|
Study: Fear shapes voters' views
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LiquidX |
Bingo Bush, so much ranting about Terrorism and fear.. sadly he uses this approaches to get te americans to vote.
| quote: | Study: Fear shapes voters' views
Responses to candidates differ after thinking about tragedy
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President George W. Bush may be tapping into solid human psychology when he invokes the September 11 attacks while campaigning for the next election, U.S. researchers said on Thursday.
Talking about death can raise people's need for psychological security, the researchers report in studies to be published in the December issue of the journal Psychological Science and the September issue of the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
"There are people all over who are claiming every time Bush is in trouble he generates fear by declaring an imminent threat," said Sheldon Solomon of Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, New York, who worked on the study.
"We are saying this is psychologically useful," said Solomon.
Jeff Greenberg, a professor of psychology at the University of Arizona in Tucson, said generating fear was a common tactic.
"A lot of leaders gain their appeal by helping people feel they are heroic, particularly in a fight against evil," Greenberg said in a telephone interview from Hawaii, where he presented the findings to a meeting of the American Psychological Association.
"Sometimes that may be the right thing to do. But it is a psychological approach, particularly when death is close to peoples' consciousness."
For their first study, Solomon, Greenberg and colleagues asked students to think about either their own death or a neutral topic.
They then read the campaign statements of three hypothetical candidates for governor, each with a different leadership style. One was charismatic, said Solomon.
"That was a person who declared our country to be great and the people in it to be special," Solomon, who worked on the study, said in a telephone interview.
The others were task-oriented -- focusing on the job to be done -- or relationship-oriented -- with a "let's get it done together" style, Solomon said.
Fearing doom, choosing charisma
The students who thought about death were much more likely to choose the charismatic leader, they found. Only four out of about 100 chose that imaginary leader when thinking about exams, but 30 did after thinking about death.
Greenberg, Solomon and colleagues then decided to test the idea further and set up four separate studies at different universities.
"In one we asked half the people to think about the September 11 attacks, or to think about watching TV," Solomon said. "What we found was staggering."
When asked to think about television, the 100 or so volunteers did not approve of Bush or his policies in Iraq. But when asked to think about Sept. 11 first and then asked about their attitudes to Bush, another 100 volunteers had very different reactions.
"They had a very strong approval of President Bush and his policy in Iraq," Solomon said.
Solomon, a social psychologist who specializes in terrorism, said it was very rare for a person's opinions to differ so strongly depending on the situation.
Another study focused directly on Bush and his Democratic challenger, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry.
The volunteers were aged from 18 into their 50s and described themselves as ranging from liberal to deeply conservative. No matter what a person's political conviction, thinking about death made them tend to favor Bush, Solomon said. Otherwise, they preferred Kerry.
"I think this should concern anybody," Solomon said. "If I was speaking lightly, I would say that people in their, quote, right minds, unquote, don't care much for President Bush and his policies in Iraq."
He wants voters to be aware of psychological pressures and how they are used.
"If people are aware that thinking about death makes them act differently, then they don't act differently," Solomon said. Solomon says he personally opposes Bush but describes himself as a political independent who could vote Republican.
Copyright 2004 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. |
|
|
|
| NYCTrancefan |
| That has been my concern all along. I heard one guy on the other day in Pennsylvania saying "I fear what is going to happen at the hands of the terrorists if we elect John Kerry thus I'm voting for Bush" mind you he is a registered Republican when asked. I just hope that the swingvoters don't fall for this fearmongering nonsense that has engulfed parts of our nation. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
And to think of Bush using our fear for political reasons! How dare you speak of such blasphemy!
Let's see, just this summer alone we were under a terrorist threat according to Ashcroft, but for some reason it escaped the Homeland Security office of Tom Ridge. Turned out to be unverified and speculative accounts, which was why Ridge didn't hear crap about it.
Then we have the seemingly perfect timing of an arrest of a Kenyan Bombing suspect announced on Thursday, July 30, coincidently on the same day as Kerry's acceptance speech, even though the suspect was arrested on Sunday, 4 days prior. A pakistani official stated that they had a coordination of timing with US officials as to when to announce it. Gee, I wonder why?:
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3804205
(listen to audio)
And now we have yet another threat on our hands, which turns out the intelligence came from retrieved documents, and individuals from Pakistan, indicating there was Al Qaeda surveillance on those given buildings at some point in the past.
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3809463
Why am I not surprised that this too might also be exaggerated?
That damn fear factor thingy, I suppose. Go Bush! |
|
|
| tupsox |
| Ah, more people who yearn to return to the world of Sept. 10. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by NYCTrancefan
That has been my concern all along. I heard one guy on the other day in Pennsylvania saying "I fear what is going to happen at the hands of the terrorists if we elect John Kerry thus I'm voting for Bush" mind you he is a registered Republican when asked. I just hope that the swingvoters don't fall for this fearmongering nonsense that has engulfed parts of our nation. |
Well you can tell that guy that Al Qaeda would much rather have Bush in the office:
| quote: | Purported al Qaeda letter calls truce in Spain
By Opheera McDoom
CAIRO (Reuters) - A group claiming to have links with al Qaeda says it is calling a truce in its Spanish operations to see if the new Madrid government would withdraw its troops from Iraq, a pan-Arab newspaper says.
In a statement sent to the Arabic language daily al-Hayat, the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, which claimed responsibility for the Madrid bombings that killed 201 people, also urged its European units to stop all operations.
"Because of this decision, the leadership has decided to stop all operations within the Spanish territories... until we know the intentions of the new government that has promised to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq," the statement said.
"And we repeat this to all the brigades present in European lands: Stop all operations."
Scepticism has greeted previous claims of responsibility by the group for attacks in Turkey and Iraq. U.S. officials say its links with Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network are unclear.
An unrelated videotape of a man describing himself as al Qaeda's European military spokesman also claimed responsibility for the Madrid bombing, saying it was in retaliation for outgoing Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar's domestically-unpopular support for the U.S.-led Iraq war.
In a shock election result three days after the Madrid bombs, Spain voted in the Socialist party, which has since said it will probably withdraw its troops from Iraq.
"The Spanish people... chose peace by choosing the party that was against the alliance with America," the statement said.
WE WANT BUSH TO WIN
The statement said it supported U.S. President George W. Bush in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry, as it was not possible to find a leader "more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."
In comments addressed to Bush, the group said:
"Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilisation."
"Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected."
The group said its cells were ready for another attack and time was running out for allies of the United States.
"Whose turn is it next? Will it be Japan or America, or Italy, Britain or Oslo or Australia?" the statement said, adding Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were also targets.
The group is named after Muhammed Atef, also known as Abu Hafs, a close bin Laden aide killed in the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040317/325/eotq9.html |
Considering Powell had to correct himself about terrorism actually rising over the past year, and considering the fact that Bush has done nothing but really give free advertisement for those thinkin' about joining Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations, I hardly think we're a whole lot safer now than we were 4 yrs. ago. |
|
|
| tupsox |
Ah, a Reuters release by Opheera McDoom from Cairo...
No potential for bias here.
Its a pretty incoherent letter actually. A few points.
1) "who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom"...this coming from a terrorist organization, targeting civilians to influence elections?
2) These London Arab newspapers get all sorts of letters from all sorts of groups claiming to have "ties" to Al Qaida. Who the heck are the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades?
3) Opheera McDoom? |
|
|
| tupsox |
| One also wonders if they merely translated "hudna" to "truce", which would of course be leaving out some of the story now wouldnt it? |
|
|
| tupsox |
| "Hi, I'm John F*cking Kerry, I served in Vietnam and will kill your nation while it sleeps, and I'm reporting for duty! |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by tupsox
"Hi, I'm John F*cking Kerry, I served in Vietnam and will kill your nation while it sleeps, and I'm reporting for duty! |
"Hi, I'm George A-ing-WOL Bush, I DIDN'T serve in Vietnam; in fact I specifically requested NOT to serve in Vietnam; in fact I'm not sure how I got into the Texas Air National Guard in the first place considering I scored in the 25th percentile on my entrance exams; in fact I really cannot account for at least 3 months of my time in the Guard in the first place on account of my archived records were somehow moved from Missouri and into the Pentagon (locked tight, thank you very much), and then I kinda locked up the copies of my Guard service records in Austin, Texas, and it seems the only way anyone will see them is through a Freedom of Information Act, which unfortunately is pending on my ass now; and I will send your wives, husbands, sons, daughters, and friends off to a war based on false premises on which I completely and blatantly ignored any and all counter-intelligence against those premises, and I will give a big " YOU" to anyone who originally thought we needed more troops to get the job done, only to find out how ing wrong I was not to listen to them, and then I'll give a big "WE DON'T NEED NO STINKIN' POST-WAR PLAN!" to anyone who thinks that kind of foresight is necessary in MY ING OFFICE, only to realize that those critics actually used 1/2 a cranium to understand the ing mess we would be in now, and I'll keep my "Go yourself"-VP on with all his ridden-with-scandals-Halliburton ass so he can soak up some more criticism about privitization ing the tax payer out of, ah hell what's it now, over a billion ing dollars due to overpricing this war?
AND I'M REPORTING FOR DUTY TO YOUR COUNTRY FOR ANOTHER ING 4 MORE YEARS! BRING 'EM ON, BITCHES!
You think this flight suit looks good on me? Boy I sure do. I wonder if my Stepford wife will like it too? ! |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
Hey, look at that, another ing scare alert on questionable data!
Hey, you really don't suppose our beloved ing Administration and all their honesty would be using these alerts for their own political purposes now, would you?
That would just be waaaay too uncharacteristic of these guys, wouldn't it?
| quote: | Pre-9/11 Acts Led To Alerts
Officials Not Sure Al Qaeda Continued To Spy on Buildings
By Dan Eggen and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, August 3, 2004; Page A01
Most of the al Qaeda surveillance of five financial institutions that led to a new terrorism alert Sunday was conducted before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and authorities are not sure whether the casing of the buildings has continued, numerous intelligence and law enforcement officials said yesterday.
More than half a dozen government officials interviewed yesterday, who declined to be identified because classified information is involved, said that most, if not all, of the information about the buildings seized by authorities in a raid in Pakistan last week was about three years old, and possibly older.
"There is nothing right now that we're hearing that is new," said one senior law enforcement official who was briefed on the alert. "Why did we go to this level? . . . I still don't know that."
One piece of information on one building, which intelligence officials would not name, appears to have been updated in a computer file as late as January 2004, according to a senior intelligence official. But officials could not say yesterday whether that piece of data was the result of active surveillance by al Qaeda or came instead from information about the buildings that is publicly available.
Many administration officials stressed yesterday that even three-year-old intelligence, when coupled with other information about al Qaeda's plans to attack the United States, justified the massive security response in the three cities. Police and other security teams have been assigned to provide extra protection for the surveilled buildings, identified as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank headquarters in Washington; the New York Stock Exchange and Citigroup Center in New York; and the Prudential Financial building in Newark.
Intelligence officials said that the remarkably detailed information about the surveillance -- which included logs of pedestrian traffic and notes on the types of explosives that might work best against each target -- was evaluated in light of general intelligence reports received this summer indicating that al Qaeda hopes to strike a U.S. target before the November presidential elections.
Several officials also said that much of the information compiled by terrorist operatives about the buildings in Washington, New York and Newark was obtained through the Internet or other "open sources" available to the general public, including some floor plans.
The characterization of the age of the intelligence yesterday cast a new light on Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge's announcement Sunday that the terrorism threat alert for the financial services sectors in the three cities had been raised. Ridge and other officials stressed Sunday the urgency of acting on the newly obtained information, but yesterday a range of officials made clear how dated much of the intelligence was.
One senior intelligence official said the information is still being evaluated.
A number of other buildings were mentioned in the seized computer files, but only in vague references, so officials decided not to issue alerts about them, an intelligence official said. They included the Bank of America building in San Francisco; the Nasdaq and American Stock Exchange buildings in New York, as well as two other sites in that city; and an undisclosed building in Washington and another in New Jersey.
"We chose not to release it because we decided they weren't anywhere near the same level of danger as the others," the official said.
President Bush and Vice President Cheney said in separate appearances yesterday that the new alert underscores the continuing threat posed by al Qaeda. At a news conference announcing his proposed intelligence reforms, Bush said the alert shows "there's an enemy which hates what we stand for."
"It's serious business," Bush said. "I mean, we wouldn't be, you know, contacting authorities at the local level unless something was real."
Employees at announced targets in New York and New Jersey arrived at work yesterday with a mix of defiance and jitters. Some said they wanted to send a message that terrorists could not deter them from living their lives as usual. Others were visibly shaken by the presence of heavily armed police officers and new barricades.
At the New York Stock Exchange, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg rang the opening bell. Exchange chief executive John A. Thain and Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) greeted arriving workers. "I wouldn't be surprised if attendance weren't higher today," Schumer said. "We are winning the war of nerves."
Much of the information about the targeted buildings is contained on a laptop computer and computer disks recovered during recent raids in Pakistan. A senior intelligence official said the cache also includes about 500 photographs, diagrams and drawings, some of them digital.
Two senior intelligence officials who briefed reporters on Sunday said the material showed al Qaeda operatives had cased the buildings both before and after the Sept. 11 attacks.
"I think the indications are that this has been a very longstanding effort on the part of al Qaeda," one official said Sunday, "that it dates from before 9/11, it continued after 9/11 and based on what it is that we are concerned about, we know about in terms of al Qaeda's plans and intentions that it probably continues even today."
Speaking about the five buildings, one official said, "I believe that since 9/11 they have been able to acquire additional information on these targets here in the United States, yes, I do."
Numerous officials said yesterday, however, that most of the information was compiled prior to the Sept. 11 attacks and that there are serious doubts about the age of other, undated files. One senior counterterrorism official said many of the documents include dates prior to Sept. 11, 2001, but there are no dates after that.
"Most of the information is very dated but you clearly have targets with enough specificity, and that pushed it over the edge," the counterterrorism official said. "You've got the Republican convention coming up, the Olympics, the elections. . . . I think there was a feeling that we should err on the side of caution even if it's not clear that anything is new."
One federal law enforcement source said his understanding from reviewing the reports was that the material predated Sept. 11 and included photos that can be obtained from brochures and some actual snapshots. There also were some interior diagrams that appear to be publicly available.
Other officials also stressed that, however long ago al Qaeda operatives compiled the surveillance details, the information was new to U.S. intelligence agencies and was almost unprecedented in the depth of its details. "All this stuff was fresh to us," one official said.
At the CIA's daily 5 p.m. counterterrorism meeting Thursday, the first information about the detailed al Qaeda surveillance of the five financial buildings was discussed among senior CIA, FBI and military officials. They decided to launch a number of worldwide operations, including the deployment of increased law enforcement around the five buildings.
A senior intelligence official said translations of the computer documents and other intelligence started arriving on Friday. "We worked on it late, and through that night," he said. "We had very specific, credible information, and when we laid it in on the threat environment we're in," officials decided they had to announce it.
"It's not known whether the plot was active and ongoing," the official added. "It could have been planned for tomorrow, or it could have been scrapped. Maybe there were other iterations of it. In this environment, this was seen as pertinent information to get out to the public. There was discussion over the weekend, should we wait until Monday?"
Initially, top administration officials had decided to wait until yesterday to announce the alert, but more intelligence information was coming in -- both new translations of the documents, and analysis of other sources' statements -- that deepened their concern about the information, and persuaded them to move ahead swiftly. "There was a serious sense of urgency to get it out," the senior intelligence official said.
On Saturday, officials from the CIA, the FBI, the Homeland Security and Justice departments, the White House, and other agencies agreed with Ridge to recommend that the financial sectors in New York, Washington and North Jersey be placed on orange, or "high," alert. Ridge made the recommendation to Bush on Sunday morning, and Bush signed off on it at 10 a.m.
In a signal of how seriously the administration took the information, officials briefed senior media executives, including network anchors, before a Sunday news conference and briefing for reporters.
In New York yesterday, traffic backed up at tunnels and bridges into the city, Hercules and Atlas police teams toting rifles and machine guns checked vehicles, police helicopters crisscrossed the skies, and employees throughout the financial district stood in long security queues, showing their corporate identifications and bags to guards.
Around the NYSE in Lower Manhattan, rows of concrete and metal barricades were in place and side streets were blocked off.
In Newark, officials set up concrete barriers and police teams around the 24-story Prudential building, where about 1,000 employees work. "I'm a little nervous," analyst Tracy Swistak, 27, told the Associated Press. "But I'm confident Prudential's doing everything they can to ensure our safety."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...6-2004Aug2.html |
This is just ing stupid. They pick up intelligence over 3 yrs. old, granted one piece was updated to Jan. of this year, they throw everyone in a big scare, raise the cute little color code 2 notches, as if that's supposed to be helpful to the common citizen, yet they have absolutely NO information on whether this information is even plausible at present?
Why the color codes? Why not just add extra security to those buildings as needed? Why throw the ing country into yet another "TERRORIST ALERT!!!!!!" when they have no confirmation on this dated intelligence whatsoever, let alone a time as when those pesky little terrorists are supposed to strike?
I call complete "BULL!" on my government for this.
I especially loved Faux News on Sunday. We were flipping around and noticed Faux guidelines for people around those selected cities and cites of terrorist targets. There were 3 things for all citizens to watch out for. I forget the first one, but
#2 - Watch out for suspicious looking individuals taking pictures of well-known buildings and monuments
#3 - Watch out for suspicious looking individuals asking for directions and appearing lost
I'm not making this up. So I just have to say, umm, Mr. Murdoch, ARE YOU ING SERIOUS YOU STUPID, ING, PARANOID, ORWELLIAN, ULTRA-CONSERVATIVE FREAK?!?!?!?!?
How ing ridiculous are those 2 guidelines? How many people take pictures of buildings and monuments around New York?!? How many people get lost and need directions in New York?!? I really do feel sorry for anyone who takes Faux seriously.
Boy, that's my Faux. Thank you so much for keeping me alert. I wouldn't have slept well had it not been for Faux keeping me on the ball. |
|
|
| tupsox |
The Bush admin issues alerts when they have evidence, and theyre scaremongering.
The Bush admin doesn't issue alerts and attacks happen, then theyre asleep at the switch.
Is there any way for them to win with you? |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by tupsox
The Bush admin issues alerts when they have evidence, and theyre scaremongering. |
Which has been evidenced so far, esp. this one and the last one in late May (from which Ridge had to come out and admit embarrassingly that Ashcroft had no intelligence to cite for his alert). Funny how that one came out immediately after Bush's lowest ratings in his presidency so far. Just gotta love those coincidinks!
C'mon now, you remember, don't cha? Look out for those European-looking fellas here in the States that might be Al-Qaeda? Wasn't that a hoot! Just curious, but did you happen to find any suspicious-lookin' folks that fit the description back then? I hope you did your duty and reported them!
| quote: | | The Bush admin doesn't issue alerts and attacks happen, then theyre asleep at the switch. |
What ing good do these alerts really do for the public? Are you prepared to watch out for folks with turbins on their heads taking pictures of buildings or asking directions?
I hope so - please report them immediately to 1-800-faux-sux
Ahh, fantastic right-wing slant on my statements. Congratulations Mr. Rove. A splendid job deliberately confusing my argument. So for you slow-minded conservatives, allow me to clarify:
Bush was most certainly asleep at the switch prior to 9/11. Of course, the same argument could be made for Clinton, but let's keep focus on the president at hand. Bush was given evidence of attacks, given warnings that attacks were imminent, yet chose to ignore them (as did Cheney, Rice, and Ashcroft - he really was serious about terrorism considering how many millions he wanted to slash from the counterterrorism budget?).
Oh yeah, I keep forgetting, what President was it that originally decided against the creation of Homeland Security? Just one guess will do, sir.
And you conservatives coin Kerry as a flip-flopper?
Now I think we all here in Romper Room can understand the difference between Bush being asleep at the switch here, and mastering heightened alert status for political gain, which is seemingly apparent now. Hey, I like a campaign pushing-message as much as the next guy, but how many ing times did I hear Ridge explain how wonderful Bush's leadership is when he was giving out these terror alerts?
| quote: | | Is there any way for them to win with you? |
Oh, I suppose a little truth-telling every now and then wouldn't hurt.
But hey Mr. Rove, I can't blame you for at least wanting to politicize this war on terrorism, even though you and your bitch Bush stated in the past that you wouldn't be doing that:
This:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/poli...ove_020118.html
From this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1778681.stm
| quote: | | "I have no ambition whatsoever to use [national security] as a political issue." |
Ooh, or how 'bout Senate Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Richard Shelby (R-AL). Asked if his party should use the war for political gain he responded, "Absolutely not. And as a Republican, I would deplore such tactics. I think that what we've got to do in a bipartisan way, as Americans, is win this war."
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0203/04/cf.00.html |
|
|
|
|
