Last night I heard some Democrat flack claim that the current economy is the worst since Herbert Hoover.

Are people so historically ignorant that this kind of stuff is effective? For me, it's totally counterproductive, and just makes me want to see Kerry, and all Dems lose all the more.

Heh. The Dem is probably just that ignorant.

According to Democratic party flacks, Republican president = worst economy since Hoover.

The moron is proabally too young to remember stagflation.

It probably is worse than Hoover's time. There are fewer Americans making vacuum tube radios now than there were in 1932

and rotary telephones

and delivering western union telegrams

and shoveling coal into railroad engines

Herbert Hoover-- didn't he invent the vacuum cleaner? Shouldn't they have named the dam after the guy who invented the washing machine instead?

(It woudldn't be a Dem presidential campaign without them running against Herbert Hoover's record. Just another example of how the Dems are the reactionary part of the past.)

The saddest part of this whole discussion is that, since the liberal Democrats control the teachers (and therefore, the schools), this kind of brain damage is becoming all too normal. Revisionist history is rampant, and an increasingly liberal philosophy is taught as standard curriculum in most public schools.

So the short answer is, yes, these people are ignorant, but the greater tragedy is that their vote still counts as much as yours and mine.

The Bush team should go on the offensive and say something like that everyone is so rich that they only need one spouse to work now. The economy is really good now. Bush mostly gets dumb luck credit for that being true, but it is amazing that the conventional wisdom is that it's bad. It may no longer be "the economy, stupid."

People don't elect presidents based on facts, issues, or policy. Trust, confidence, and believability take precedence. (If you don't believe a president, why would you give credence to one of his policy positions?)

The country is, again, split down the middle in terms of our trust and confidence in the two candidates. Sadly, many people are so ideological about their choice that they attribute the opposition's choice to ignorance and stupidity, if not deliberate conspiracy.

We see it every day in blogs, where the politcal discourse has fallen to Slashdot levels.

So it the perception, stupid?

You ever notice you need to take a test to drive a car, but any moron can drive a country?

Really, it's the schools... soon we'll only have Islamic teachers and little billy will be learning the correct way to strap on a suicide belt.

Recruiting in our prisons. Recruiting in our schools. Are we just plain stupid???

Of course, Mr.Anthony, it is the perception. You didn't really think Americans actually read those position papers?

In any case, if you don't believe a candidate, what sense does it make to worry about their position on an issue? Odds are, he's lieing.

Most voters understand that positions on issues are irrelevant unless a President can actually lead the country. If a President does not inspire confidence and trust, if people do not believe him, then he will not lead.

geesch.... it's a good thing the Republicans never say anything stupid...