3 ms·

Judging by George W. Bush’s approval rating right after 9/11, it probably wouldn’t be very many.

by rayiner 8mo ago

deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
estimator7292 8mo ago
9/11 was the first major attack on the continental US in living memory. It was literally a world-altering event for most of the population, and it radically changed the geopolitical calculus of the average citizen. Lots of american citizens demanded retaliation. Our counterattacks weren't sanctioned by congress, but they were by the people. Meanwhile, the current president just started a war based on a temper tantrum and an attempt to distract the population. These aren't really the same thing.
- rayiner 8mo ago
  I agree with you that the Iran strike is an effort to distract the public from Trump’s failure to bring down grocery prices like he promised: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog I was addressing the hypothetical of how Americans would react if Trump was killed by a foreign country in airstrikes similar to how the Ayatollah was killed. I think Americans would react like they did after 9/11, instead of celebrating like many are in Iran.
  - hollerith 8mo ago
    I agree. Half the country would be happy if an entity composed of Americans killed Trump, but most of those would be unhappy with a non-American entity doing it. Or at least I hope they would.
bdangubic 8mo ago
if starting a war in the middle east gets you high approval ratings after campaigning as “presdent of peace” and crying like a little bitch trying to get nobel “peace” prize, the downfall of America is coming a lot sooner than most are ballparking (we are well on the way)
woodruffw 8mo ago
Bush’s approval rating benefited from the US being attacked, and then responding. Trump has the order wrong; preemptively attacking countries (even bad ones) doesn’t poll very well with Americans. (This is ahead of Trump’s base being isolationist; it’s not even clear who wants this besides conventional hawks.)
- rayiner 8mo ago
  I think it’s just wagging the dog: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog. Combined with the fact that the media will be confused about how to respond. You’ll have Iranian diaspora celebrating, like Venezuelans did after the capture of Maduro, making it impossible for the media to frame this simply in terms of “Trump is racist.” As a result, the whole thing will get memory holed, just like the Venezuela attack.
  - woodruffw 8mo ago
    That’s a very different argument than it being similar to 9/11!
    - rayiner 8mo ago
      I didn’t say the attack on Iran was like 9/11. I was responding to OP’s hypothetical about what would happen if the situation was reversed and Trump was killed.
Cyph0n 8mo ago
Now imagine if Bush & his family were assassinated by AQ on 9/11, and you’ll understand why the majority of Iranians inside Iran will not be celebrating.
jfengel 8mo ago
You may be right, but a lot has changed in the last quarter century. The 9/11 attacks came at a time when the Cold War had just ended and the dotcom boom had just given us a strong economy. There was a lot of resentment over the 2000 election but it didn't seem like the end of the world. Since then public discourse has almost completely broken down. The President spends his days thinking of insults, and has deployed masked armed forces against civilians. As bitter as 2000 was, it's nothing compared to January 6 2021. I imagine the details would depend on the circumstances. Say, a targeted assassination versus killing thousands of civilians. But I'm not so sure that things would look anything like 9/11.

Judging by George W. Bush’s approval rating right after 9/11, it probably wouldn’t be very many.

by rayiner 8mo ago

Judging by George W. Bush’s approval rating right after 9/11, it probably wouldn’t be very many.

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]

estimator7292 8mo ago

9/11 was the first major attack on the continental US in living memory. It was literally a world-altering event for most of the population, and it radically changed the geopolitical calculus of the average citizen. Lots of american citizens demanded retaliation. Our counterattacks weren't sanctioned by congress, but they were by the people. Meanwhile, the current president just started a war based on a temper tantrum and an attempt to distract the population. These aren't really the same thing.

rayiner 8mo ago
I agree with you that the Iran strike is an effort to distract the public from Trump’s failure to bring down grocery prices like he promised: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog I was addressing the hypothetical of how Americans would react if Trump was killed by a foreign country in airstrikes similar to how the Ayatollah was killed. I think Americans would react like they did after 9/11, instead of celebrating like many are in Iran.
- hollerith 8mo ago
  I agree. Half the country would be happy if an entity composed of Americans killed Trump, but most of those would be unhappy with a non-American entity doing it. Or at least I hope they would.

bdangubic 8mo ago

if starting a war in the middle east gets you high approval ratings after campaigning as “presdent of peace” and crying like a little bitch trying to get nobel “peace” prize, the downfall of America is coming a lot sooner than most are ballparking (we are well on the way)

woodruffw 8mo ago

Bush’s approval rating benefited from the US being attacked, and then responding. Trump has the order wrong; preemptively attacking countries (even bad ones) doesn’t poll very well with Americans. (This is ahead of Trump’s base being isolationist; it’s not even clear who wants this besides conventional hawks.)

rayiner 8mo ago
I think it’s just wagging the dog: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog. Combined with the fact that the media will be confused about how to respond. You’ll have Iranian diaspora celebrating, like Venezuelans did after the capture of Maduro, making it impossible for the media to frame this simply in terms of “Trump is racist.” As a result, the whole thing will get memory holed, just like the Venezuela attack.
- woodruffw 8mo ago
  That’s a very different argument than it being similar to 9/11!
  - rayiner 8mo ago
    I didn’t say the attack on Iran was like 9/11. I was responding to OP’s hypothetical about what would happen if the situation was reversed and Trump was killed.

Cyph0n 8mo ago

Now imagine if Bush & his family were assassinated by AQ on 9/11, and you’ll understand why the majority of Iranians inside Iran will not be celebrating.

jfengel 8mo ago

You may be right, but a lot has changed in the last quarter century. The 9/11 attacks came at a time when the Cold War had just ended and the dotcom boom had just given us a strong economy. There was a lot of resentment over the 2000 election but it didn't seem like the end of the world. Since then public discourse has almost completely broken down. The President spends his days thinking of insults, and has deployed masked armed forces against civilians. As bitter as 2000 was, it's nothing compared to January 6 2021. I imagine the details would depend on the circumstances. Say, a targeted assassination versus killing thousands of civilians. But I'm not so sure that things would look anything like 9/11.