NY Times Discounts Moveon.org Betray Us Ad!

[chance1]

^ ur gonna get in trouble for that

but i liked it

 

[Centexfarmer]

Wait a minute, Oh Organic One. I posted polling returns from the past couple of days. If this so-called "ad" so-called "backfired," why isn't it reflected in the polls? It isn't reflected in the polls because America no longer believes Bush, it doesn't believe Petraeus, it doesn't believe the war is worth fighting. Were the right wing noise machine successful, the numbers would have moved -- the needle moved, slightly, and it moved down.

Don't be so hard-headed, Oh Lover of cute Dogs. The "backfire" that I'm talking about, is that if MoveOn.org had been paying attention to the polling numbers, rather than trying to capitalize on them, they could have produced a more effective ad.

Something more along the lines of what we should expect from the report, instead of something that came across looking like it impugned the character of a Military Officer who's only taking his orders and doing his job.

I never once suggested that they were trying to shift the balance of "polling numbers," I'm talking about public perception and the opposite effect that the ad had in regard to the public debate on Petreaus' testimony. IOW it distracted from the debate, it didn't ad to it.

What's more important to you? Polling numbers, or the real in the streats public debate?

 

[greydog]

ha, ha,
Wait a minute "Oh Organic one".

Don't be so hard headed, "Oh lover of cute dogs".

yuk, yuk

 

[Centexfarmer]

The ad wasn't one I'd have chosen.



But many members and friends of MoveOn, even some elected Democrats, point to Petraeus's history and public record over the course of his leadership in Iraq with serious reservations. His successes are certainly less than he claims, his track record training the Iraqi army is dismal; the nation itself believes the surge failed, and that the Petraeus report itself was largely made of fabrications and questionable data. So, viewed from the perspective of MoveOn, they were expressing the beliefs of their membership, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Petraeus wrote a glowing editorial five or six weeks before the 2004 election, a piece that appeared absurd then; in retrospect, it was clearly nothing but political propaganda (not war propaganda, political propaganda). That Petraeus wasn't greeted by the tossing of flower petals is something he's simply going to have to get over.

I agree, and since it's apparent to me at least, that "The War President" has abdicated his responsibilities of this war to General Petreaus it's only fair to question whether or not the General is with the American People, or the President on this.

I know where MoveOn.org was trying to go with their ad. I'm on their email list, so I'm up to speed with everything that they're doing.

I don't think, any more than they did, that they were being extreme here. They just didn't think it through in regard to how the to pro-war side would react to it, and how they would attempt to spin it.

When playing a game of chess, the idea is to know/anticipate your opponent's moves to minimize the loss of your pieces.

MoveOn.org could have lost a Pawn, but they lost a Bishop instead.

At least that's the way that I see it.

 

[chance1]

^moveon.org is a left wing loony tunes outfit that is out of touch with reality

u guys banter about it as if .........................

it wasn't

dream on

Hillary not denouncing them is not a good political move - period

she appears weak in allowing them to attempt (unsuccessfully) to discredit a general in the armed forces who is doing his duty

by not condemning it, she is tacitly agreeing

and alfie ur polls say nothing other than bush is unpopular - duh

 

[Centexfarmer]

^moveon.org is a left wing loony tunes outfit that is out of touch with reality

u guys banter about it as if .........................

it wasn't

dream on

Hillary not denouncing them is not a good political move - period

she appears weak in allowing them to attempt (unsuccessfully) to discredit a general in the armed forces who is doing his duty

by not condemning it, she is tacitly agreeing

and alfie ur polls say nothing other than bush is unpopular - duh

That may be true in your small part of Long Island, but that's not the case out here in America.

Sorry to break that to ya.

Only two Democrats denounced that ad to my knowledge and those are Senator John Kerry, and U.S Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi. Neither of whom are currently running for public office.

Senator Clinton appears to be savy enough to know which battles to fight, and clearly ignoring that ad by MoveOn.org was the right way to go IMO.

 

[chance1]

That may be true in your small part of Long Island, but that's not the case out here in America.

Sorry to break that to ya.

Only two Democrats denounced that ad to my knowledge and those are Senator John Kerry, and U.S Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi. Neither of whom are currently running for public office.

Senator Clinton appears to be savy enough to know which battles to fight, and clearly ignoring that ad by MoveOn.org was the right way to go IMO.

pfffft

pfffft

and did i say pfffft ?

ur long island reference is alfie-esque and beneath u - too bad u succumbed - u now own it

hillary picked a loser here

and i hope she pays - cuz people shud be responsible for their actions - like in real life

moveon is a piece of dog shit - w/o iraq moveon does not exist - not really

she's a coward for doing this - and people do not trust her as a default - and this will increase their wariness

 

[chance1]

^^^ check out the above 3 posts

read them close

make up ur own mind