Author: Doug Berger

Founder, visionary, and editor of Doug's Views. Need more info - see the About page linked below the masthead.
Posted on

If I could vote, who would I vote for????

I don’t live in Hancock county. I was born and raised there so I am interested in the elections there. If I were to vote there here is who I recommend:

United States Senator Eric D. Fingerhut, US Representative To Congress 4Th District Ben Konop, House Of Representatives 76Th District Kenneth J. Ludwig

Commissioner 1/3/2005 Christopher Cox

The other local offices have no challengers and none of the incumbents are that bad but it is sad no one will challenge them.

Even if he had a challenger I would recommend for Coroner, Dr. LeRoy L. Schroeder. He was my Doctor in the later years I lived in Findlay and I was in the same Scout Troop as his son Kevin. He is a nice guy who supports his community and does a job that not many would do.

If you do live in Hancock County and want more election info check out these links:

http://www.hancockboardofelections.com/
http://www.co.hancock.oh.us/

Originally posted on the blog “Hancock County Politics Unfiltered”

Posted on

Bush has edge in final NY Times poll even though it shows he has done a bad job overall

Today is the last day of the long 2004 Election season. Living in a “battleground” state has been interesting and tiring. Each of the Presidential candidates kept coming around about once a week for months. Each seems that neither want to let the other have the last visit as if that will matter.

I really feel that most who plan on voting have decided and are ready to draw the curtain in their booth.

I really doubt that a winner will be declared on Tuesday evening. We will have an idea who has the advantage but after the crap we went through in 2000, there will be probably a few weeks as each party tries to manage the problem votes toward their candidate through the court system.

The New York Times published their final poll Monday. If you read the detailed results (available as a PDF file on their website) it is strange. Of likely voters on November 2nd, a slim majority would vote for George Bush. (49 % for Bush and 46% for Kerry). Yet when reading the other questions Bush gets bad marks on handling the war in Iraq, the economy, job creation, and most feel the country is on the wrong track. Yet Bush would get their vote. Why? Because of the campaign against terrorism. Bush actually got good marks on that and people feel he would continue to do a good job although in another question people said the administration mucked things up and didn’t plan the Iraq invasion it well enough. Most thought that was a major part of the campaign against terrorism.

The only bad mark Kerry got was that people felt he said what people wanted to hear rather than what he truly believes. Other than that the respondents had good feelings about Kerry but they won’t vote for him.

The demographics of the sample was they were mostly white, republican, between 45 and 64, and had some college.

I’m not an expert but even though the sample would vote for Bush over Kerry because of one issue, I think the results show Kerry has the advantage. If voters balance their fears with the reason they are voting in the first place, Kerry could come out on top. You vote to pass judgement on how the current occupant of the White House is doing his/her job overall.

The poll results show that the sample would fail Bush on that overall evaluation. And THAT is how we should vote on November 2nd.

Posted on

Desparate Bush looks for support in Findlay

President George Bush is a desperate man. Sen. John Kerry is nipping at his heels as the race for the White House steams to a conclusion. His ads have gone very negative. Republicans believe that name calling is a valid campaign tactic.

So what does one do to buck up a campaign in trouble? You hold a rally in a Republican strong hold like Findlay.

Bush landed Wednesday afternoon at the Findlay Municipal Airport in a smaller version of Air Force One and went to the rally held at the Hancock County Fairgrounds.

Surrounded by a partisan crowd of 15,000, shipped in for the photo op, Bush took off his jacket and spoke to the crowd.

It really doesn’t matter what he said because it was just a stump speech to those who plan to vote for him any way.

The site of the rally was at the South Grandstand, used during the county fair for truck pulls, the demolition derby, and musical groups like Phil Dirt and Dozers. There is also a track that use to be used for harness racing. The track was regraded, the light polls taken down (don’t really know why) and extra bleachers brought in on flatbed trailers. Those were the seats for the “crowd” seen behind Bush in the videos and photos.

Introducing the President was Democrat turn coat Sen. Zell Miller. That was an odd choice because the Democratic Party is a non-factor in Hancock County. George wasted Miller’s appearance.

According to the local paper The Courier:

There did not appear to be any John Kerry supporters in the crowd at the rally, and according to one report, they were refused admittance.

Because the rally was held on private property — at the Hancock County Fairgrounds — the Republican Party could legally deny admittance to anyone with Kerry signs or shirts.

That has been the common agenda of the Bush Campaign. Holding campaign rallies and only allowing loyal party members to attend. That way Bush can’t be challenged with signs or protests from those against him.

And except for the staging, the county taxpayers picked up the bill.

Originally posted on the blog “Hancock County Politics Unfiltered”

Posted on

Study shows that Bush supporters suppress awareness of unsettling information

Kevin Anderson is keeping an US election blog for the BBC Online website.

One entry from Sunday might be of interest to those here who believe that Bush supporters are off their gourd. A study was done that shows that maybe true.

The Program on International Policy Attitudes complied a study titled: The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters and here are some clips.

The text is from Anderson’s report:

In light of reports over the past few months from the Senate Intelligence Committee and the heads of the Iraq Survey Group, David Kay and Charles Duelfer, the pollsters asked Bush and Kerry supporters what these reports said about weapons of mass destruction in pre-war Iraq.

Findings in the Duelfer report say that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction before the war, yet 56% of President Bush supporters still believe that most experts say that Iraq did indeed have WMD before the war.

But, amongst John Kerry supporters, 56% believe that most experts thought Iraq did not have WMD.

A majority of both Bush and Kerry supporters believe that if the US had known that Iraq had no WMD, then the US should not have gone to war. The figures being 58% of Bush supporters and 92% of Kerry supporters.

The president’s supporters also believe the he has widespread backing for going to war in Iraq.

I might argue that a lot of people outside of Washington don’t pay as much attention to these things as we do here, even though they are on issues as important as war and terrorism.

But the study’s authors say: “Apparently, to avoid this cognitive dissonance, Bush supporters suppress awareness of unsettling information.”

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/Report10_21_04.pdf
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3949543.stm
About Proudly powered by WordPress