Or should it be marked down to stupidity, incompetence, arrogance, living in a fantasy world, or something less incriminating?
2006-12-08 07:43:31 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I'm not a big fan of the Shrub, but in this case it's hard to say he was lying. Whistling past the graveyard is about as far as it goes.
The famous malaprop artist Yogi Berra once said, "Prediction is always hard, especially when it's about the future." Predicting the outcome of an election, even when the signs were so clear before this one, is always a horse race. Remember the famous picture of newly-elected President Harry Truman holding up a newspaper with the headline, "Dewey Defeats Truman"?
I might be convinced that it's at least partly due to his tendency to live in a fantasy world ("Mission Accomplished," "They'll meet our troops with flowers," and so many more), as you suggest. He may genuinely have BELIEVED that the GOP would retain a majority after the election. In that case, it's no more a lie than a die-hard Trojan fan declaring that USC would beat UCLA.
But no, I don't think this was an outright lie. Not even close to the same league as "I have not engaged in any wiretapping activity without warrants," or "If anyone in my administration was involved in leaking the name of a covert CIA agent to the press, that person will be fired." Those are flat, bald-faced, no-bones-about-it lies -- get the difference?
2006-12-08 08:00:00 · answer #1 · answered by Scott F 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
a lie: a statemant meant to deceive? Was he trying to deceive or just wishful thinking? Should Pres. Clinton when the Dems lost the congress to the Rep. in the 90s have said before the elections that the Dems where going to lose? Of course not, and anyone thinking a Pres. should could be marked down to stupidity, incompetence, arrogance, or living in a fantasy world.
2006-12-08 07:50:23 · answer #2 · answered by David 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, Bush honestly believed Rove when they thought they'd hold the Congress.
You see, every exit poll had Kerry winning in 2004. However, Rove's polling showed otherwise, and Rove and Bush believed in Rove's polling.
Same polling took place, Rove saw good numbers, and in fact, believed in them so much that he planned to launch a committee to explore why conventional polling by Zogby, etc. were wrong and he was right.
Well, one out of two ain't bad.
So, no, not lying. Honest mistake is more like it.
2006-12-08 07:56:12 · answer #3 · answered by Prakash V 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Theres such a thing as an honest mistake, also political hyperbole, the kind of thing you don't take seriously. Not a lie, a mistake. Another mistake. Kind of like predicting in April who's going to take the Series in October.
2006-12-08 07:46:38 · answer #4 · answered by jxt299 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush is always lying. From the fish he claimed he cuaght to the WMDs he's a born liar!
2006-12-08 07:59:42 · answer #5 · answered by Edward K 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, Bush can't be nailed for this one, he was just voicing his opinion, and he was wrong again.
2006-12-08 08:03:56 · answer #6 · answered by WC 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If his lips are moving, then the words are untrue. Intent is another issue.
2006-12-08 07:45:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
It was wishful thinking.
2006-12-08 07:45:23 · answer #8 · answered by Leah 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The only thing he knows how to do is lie.And he's not even good at THAT.
2006-12-08 07:47:50 · answer #9 · answered by festeringhump 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋