Moore's 9/11 si, Bush go home

[rmcrobertson]

A simple question about Moore's film and the election: since the movie's doing so well across the country, and doing well in both rural and urban areas, does this mean that George Bush is dead meat at the polls?

A related issue: for those of you who have a religious faith in capitalism, and who also believe that the freedom to compete and make money is the same thing as democracy, aren't you kinda stuck with a, "yes, absolutely," answer here?

[Feisty Mouse]

:boing2: I love your follow-up question.


I'm not sure. I'm hoping that some of people going to see the film are (or were?) Bush supporters, as well as Bush... non-supporters. I wonder how many people will have their perspectives changed or challenged by the film.

[Cruentus]

I say Yup...

Paul Janulis

[MisterMike]

I wouldn't equate people seeing the movie to those who WILL vote for Kerry.
Nor would I assume that they are all voters.

I don't know hat the last count was for tickets sold, but I think it was around $8M opening night. At 8 bucks a ticket, that's only a million people. Now take what fraction of that who will actually vote.

Not enough info to say really.

I would tend to agree that the view of this war will determine the election but the people going to this flick are not exactly "swing voters".

[RandomPhantom700]

I don't know hat the last count was for tickets sold, but I think it was around $8M opening night. At 8 bucks a ticket, that's only a million people. Now take what fraction of that who will actually vote.
Factor into that the fact that, with so many theatres strangely deciding not to play F911, there were probably quite a number of people (such as myself) who couldn't make the opening night showings. Or probably any at all. Don't know if that would make much of a difference, but it may be a factor.

[RandomPhantom700]

As for robertson's question, I don't really see what a "religious faith in capitalism" has to do with the answer, but I don't think that anything Moore says in the film will guarantee any land-slide win for Kerry. There are too many hard-liners who either believe Bush is a great patriot leader, who strictly vote by party, or who simply don't want to confront their own beliefs about Bush's politics, that the movie would guarantee Bush's defeat.

[rmcrobertson]

The film opened in 868 theaters, bringing in an average of $25, 115 per screen, for a 3-day total of $21.8 million.

Its closest competitor, "White Chicks," opened in 2,726 theaters and brought in an average of $7, 190 per screen, for a three-day total of around 19 million.

Just FYI, this broke the previous documentary record set by--guesses, anyone?--yep, "Bowling for Columbine."

To be catty, I will bet a shiny nickle that a lot more people saw and paid attention to this movie than to our esteemed President over the weekend.

[Dan Anderson]

A simple question about Moore's film and the election: since the movie's doing so well across the country, and doing well in both rural and urban areas, does this mean that George Bush is dead meat at the polls?


No. I just heard on the news that since Moore made his documentary so political, it can't be shown 90 days before the election. I'm not sure of the exact law but this means by the time the elections come about the film should be a moot point. Also, who knows what will happen in the following months? While Bush has shown a drop in the polls it's early yet. Anything can happen. I still believe this election is Bush's to lose rather than Kerry's to win. It'll be interesting.

Yours,
Dan Anderson

[Touch Of Death]

No. I just heard on the news that since Moore made his documentary so political, it can't be shown 90 days before the election. I'm not sure of the exact law but this means by the time the elections come about the film should be a moot point. Also, who knows what will happen in the following months? While Bush has shown a drop in the polls it's early yet. Anything can happen. I still believe this election is Bush's to lose rather than Kerry's to win. It'll be interesting.

Yours,
Dan AndersonAre you serious? what law does that fall under or is this the new Hoodoo Ashcroft rule. Will theatre that show it be closed down, thank god for bootleg.
Sean

[Phoenix44]

No. I just heard on the news that since Moore made his documentary so political, it can't be shown 90 days before the election.
Not true. That is what the Bush Administration would like to happen. But in fact, it's a documentary, and Kerry is not mentioned even once in the film.

Besides, as I understand, it's going to be out on DVD in September.

[michaeledward]

I have been privately telling my wife since the beginning of the year, that even though everything I hear says the country is split 50/50, this year's election is going to be a blow out against Bush. I am talking a 9 - 10 - 11 point spread. I think it also doesn't really matter who the candidate is on the Democratic side (still hoping for a miracle - that Kucinich actually receives the nomination in Boston).

Now, I live in the most conservative state in the Northeast (New Hampshire) which means even all my Conservative Buddies (MisterMike) are way more liberal than most of those in Alabama, Tennessee, and South Carolina. So I really have to temper my point of view, and balance what I perceive as a time for a change, with what might be going on in those parts of the country I don't have regular contact with (the South).

I think that many very religous / spiritual people are going to vote for George Bush because they think he is a 'Good Man'. But many of those, in those bible-belt communities and small towns are having their lives significantly impacted by the National Guard being called up for extensive tours of duty (when they thought they were getting almost free money for college). Small town America is being much more severly affected by this conflict than the big Metropolitan areas of the country. I wish that small town, bible-thumping Americans would vote for a 'Good President' rather than a perceived 'Good Man'.

Anyhow ... I think that even without this movie, Bush has nowhere to go, but away. What this movie has shown me, is how strong that 'This War Is Bad for the Country' feeling is in the 'Red States'. This movie is playing strong in Bush country.

And, you can always count on good old fashion greed (capitalism) to play its part. Last weekend, the movie was in less than 1,000 theaters ... with protests abounding. This weekend, the movie will be in twice as many theaters. The real question will be does the movie have 'Legs'.

Thanks for listening. Mike

[Cruentus]

Can anyone say, "Dewey Vs. Truman"?

Yours,

Earl Warren

[michaeledward]

Wasn't Dewey v Truman so close that the papers got it wrong? I'm not that sharp on the history of that period, but do you think it is going to be that close?

Mike

[Cruentus]

I am not bringing it up because it was close, it was that Dewey and the republicans had wholeheartedly believed they had a win, and the polls showed Truman down to 36%, and the Press had been reporting Truman as the underdog since the beginning of the election. Part of it was Truman talked about stuff like rights for minorities, and other such nonsense, which caused many of the Southern Democrates to break off from the party to form "The Dixiecrats," headed by our republican favorite, Strom Thurmond.

Pop quiz...can you guess which party "The Dixiecrats" eventually merged with? Hmmm? (Big clue...Strom Thurmond headed the party.. :rolleyes: )

Good Article:
http://www.kennesaw.edu/pols/3380/pres/1948.html

Now, the election was close...but the polls only gave Truman 36%...and that's the thing we need to look at.

Most of the polls are taken from a pool of voters from last election. I predict that the media will make it look "close" up until the election, and the polls will look close as well. I think Kerry will remain up in the polls, but probably not by a large margin. What people won't be taking into account are all the unhappy americans who would love to see Bush out of office, and who didn't vote in the last election. So...as long as they are allowed to vote, and as long as their vote is counted (have to put dislaimers in place with states like Florida), I predict Kerry by a landslide, even though the polls and media are going to be even-steven til the day of.

Now...if the polls are far in favor for Kerry, I still say Kerry by a landslide. Why? Because there are a lot of angry "lberals" who are pissed at Bush who WILL be voting this time around, skewing the numbers in Kerry's favor; there aren't a lot of closet conservatives who are overjoyed with Bush who didn't vote last time, leaving nothing to skew in Bushes favor. Oooo...Diabold better get on the ball with those machines so that their "Boy" can get in. :rolleyes:

So...I am saying look at that election to see how at times polls and media "bias" can be vastly wrong at times in their predictions.

yours,
Al Gore

[Flatlander]

Look at what just happenned here in Canada. The system's a little different here, with 3 main national parties instead of 2, and one very strong regional party which can never form government. Here, there are 308 "ridings" (each represented by a elected member of parliament). A party needs 155 seats in order to form a majority government (and control parliament) or just "the most seats" in order to form a minority gov't.

This election basically came down to 2 parties, and the polls favoured the conservatives to win a minority at one point, maybe 2 weeks before the election.

The day before the election, it was a dead heat, according to the polls. The Liberals were elected, nearly with a majority (135 - 99-54-19-1) was the vote split.

Just a recent example of polling innaccuracy.

[deadhand31]

I don't really think it's going to change a person's point of view. If you're not a Bush backer, then you're going to have things that you'll hate him for no matter what. If you're a Bush backer (like me), you'll see that it's mostly heavily biased propaganda, and an awful lot of lies and half-truths. In my opinion, Moore doesn't make documentaries. He makes propaganda. He tends to leave out an awful lot of information to make his points sound like the smart ones.

To see several examples of what I'm talking about, go here:

www.bowlingfortruth.com

[michaeledward]

I don't really think it's going to change a person's point of view. If you're not a Bush backer, then you're going to have things that you'll hate him for no matter what. If you're a Bush backer (like me), you'll see that it's mostly heavily biased propaganda, and an awful lot of lies and half-truths. In my opinion, Moore doesn't make documentaries. He makes propaganda. He tends to leave out an awful lot of information to make his points sound like the smart ones.

To see several examples of what I'm talking about, go here:

www.bowlingfortruth.com (http://www.bowlingfortruth.com)
You are probably quite right about this movie not actually changing anyone's point of view.

This movie is a polemic.

Main Entry: po·lem·ic http://www.m-w.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?polemi01.wav=polemic'))
Pronunciation: p&-'le-mik
Function: noun
Etymology: French polémique, from Middle French, from polemique controversial, from Greek polemikos warlike, hostile, from polemos war; perhaps akin to Greek pelemizein to shake, Old English ealfelo baleful
1 a : an aggressive attack on or refutation of the opinions or principles of another

Moore received a huge tax cut from President Bush's 2001 legislation. He pledged to spend all of that tax break to get Bush removed from the office. He has never presented this movie, or any of his other works as 'Partisan' (Moore is not a Democrat).

But, the other side of the arguement is the contortions that Bush Supporters try to put themselves through to convince themselves (and others) that Bush did not lie to them.

There are some points in the film that can honestly be discussed as to if the point is 'accurate' ... and 'how accurate' specific points might be. But, we don't throw the baby out with the bath water, usually. What points in the movie are Bush supporters deliberatly ignoring so they can continue to support his administration. What other principles will they comprimise in order to continue to support this administration?

We American Citizens are spending 1 Billion Dollars a week to pay for this indulgent war in Iraq. That is money we do not have. We will be paying for this 'private little war' for decades. And the administration is still pushing for further tax cuts ...what ever happened to fiscal conservation among the Republican party?

Thanks for contributing. Mike

[michaeledward]

There are some points in the film that can honestly be discussed as to if the point is 'accurate' ... and 'how accurate' specific points might be. But, we don't throw the baby out with the bath water, usually. What points in the movie are Bush supporters deliberatly ignoring so they can continue to support his administration. What other principles will they comprimise in order to continue to support this administration?

I apologize for quoting myself here. But, I just read this article in Newsweek and I am inspired. I think I am going to have to find and download the complete report. So, Here's to the Bush Supporters.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5412317/site/newsweek


July 19 issue - The more he read, the more uneasy he became. In early February 2003 Colin Powell was putting the finishing touches on his speech to the United Nations spelling out the case for war in Iraq. Across the Potomac River, a Pentagon intelligence analyst going over the facts in the speech was alarmed at how shaky that case was. Powell's presentation relied heavily on the claims of one especially dubious Iraqi defector, dubbed "Curve Ball" inside the intel community. A self-proclaimed chemical engineer who was the brother of a top aide to Iraqi National Congress chief Ahmad Chalabi, Curve Ball had told the German intelligence service that Iraq had a fleet of seven mobile labs used to manufacture deadly biological weapons. But nobody inside the U.S. government had ever actually spoken to the informant—except the Pentagon analyst, who concluded the man was an alcoholic and utterly useless as a source. He recalled that Curve Ball had shown up for their only meeting nursing a "terrible hangover."
Thanks - Mike

[RCastillo]

Well, we can't stop now. This is what this country was based on;taking other peoples land by force, treaty, or money.

Kicking the crap out of those that stood in our way, influencing others in all ways possible.

Simply watching our back, like all other countries have done in the past of mankinds history, looking out for our self interests. :uhyeah:

[Brother John]

A simple question about Moore's film and the election: since the movie's doing so well across the country, and doing well in both rural and urban areas, does this mean that George Bush is dead meat at the polls?

A related issue: for those of you who have a religious faith in capitalism, and who also believe that the freedom to compete and make money is the same thing as democracy, aren't you kinda stuck with a, "yes, absolutely," answer here?

I'd have to say a "not necessarily" to both questions.
It presumes that everyone who saw the film agrees with the film or believes what the film puts forth. I've talked to several who have seen it and they said that there was as much fact as there was error in it...and these folks are Kerry supporters. Besides I think I've heard that in some of the major polls Bush's numbers have gone up some since the film.
I don't see it having that big of an impact overall. I'd think that a person liking President Bush after having seen the movie...liked him before, and that someone disliking him after...already did before as well.

Your Brother
John

[Nightingale]

I've paid for six Bush backers to see the film. They didn't want to give Moore their money, so I bought their tickets.

Three are now voting for Kerry.

Two are thinking things over.

One couldn't stand to watch and walked out of the theater.

There were voter registration tables set up outside the theater. People were registering in droves. There was a long line at the table.

[Trident]

I think the film is mostly "preaching to the choir". The majority of the people who see Moore's work already agree with him, and are vehemently anti-Bush. The fact that Bush had a bump in the polls after all the media hype surrounding this film may indicate that it really didn't have a positive impact for Kerry.

And, just to throw my 2 cents in, my election prediction is that Bush is going to win by a landslide, close to the '84 Reagan/Mondale results. Of course, my predictions and a quarter will buy you a cup of coffee, but what the hey.

Mike

[michaeledward]

I think the film is mostly "preaching to the choir". The majority of the people who see Moore's work already agree with him, and are vehemently anti-Bush. The fact that Bush had a bump in the polls after all the media hype surrounding this film may indicate that it really didn't have a positive impact for Kerry.

And, just to throw my 2 cents in, my election prediction is that Bush is going to win by a landslide, close to the '84 Reagan/Mondale results. Of course, my predictions and a quarter will buy you a cup of coffee, but what the hey.

Mike
Where can I get a cup of coffee for a quarter? ;)

[hardheadjarhead]

And, just to throw my 2 cents in, my election prediction is that Bush is going to win by a landslide, close to the '84 Reagan/Mondale results. Of course, my predictions and a quarter will buy you a cup of coffee, but what the hey.

Mike


Bet you that cup of coffee that you're wrong.

9-11 is one of several documentaries that go against the Right. We haven't seen any Rightist films of like nature.

I'm giving it to Kerry by at least 316 Electoral votes...unless something drastic happens between now and then.

-----

I'm impressed Nightingale bought tickets for Bush backers...more impressed (but not surprised) by the number of conversions out of that group.

I know a number of detractors of the film that simply won't see it, yet have loads of criticisms for it. The threads here are indicative of what may be a nationwide trend. The majority of critics here on MT post links to negative reviews, but haven't seen the film. They attack by proxy and fail to see how they've surrendered their intellectual honesty and...to be blunt...their courage.

If they truly believe Moore's work is flawed, they'll feel the same way once they've seen it. However having seen it will gel their arguments against the film with the substance of personal experience. But most won't do this.


Regards,


Steve

[Trident]

Fine. Then how about "....that and $3.99 will get you a decaf mocha latte"?

hardheadjarhead - you're on for the cup of java.

Seriously, though - I have not seen anything defining from John Kerry other than "I'm not Bush". A negative argument will only get you so far. Great for energizing your base, but those folks would vote for you anyway. Hard to win over converts that way. That, and if you want to get conspiratorial (is that a real word?) we can talk about the Hillary factor.

I'm still standing with my "Bush 04 Landslide" prediction.

Mike

[michaeledward]

Kerry does suffer from a legislation gap after 24 years in the Senate. There are not really many pieces of law that were introduced by the junior senator from the bay state. Part of that is his background. John Kerry is a prosecutor (tough on crime). He is also an investigator. I understand that he did a lot of work around the Iran-Contra investigations and several issues along those lines. The information is there for the curious.

Some have said he is the best qualified among the 10 original democratic contenders. His experience in major committees has contributed to those qualifications. And ... He has great Hair!

Hopefully, you, and the rest of the country will learn more about him next week. But it will probably be less about his past ... and more about the future.