For some reason, in the face of overwhelming evidence Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq either had or could develop WMD. Where was Iraq keeping them? Is there a lonely sand dune somewhere out there where WMD and/or a major weapons program hide? C’mon. The WMD are not there. The haven’t been there for a long, long time. There was no program. There was no threat.
Again, in the face of the evidence, Bush supporters believe that the sky is a different color. Why? Apparently because Bush keeps telling them it’s so:
[…]Large majorities of Bush and Kerry supporters agree that the Bush administration is saying that Iraq had WMD and was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. In regard to WMD, these
majorities are growing.
So why are Bush supporters clinging so tightly to these beliefs in the face of repeated disconfirmations? Apparently one key reason is that they continue to hear the Bush administration confirming these beliefs.
The Decision to Go to War
[…]Another key reason why Bush supporters may hold to the beliefs that Iraq had WMD and supported al Qaeda is that it is necessary to their support for the decision to go to war with Iraq. Eighty-five percent of Bush supporters say that going to war was the right decision. However, asked what the US should have done “If, before the war, US intelligence services had concluded that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction and was not providing substantial support to al Qaeda,†58% of Bush supporters said in that case the US should not have gone to war.
In another case of logic that makes my brain hurt, Bush supporters apparently find it necessary to believe that WMD are there and Iraq was involved in 9/11 simply because we are now involved in a war that otherwise would not be supportable. This is a pretty extreme case of denial.
World Public Opinion on the Iraq War and George Bush’s Reelection:
[…]Only three in ten Bush supporters believe that the majority of people in the world oppose the US going to war with Iraq, while an overwhelming majority of Kerry supporters have this view. A majority of Bush supporters assume that the majority of people in the world would like to see Bush reelected, while a large majority of Kerry supporters believe the opposite. Bush supporters also lean toward overestimating support in Islamic countries for US-led efforts to fight terrorism, while Kerry supporters do not.
[…]International polls have found a strong preference for Kerry. Polling conducted by GlobeScan and PIPA (summer 2004) of 35 of the major countries around the world found that in 30 countries a majority or plurality preferred to see Kerry elected president, while 3 countries favored Bush.
[…]Between summer 2002 and February 2004, the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Survey polled a number of countries with large Islamic populations—some of them three times—asking whether people favor or oppose “the US-led efforts to fight terrorism.†The four countries asked in 2004 (Turkey, Pakistan, Jordan, and Morocco) all had majorities in opposition.
So, again, Kerry supports have a much better grasp on the opinions of the rest of the world. Bush supporters put on their blindfolds (over rose colored glasses?) and assume that everyone loves their candidate as much as they do. In my opinion, it seems that assuming that the world wants us to lead “the effort to fight terrorism” is the worst sort of imperialism.
Candidates’ Foreign Policy Positions:
[…]Majorities of Bush supporters misperceive his positions on a range of foreign policy issues. In particular they assume he supports multilateral approaches and addressing global warming when he has taken strong contrary positions on issues such as the International Criminal court and the Kyoto Agreement. A majority of Kerry supporters have accurate perceptions of Kerry positions on the same issues.
[…]In all these cases, there is a recurring theme: majorities of Bush supporters favor these positions, and they infer that Bush favors them as well. For example, in PIPA’s September 8 – 12 poll 54% of Bush supporters favored participation in Kyoto, 66% favored participation in the land mines treaty, and 68% favored a treaty prohibiting testing nuclear weapons (CTBT). Apparently in the absence of evidence to the contrary, Bush supporters assume Bush feels as they do.
[…]Kerry supporters were much more accurate in assessing their candidate’s positions on all these
issues.
OK. I find this really scary. Instead of checking to see what your candidate’s views actually are, you simply assume they believe what you believe because… why? You like the guy? He’s the same religion? He’s the same political party? What???
This seems so strange to me that I’m recreating the table below showing the percentage of supporters of each candidate who correctly perceived their candidate’s position on various foreign policy issues:
| Issue |
Bush’s position |
Bush Supporters Correctly perceiving Bush position |
Kerry’s position |
Kerry Supporters Correctly Perceiving Kerry Position |
| Labor & Environmental standards in trade agreements |
Opposes |
13 % |
Supports |
81 % |
| Participation in land mines treaty |
Opposes |
20 % |
Supports |
79 % |
| Participation in a treaty that bans the testing of nuclear weapons |
Opposes |
24 % |
Supports |
77 % |
| Participation in the International Criminal Court |
Opposes |
38 % |
Supports * |
65 % |
| Participation in Kyoto agreement on global warming |
Opposes |
39 % |
Supports * |
74 % |
| Building a missile defense system |
Build now |
47 % |
Research only |
68 % |
| Defense spending |
Expand |
57 % |
Keep same |
43 % |
| Who should take the lead in Iraq on writing a new Constitution and building a democratic government |
US |
70 % |
UN |
88 % |
| * Supports in principle but wants to negotiate terms for US involvement
|
See how scary this is? In most cases less than 40% of Bush supporters know what his position is. In only two cases, defense spending and the new Iraqi government, do more than half know. On the other hand, in most cases better than 75% of Kerry supporters know what his position is. Only once (defense spending) does it fall below 50%, and even then it’s better than the majority of the Bush supporters.
The study’s conclusion:
[…]Bush appears to assume that his support is fragile. He refuses to admit to making any mistakes. He admits that he was surprised that WMD were not found, but does not say that the most reasonable conclusion is that they were never there and continues to talk about “disarming†Iraq. He asserts that he never said that Iraq was directly involved in 9/11, but maintains that there were contacts with al Qaeda in a way that implies that they were significant. Most telling, his supporters as well as his opponents overwhelmingly say that they hear him still saying that Iraq had WMD and supported al Qaeda. To remain loyal and bonded to him means to enter into this false reality.
Bush may be right. Admitting his mistakes may shatter his idealized image in a way that some supporters may not forgive. But there also risks in succeeding in getting elected based on false beliefs. The number of people in the public who see through the illusion will likely continue to grow, eating away at the implied mandate of an election. Further, the cohesion of society can be damaged by a persisting and fundamental division in the perception of what is real, undermining pathways to consensus and mutual sacrifice, and making the country increasingly difficult to govern.
What ever happened to finding out what a candidate’s platform is before deciding whether or not to vote for him/her?
What color is your sky?
Time for Bush to be defeated. Vote for Kerry. Vote for truth.
« Hide It
