Do they actually buy into what Ynet's trying to get people to think/believe about Bibi?
With all due respect for Soccerdad and even Sha!, I can't believe they actually buy into what a newspaper like Yediot Achronot is trying to do: to tell people what to think/believe. The latter says in response to Ynet's article:
An interesting aside, in the primary elections a few years ago, there were quite a few people, Labor party loyalists and even people who just simply hated Netanyahu for the sake of it, who voted simply to prevent him from being reelected at the time. This year, it appears that things are different, and more than 100,000 signed up to vote, in fact, more than there actually were a few years ago.
Now I'm sure that Netanyahu may have made a few alterations in his campaign approach, but that doesn't mean that things are any different from when they were when he gave his campaign press conference a few weeks ago. And Makor Rishon pretty much indicated that, whatever the current standings, Netanyahu is still leading in the polls, and Ynet's implications are, if anything, exaggerated.
There is also the question of if a candidate who's over 70 years old, as Sharon is, is still viable as a leader. Many people in the public today want leaders who are young enough to prove effective in the job for many years, and Sharon is way past that point already. In France, they've had a problem not just with leaders who haven't offered anything inspiring, but who are also very old as well. For the best of political leaderships, that's why it'd be a very good idea to learn from France's mistakes in past years, to help learn how we in our turn can avoid making the same.
I really wish that the two bloggers I've cited would do better than to simply buy into what a newspaper that many are disillusioned with says at face value. It should also be noted that the argument they've got is confusing, and requires much more meat-and-potatoes thinking than that.
Bibi has a reputation for being a political magician. And while he is definitely a master of using the media, his political skills are nothing compared to the Prime Minister's. Instead of confronting Netanyahu directly, Sharon quitely started making noise about splitting the Likud and starting his own party. And polls showed that he would get a lot more votes than a Netanyahu-led Likud. So, the LCC members got to thinking. And it seems a lot of them have decided it would be better not to go to early elections and risk losing the influence and job distribution that comes with being in power.What the blogmaster fails to understand is that many of the people who signed up for this year's party primaries are doing so because they are opposed to Sharon's tyranny, as Caroline Glick put it a month ago in the Jerusalem Post. Exactly why would they just suddenly change their vote just like that?
Now it looks like Sharon's chances of beating Netanyahu in the Likud have improved to at least 50-50. If he manages to kill the idea to move up the leadership vote, his chances become much, much better.
An interesting aside, in the primary elections a few years ago, there were quite a few people, Labor party loyalists and even people who just simply hated Netanyahu for the sake of it, who voted simply to prevent him from being reelected at the time. This year, it appears that things are different, and more than 100,000 signed up to vote, in fact, more than there actually were a few years ago.
Now I'm sure that Netanyahu may have made a few alterations in his campaign approach, but that doesn't mean that things are any different from when they were when he gave his campaign press conference a few weeks ago. And Makor Rishon pretty much indicated that, whatever the current standings, Netanyahu is still leading in the polls, and Ynet's implications are, if anything, exaggerated.
There is also the question of if a candidate who's over 70 years old, as Sharon is, is still viable as a leader. Many people in the public today want leaders who are young enough to prove effective in the job for many years, and Sharon is way past that point already. In France, they've had a problem not just with leaders who haven't offered anything inspiring, but who are also very old as well. For the best of political leaderships, that's why it'd be a very good idea to learn from France's mistakes in past years, to help learn how we in our turn can avoid making the same.
I really wish that the two bloggers I've cited would do better than to simply buy into what a newspaper that many are disillusioned with says at face value. It should also be noted that the argument they've got is confusing, and requires much more meat-and-potatoes thinking than that.
Labels: Israel
