What does it take to be among the 31% who approve of Dubya?

[techweenie]

Some hints of this are regularly demonstrated on OT.

Are George W. Bush lovers certifiable?
November 23, 2006
By Andy Bromage

A collective “I told you so” will ripple through the world of Bush-bashers once news of Christopher Lohse’s study gets out.

Lohse, a social work master’s student at Southern Connecticut State University, says he has proven what many progressives have probably suspected for years: a direct link between mental illness and support for President Bush.

Lohse says his study is no joke. The thesis draws on a survey of 69 psychiatric outpatients in three Connecticut locations during the 2004 presidential election. Lohse’s study, backed by SCSU Psychology professor Jaak Rakfeldt and statistician Misty Ginacola, found a correlation between the severity of a person’s psychosis and their preferences for president: The more psychotic the voter, the more likely they were to vote for Bush.

But before you go thinking all your conservative friends are psychotic, listen to Lohse’s explanation.

“Our study shows that psychotic patients prefer an authoritative leader,” Lohse says. “If your world is very mixed up, there’s something very comforting about someone telling you, ‘This is how it’s going to be.’”

The study was an advocacy project of sorts, designed to register mentally ill voters and encourage them to go to the polls, Lohse explains. The Bush trend was revealed later on.

Full story:
http://www.ctnow.com/custom/nmm/newhavenadvocate/hce-nha-1123-nh48bushbash48.artnov23,0,1695911.story

[fastpat]

I think the study is revealing, not that all who voted for Bush are neurotic or worse, but of the fact that they want a "strong leader", the Germans called it "Fuhrer Prinzip", the Leader Principle.

You can see it in their writings in this forum. Loving the killing of others, desiring the arrests of those in opposition, disapproval of the rule of law when it obstructs their "Dear Leader", and so on.

It's disheartening that as many as 31% of the population (or electorate) might desire a dictatorship, even a democratically elected one, but there it is.

[red-beard]

Oh geezus!

You people do understand that 50% of the people in the United States have IQs under 100, right?

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by red-beard
Oh geezus!

You people do understand that 50% of the people in the United States have IQs under 100, right?

And you're telling me they're all in 'red states', as opposed to infesting numerous inner cities in America?

There are MILLIONS of totally moronic sociopaths that vote for the demz in every election afterall.

[red-beard]

No, I'm saying _they_ are in the 50% below.

[m21sniper]

LOL...

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by red-beard
Oh geezus!

You people do understand that 50% of the people in the United States have IQs under 100, right?

Believe that you are being far too kind. Would peg it more like an IQ of 70 and most are driven to the polls by both sides and paid to vote one way or the other.

The other sad part are people who post crap like this believing that its really true without thinking about it first.

Lastly, thinking that 69 Psy patients are normal in any way is laughable.

JA

[speeder]

Hilarious thread, I'm horse-laughing here.

[the]

Originally posted by m21sniper
LOL...

+1.

[red-beard]

Hey, I'm just trying to make as little sense as anyone else.

[widebody911]

[speeder]

[the]

I think a lot of people don't really care much about foreign wars, deficits or other things that don't immediately affect them or their family.

So when a lot of people look around, they see the Dow at an all time high, their 401K doing better, their home equity at an all time high, interest rates low and their mortgage payment at an all time low, low priced and affordable consumer goods all around them, their job security good, inflation arguably in check, and all the talking heads saying how the bull market is going to go on and the housing market only going to mildly correct (soft landing).

That's what they see.

What was that old saying . . . "It's the economy, stupid." There's a lot of truth to that, and it looks ok to good to a lot of people.

Given all that, it is actually pretty amazing his approval is only 31%, though. It shows how heavily the Iraq mess does weigh on a lot of people. If not for Iraq, Bush's rating numbers would be very high, IMO, at or above average for a mid-term second term president.

[techweenie]

Originally posted by the
I think a lot of people don't really care much about foreign wars, deficits or other things that don't immediately affect them or their family.

So when a lot of people look around, they see the Dow at an all time high...

People would have to be pretty stupid to think that an 8% increase over 5-1/2 years was a good return.

Especially since inflation/cost of living has made $12,300 today equal to $10,794 in 2001 (source: BLS website calculator).

[jorian]

"I think a lot of people don't really care much about foreign wars, deficits or other things that don't immediately affect them or their family."
- Try not to think.

-This is why you have GW in the White house

[fintstone]

Originally posted by techweenie
People would have to be pretty stupid to think that an 8% increase over 5-1/2 years was a good return.

Especially since inflation/cost of living has made $12,300 today equal to $10,794 in 2001 (source: BLS website calculator).

People would have to be pretty stupid to only have an 8% return over the last 5 1/2 years. My small personal portfolio was up 100% in the last month and 52% on Monday alone. No wonder liberals are always whining about the economy if they cannot make money in this market. Even my relatively safe 401K has more than doubled in the last 3 years.

[jorian]

My portfolio goes to 11

[the]

Actually, the biggest reason we have George Bush in the White House at this time is because the Dems nominated another unlikeable, disagreeable, humorless, unrelateable, Northeastern far-left liberal stiff in 2004 to run against Bush.

If the Dems has nominated someone even a couple of degrees closer to the center, and even a little more likeable (Kerry ranks at the bottom of the "likeability polls" among current Dems), that person would be sitting in the WH right now.

[m21sniper]

Agreed.

I would just as soon eat broken glass as vote for Kerry or Al "I invented the internet" Gore.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by the
Actually, the biggest reason we have George Bush in the White House at this time is because the Dems nominated another unlikeable, disagreeable, humorless, unrelateable, Northeastern far-left liberal stiff in 2004 to run against Bush.

If the Dems has nominated someone even a couple of degrees closer to the center, and even a little more likeable (Kerry ranks at the bottom of the "likeability polls" among current Dems), that person would be sitting in the WH right now.

That's exactly why the Bush campaign team worked overtime to make sure that Howard Dean did not get the nomination.

Dean would have mopped the floor with Bush in 2004.