would have swung the election? If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism."
I'm not necessarily saying what I think. I am saying what I believe Calame and the NYT think. Calame is obviously disappointed that they didn't use this to help their side win the elections.
And I'm not so sure that this would have been presented clearly enough to the public by the DNC/MSM that they would have seen it as a nescessary move by the Bush administration in a time of war. It would have been portrayed as an outrage on the Constitution. And probably brought out so close to the election that nobody would have a chance to argue for its need.
But maybe this is another explanation. Maybe the DNC did some internal polling and found that this would hurt them. But I sort of doubt they would believe it without some kind of polls. They think they have the popular positions, you know.
"If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism."
My bet is the Kerry campaign and the DNC specifically asked that this be held off until after the election. They knew that the Swifties nailed Kerry on being anti-American and this would have sealed the deal. They were also banking on Plame blowing up in Bush's face.
The RATS and Slimes are so petty it is beyond belief.
I'm in total agreement. I would've loved to see how the dims would present their "no spying on terrorists" strategy for winning the war. I might not have had to sit biting my fingernails for Bush ("Fingernail Biters for Bush!") on election night.
"If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism."
My bet is the Kerry campaign and the DNC specifically asked that this be held off until after the election. They knew that the Swifties nailed Kerry on being anti-American and this would have sealed the deal. They were also banking on Plame blowing up in Bush's face.
The RATS and Slimes are so petty it is beyond belief. They are going to turn this around like they turned around the memogate files. It wasn't the fact that the RATS were trying to take down Bush, it was the fact that the Republicans found out.
Just a guess .. but I think it's about what the NYT thought and not the public in general
The NYT THOUGHT the country would be outraged .. it never dawned on them that the American people actually want our President to fight the terrorists
This is now about the 2006 election and not the 2004