Support
Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!
Contact
Top Headlines
Etymologies: hussy and gussy
Hussy was just originally a slurred/shortened version of housewife, that meant only that. But, you know, all words for women are eventually given some venom and vinegar. My guess is that insults like "dirty hussy" and "cheap hussy" were tossed around so much that the word just lost its original neutral meaning and now was only thought of in a derogatory way.
Gussy, as in "gussied up," is a recent invention, and either comes from 40s schoolyard slang for "overly dressed" which in turn might come from "gussie," meaning effeminate man or "foppish dandy,", starting around 1901 in Australia.
Apparently "jessie" is still used in Australia and England to mean "effeminate man.
Muldoon: A Last Limerick
NeverTrump hero Evan McMullin: Hillary Clinton is right, Tulsi is a Russian agent
Everyone who disagrees with the liberal DC consensus is a Russian, a Racist, or a Russian Racist.
Dancing in the Streets, No Music Silent Video Version
Really funny. It's old, but still funny.
Mitt Romney, who is America's number one geopolitical foe, claims Turkey is a "small country"
Kyle Sheideler responds that he is anti-Turkey and doesn't wish them to be a part of NATO, but Mitt Romney should stick to giving gay kids haircut rapes, because Turkey has the second largest army in all of NATO, after only the US. If that's "small," what would "big" be?
When I was in Beirut, I was surprised to learn that Arabs felt insecure because there was not a single Arab great power capable of doing much more than defend its own borders (if even that). No Arab powers-- not even in the Middle East? No, I was told by a professor. There are three great powers in the Middle East, but not a single one of them is Arab. One is Israel -- obviously not Arab. One is Iran. They're Persians. And one is Turkey, who are not Arabs but Turks.
Anyway, it's strange to hear Mitt Romney, America's Number One Geopolitical Foe, get something so absurdly wrong as to call Turkey, one of the three Great Powers of the Middle East, a "small country" that we don't need to pay no mind to.
Quick funny story from Tim Pool, explaining why social media "fact-checking" is trash -- it's because they rely on trash outlets, like CNN and MSNBC (and the SPLC and Snopes!), to decide what is true and what is not true, despite CNN and MSNBC being absurdly biased and wrong more often than right.
The quick story he tells (about a minute long) is about Wikipedia's insistence that he himself "invented a zeppelin" -- something some trash outlet made up. It's not derogatory -- who wouldn't want to be credited as a zeppelin inventor? -- but it's completely false and without even a some distorted factual basis.
But no matter how many times Pool tells them "I never invented any zeppelin, you should delete that," they keep the false zeppelin-inventing biographical point, because Tim Pool is not considered a "credible source" on Tim Pool's zeppelin-inventing career or lack of same.
HuffPo says you invented a zeppelin, and who are you compared to the warriors of truth we know as HuffPo?
PBS "News" Hour "journalist" is very, very angry that Trump... posted a respectful remembrance of Elijah Cummings?
Psst, little open secret: It's the Paul Ryan types who keep PBS and NPR funded. Everything for the Suburban Wine Moms.
Video about your eyes' and brain's own color-correction function -- in other words, explaining the "What Color Is This Dress?" controversy
Even if you remember the gist of the explanation about the blue-black or white-gold dress, this video is still sort of illuminating (pun intended)
They gimmicked up another case of colors looking different to different people. This video can help you see something in ambiguous lighting in two different ways.
By the way, it worked for me.
SJW Fascist: Let's ban children's Stormtrooper costumes Because Nazi and Because Trump
This is inspired by Ivanka Trump's son wearing the costume. Now it's #problematic and must be #cancelled.
Tim Pool: YouTube is suppressing all videos which mention James O'Keefe's sting videos, imposing Chinese-style speech restrictions to make James O'Keefe officially Unmentionable and erased from all public discussion
All hail our Social Media Monopoloy Overlords. Who just happen to be working to protect Legacy Media Overlords.
Tim Pool also notes in this video that Twitter is refusing to give primary challengers a Blue Check, which the incumbents already have, delivering a huge advantage to incumbents and a big disadvantage to challengers.
Recent Entries
Horrifying: Texas Jury Rules that Father Cannot Stop Ex-Wife From Sex-Changing Their Seven Year Old Son; Ruling Will Force Father to "Affirm" Child's Supposed "Gender Identity" and Refer to This Boy as a Girl
John Brennan Orders His Personal Stenographer, Natasha "Fusion Nat" Bertrand, to Write a Five-Alarm Scream Piece Decrying How Terrible It Is That the Architect of the Russia Hoax is Being (Gasped) Investigated
The Morning Rant: Minimalist Edition
Mid-Morning Art Thread
The Morning Report - 10/22/19
Monday Overnight Open Thread (10/21/19)
The Soyciety Pages
Etymologies of All the Old-Timey Synonyms For "Whore" Found in the Dungeon Masters Guide "Random Harlot Encounters" Table
Air Canada Will No Longer Address Passengers As "Ladies and Gentlemen," In Order to Respect the 0.1% of Mentally Unwell People Who Say They're Both, or Neither, or Maybe Unicorns
Mark Hemingway: Is the Anti-Trump "Resistance" Just the Attempt of the Ruling Class/Establishment/Managerial Class to Give Legitimacy to Their Worldview of Socially-Favored Fictions?
Recent Comments
Guy Mohawk: "[i]Where was Mueller the day before Rosenstein app ..." [view]

Cato, Collectivism Delenda Est: "75 And this is in Texas? Posted by: Mikey NTH - T ..." [view]

bicentennialguy: "I've heard she's a pediatrician. The mind, it ..." [view]

illiniwek : "child abuse, state approved ... can it go to SCOTU ..." [view]

mrp: "Let me see if I have this right ...  a teenag ..." [view]

x: "I hope I'm on Luna's jury when he offs his mom. He ..." [view]

Diogenes: "Words escape me. ..." [view]

krakatoa: "There is absolutely nothing I would not do to get ..." [view]

Cato, Collectivism Delenda Est: "Wouldn't surprise me if Boondock Saints doesn't be ..." [view]

steevy: "Crazy times ..." [view]

Mikey NTH - Transition from a Fugue to Enlightenment With an SJW Kit from the Outrage Outlet!: "And this is in Texas? ..." [view]

Trump poisoned my cat: ""467 R Congresscritters need to know that going al ..." [view]

trev006: "That poor kid. I can't imagine a Victorian era Bri ..." [view]

blaster: "Maybe this was in the content, but my guess is tha ..." [view]

LizLem: "Someone (paging David Mamet!) needs to update the ..." [view]

Search


Bloggers in Arms

Talk Of The Town with Steve Noxon
American Digest
The Anchoress
Belmont Club
Betsy's Page
The Bitch Girls
BizzyBlog
Blackfive, Paratrooper of Love
Blonde Sagacity
California Conservative
Chicago Boyz
Classical Values
Cold Fury
The Country Store
Cowboy Blob
Cranky Neocon
Da Goddess
Daily Lunch
Daily Pundit
The Daily Recycler (Vidblog)*
Daleks Weblog
Daly Thoughts
Ilyka Damen
Damn the Man
Dave Munger
Dave's Not Here
Dawn Eden
Day by Day (Cartoon)
DefenseTech
Demure Thoughts
EduWonk
Enter Stage Right
Eternity Road
Dean Esmay
The Fat Guy
File It Under
FloridaCracker
Ghost of a Flea
Grim's Hall
Hell in a Handbasket
Victor Davis Hanson
Hugh Hewitt
The House of Payne
IMAO
Instapundit
Iowahawk
JamieR (Classics)
JihadWatch
Just One Minute
Kausfiles
Le Sabot Post-Moderne
Lileks/The Bleat
Likelihood of Confusion Law Blog
Michelle Malkin
Memeorandum (Metablog) Mind of Mog
My Pet Jawa
Oh, That Liberal Media
Outside the Beltway
Patterico's Pontifications
The Perfect World (Discussion Forum)
The People's Cube
New Hampshire Review
Powerline
Protein Wisdom
The Pundit Guy
Q & O
RedState
Reliapundit
Riehl Worldview (Carnivorous Conservative)
Say Anything Blog
Scrappleface
Seraphic Press
Roger L. Simon
Six Meat Buffet
Slublog
Ten Fingers Six Strings
Traction Control/US Citizen
Two Crackas in My Soup
Twisted Spinster
An Unamplified Voice (Music/Opera)
Velociworld
Viking Pundit
The Wardrobe Door
White Pebble (Politics/Poetry)
Whitney Gaskell (Author)
Michael Williams/Master of None
WizBang
Faces From Ace's
The Rogues' Gallery.
Archives
Syndicate this site (XML)

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

ę Breaking the Embargo: NBCNews Reports Positively on the Economy | Main | Giving Them the Choice Ľ
June 04, 2004

Gallup: Political Polarization Over Bush Most Extreme in History

Very interesting stuff. Stuff we've all suspected, but it's nice to get objective numbers for it.

Highlights:

* The previously most-polarizing political figure was Bill Clinton, natch. But Bill Clinton's partisan gap (the difference between support from his partisans and support from those in the opposite party) was only 60 points in May 1996. Bush's partisan gap is 25% larger, over 70 points of difference.

[Yeah, I know, that doesn't seem like quite 25%. But this is what Gallup tells me.]

* Bush's 70+-point gap is not only unprecedented for May of a re-election year, but it is unprecedented for any point in a re-election year. No president, dating back to Harry Truman, has had a partisan gap above 70 points in any Gallup Poll in a re-election year.

* Prior to Bush, there were only a few times when a majority of one party's supporters strongly approved of a president while a majority of the other disapproved. For example, during the last years of Clinton's presidency, Gallup found a majority of Republicans strongly disapproving of him and a majority of Democrats strongly approving of him, but never did both groups simultaneously exceed 6 in 10. The closest the groups came to matching Bush's current pattern was in March 1999 -- shortly after the Senate acquitted Clinton in his impeachment trial -- when 57% of Republicans strongly disapproved and 73% of Democrats strongly approved of Clinton. This was one of four times (out of nine measurements for Clinton) when a majority of Republicans disapproved of him at the same time a majority of Democrats approved.

The only other time Gallup data find a majority of the two parties' supporters holding strong opposing views of the president was in October 1982, when 51% of Republicans strongly approved of Reagan and 54% of Democrats strongly disapproved.

* While the polarization in the current president's approval ratings is certainly remarkable, the fact that such a high proportion of either partisan group has such strong opinions is also rare. The only other president to have more than 60% of a partisan group disapproving of him was Richard Nixon in the year of his resignation, when 61% of Democrats strongly disapproved of him. At that time, Nixon had overall job approval ratings below 30%.

Presidents who have more than 60% of a partisan group approving of him are typically benefiting from a significant rally event, including: the elder Bush shortly after the Persian Gulf War (91% of Republicans as well as 65% of Democrats strongly approved); Clinton during the height of the impeachment process (a 79% strong approval rating among Democrats shortly after the Monica Lewinsky story broke); and the current president after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (87% of Republicans strongly approved of Bush in early October 2001).

Taken together, the data show that the current political environment is highly unusual. The country experienced a polarization only remotely similar during the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal years.

There are good reasons for this, I think.

There is Florida 2000, of course.

But there's also the fact that Bush has not been afraid to push his agenda hard, and the Democrats have been emboldened to resist just as hard, if not harder.

We all know what's going on: The Democrats have staked their political future -- their viability for 20 or more years -- on a disaster in Iraq and in the American economy. They have not been careful to half-support Bush's moves, so that they can take partial credit if good news comes. They have stridently opposed just about everything he's done, so that if there is good news, they will be discredited.

They cannot afford, at this point, for America to win in Iraq. Or for America's economy to recover.

The stakes of this election, then, are pushing both sides to historic levels of partisanship. But it's particularly vicious on the left, which has, of its own free will, set itself up so that it can only prosper politically should America be beset by misery and disaster.

In a way, I can't even blame the left anymore. They may have put themselves into this situation, but however they got there, they're in that situation now. They cannot under any circumstances afford for Bush to preside over the rapidly-growing, super-prosperous, Treasury-enriching 2005-2009 presidential term.

And if that means they need terrorist attacks, dead American bodies in Iraq, and Hoovervilles, so be it. They've got to pray for those things. They've left themselves little choice.

Even though they opposed the tax cuts which were partly responsible for the new prosperity, they can at least take credit if the economy grows like gangbusters under President John Kerry. It happened under my watch, he will say.

This is going to be a watershed election. The consequences of this election will be felt for 20 years.


posted by Ace at 08:25 PM