0
   

The Democrats Gloat Thread

 
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Aug, 2005 10:46 am
BBB
bm
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 06:22 am
Quote:
Bush's approval rating falls to new low
53 percent say they disapprove of president in new Post-ABC survey


By Richard Morin and Dan Balz
The Washington Post
Updated: 12:02 a.m. ET Aug. 31, 2005

Rising gas prices and ongoing bloodshed in Iraq continue to take their toll on President Bush, whose standing with the public has sunk to an all-time low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The survey found Bush's job approval rating at 45 percent, down seven points since January and the lowest ever recorded for the president in Post-ABC surveys. Fifty-three percent disapproved of the job Bush is doing.

The war has been a drag on Bush's presidency for many months, but his Iraq approval ratings in the new poll were little changed from two months ago [..] What may have pushed Bush's overall ratings down in the latest poll is pervasive dissatisfaction over soaring gasoline prices. [..] Six in 10 Americans said there are steps the administration could take to reduce gas prices. [..]

Bush also received negative marks for his handling of immigration, the economy and Social Security, although his ratings on the latter two were not as low as they were two months ago. [..]

The poll numbers paint a portrait of national frustration with the direction and leadership of the country, which, if not reversed in coming months, is likely to color the environment for next year's midterm elections, putting incumbents in both parties on the defensive.

Dissatisfaction is not limited to the president. Fewer than four in 10 Americans -- 37 percent -- approve of the way the Republican-controlled Congress is doing its job, the lowest rating for lawmakers in nearly eight years.

The survey also provided bad news for Democratic leaders, who are judged as offering Bush only tepid opposition. Slightly more than half of those surveyed expressed dissatisfaction with congressional Democrats for not opposing Bush more aggressively.

Self-identified Democrats were particularly impatient. More than three in four said congressional Democrats have not gone far enough to oppose Bush on Iraq or on administration policies in general. [..]

Independents were similarly dissatisfied with Democratic leaders for not challenging the president over the war and other issues, with six in 10 saying Democrats have been too meek.

Public attitudes toward the war have not changed significantly since the first of the year, the poll found. Slightly more than four in 10 -- 42 percent -- approved of the job Bush is doing in Iraq; 57 percent disapproved, unchanged in recent months. Slightly more than half -- 53 percent -- said the war was not worth it, while 46 percent said it was, identical to the results of a Post-ABC poll two months ago. [..]

The survey also found that [Cindy] Sheehan, who has been protesting the war outside Bush's ranch near Crawford, Tex., has become the most visible symbol of the antiwar movement. Fully three in four Americans have heard or read about her.

[..] Slightly more than half of the country -- 52 percent -- said Bush should meet her again; 46 percent said he should not. Fifty-three percent supported what [Sheehan] is doing and 42 percent opposed. [..]

Looks like the Republicans are "outside the mainstream" of the American people...
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 07:44 am
A few more interesting factoids from the same poll:

Quote:
A majority of Americans supported his handling of the campaign against terrorism.


Quote:
By a 51 percent to 38 percent ratio, the public said the United States is winning the war, despite mounting casualties and insurgent attacks.


Quote:
A majority (54 percent) continued to say the United States should keep military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there; 44 percent said U.S. forces should be withdrawn. Six in 10 opposed announcing a timetable for withdrawal. Only about one in eight -- 13 percent -- said U.S. forces should be withdrawn immediately.


Quote:


Quote:
Despite escalating bloodshed, the struggles to approve a draft constitution and the well-covered antiwar protests led by Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq, the survey found little evidence that antiwar sentiment has increased the past two months.


I know you didn't present, via highlighting and bolding, these parts of the poll in the interest of space, though.

As far as the Sheehan polling results, it could be the public would view that whole "camping in Crawford" stunt in a different light if they had access to the whole story. Perhaps if the media had seen fit to publish remarks by the homeowners in Crawford regarding their treatment at the hands of the "protesters", or published pictures of Cindy getting "touched up" by her makeup artist prior to her "going on camera" or video of her laughing and mocking those supporting the troops, a few of those polled might have voiced a different opinion. Smile
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 07:59 am
Well, that's even more interesting. If the majority of people approve of the war and the anti-terrorism measures and Bush's handling of them, what is it that they disapprove of enough to give him bad marks overall?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 08:00 am
High gas prices.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 08:03 am
JustWonders wrote:
High gas prices.


Laughing A JW classic
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 08:10 am
I'm sure that's part of it.

It seems that the majority of American's don't really approve of the job he's doing with Iraq.
Quote:
Public attitudes toward the war have not changed significantly since the first of the year, the poll found. Slightly more than four in 10 -- 42 percent -- approved of the job Bush is doing in Iraq; 57 percent disapproved, unchanged in recent months. Slightly more than half -- 53 percent -- said the war was not worth it, while 46 percent said it was, identical to the results of a Post-ABC poll two months ago. By a 51 percent to 38 percent ratio, the public said the United States is winning the war, despite mounting casualties and insurgent attacks.


It's just that it hasn't changed in several months.

Also possible he's being tainted by association with Congress.
Quote:
Dissatisfaction is not limited to the president. Fewer than four in 10 Americans -- 37 percent -- approve of the way the Republican-controlled Congress is doing its job, the lowest rating for lawmakers in nearly eight years.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 08:35 am
JustWonders wrote:
Quote:
A majority (54 percent) continued to say the United States should keep military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there; 44 percent said U.S. forces should be withdrawn.

Hell, I think the US should stay in Iraq for now; make a mess, you gotta clean it up too. Dont say nothing about how I like President Bush or the Republicans. Hell, most Democratic politicians feel the same way.

FreeDuck wrote:
Well, that's even more interesting. If the majority of people approve of the war

They dont. The Republicans are definitely outside the mainstream on this issue: a majority of Americans disapprove of Bush's handling of the war in Iraq and think the war was not worth it. Just like last time they polled. Its just that the numbers havent changed since.

JustWonders wrote:
published pictures of Cindy getting "touched up" by her makeup artist prior to her "going on camera"

You folks are really desperate when it comes to Sheehan, judging on the "allegations" you grasp to. Everyone gets the "touch up" treatment before going on TV. You probably would want to, too.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 08:39 am
Yeah, that was weird. (So, like, people who are in mourning are supposed to wear all black and tear their hair out a bit or else the sadness is all a sham?)

Something that occurs to me re: Congress/ Bush is that the Congress one is more telling in terms of how people feel the work of running the country is going, but that some of them have a residual fondness for Bush, himself, so give him higher marks. As in, the country is being run badly, but yeah, it's Congress' fault, not my boy Bush's...
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 09:14 am
sozobe wrote:
Something that occurs to me re: Congress/ Bush is that the Congress one is more telling in terms of how people feel the work of running the country is going[...]

Not to mention that Congress is up for reelection and Bush is not.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 09:21 am
nimh wrote:
You folks are really desperate when it comes to Sheehan, judging on the "allegations" you grasp to. Everyone gets the "touch up" treatment before going on TV. You probably would want to, too.


Not everyone. Not Gary Qualls or Greg Garvey (both fathers who lost sons in Iraq and were in Crawford much of the time Cindy was there, supporting the troops and supporting the president).

Of course, they didn't have huge PR firms assisting them.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 09:24 am
JustWonders wrote:
Not everyone. Not Gary Qualls or Greg Garvey (both fathers who lost sons in Iraq and were in Crawford much of the time Cindy was there).

How do you know?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 09:33 am
I spoke to both Mr. Qualls and Mr. Garvey (as well as Jonathan Bowling's dad, whose son also died in Iraq) via phone last week. Mr. Bowling, who lives in Tennessee was asking that someone retrieve his son's name from a white cross placed at Camp Casey II. I was able to put him in touch with someone who would assist him in his request, since he couldn't personally travel to Crawford.

You see, Cindy Sheehan doesn't speak for him. Nor does she speak for thousands of other American mothers and fathers. She doesn't yet get that.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 10:30 am
Were they on tv?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 11:09 am
Mr. Qualls has appeared on a local Waco TV station's news segment in an interview, possibly more than one. All of the large news agencies were in Crawford last weekend - NBC, Fox, CNN, etc. - but starting on Sunday, much of that coverage was replaced by news of the hurricane.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 11:10 am
So did you ask Mr. Qualls if he got a touch-up before he went on the news?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 11:24 am
Not directly. We shared a joke about Cindy's professional make-up artist and from his comments, I concluded that he was neither seeking nor would entertain such machinations for himself.

I also think a lot will be forthcoming in the weeks ahead (now that she's leaving Crawford) about what really went on there and who was really behind it. There may be those reluctant to speak out while in the midst of gathering facts who will now feel free to share their documentation. Might prove to be embarrassing for some, and that might also be a reason moveon.org, etc. are now backing away from their support of her.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 11:27 am
nimh wrote:
JustWonders wrote:
Quote:
A majority (54 percent) continued to say the United States should keep military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there; 44 percent said U.S. forces should be withdrawn.

Hell, I think the US should stay in Iraq for now; make a mess, you gotta clean it up too. Dont say nothing about how I like President Bush or the Republicans. Hell, most Democratic politicians feel the same way.

yep. i got into this a little bit on one of the other threads in the context of how a poll's results are based largely on how a question is asked. bottom line is, agreement that the us must leave iraq in some semblence of order does not necessarily equal support for maintaining a frontline presence in perpetuity.

true, we shouldn't make over much of these polls, but the bush loyalists also shouldn't make too little of them. something is changing and it doesn't seem to be in favor of the policies of the current administration.


JustWonders wrote:
published pictures of Cindy getting "touched up" by her makeup artist prior to her "going on camera"

You folks are really desperate when it comes to Sheehan, judging on the "allegations" you grasp to. Everyone gets the "touch up" treatment before going on TV. You probably would want to, too.

gosh. this is the tackiest attack yet... probably soon to be followed by accusations that "mother sheehan denies getting "touched up" for her "manufactured touching moment".

"she lies !" reports matt drudge.

"cindy sheehan's use of makeup gives aid and comfort to the enemy. typical liberal hatred of america." opines sean hannity from his dressing room while being "groomed" for his daily declarations on HANNITY [size=7]and colmes[/size]

speaking from the right hand of the right hand of god, the reverend jerry falwell confirmed the judgement of the almighty; "this cindy sheehan, in league with her hollywood homosexyul make-up crowd certainly must bear some of the responsibility for 9/11."

mrs.phyliss shafley was succinct; "burn the painted WITCH !!"

but the most crushing indictment comes from john o'neill of the group, swiftboat vets for truth; "cindy sheehan painted herself! and she was NEVER in cambodia !"

on a golfing trip in scotland, neither tom delay or ralph reed were available for comment.

finally, when questioned, karl rove denied any involvement or knowledge of the alledged accusations against ms. sheehan.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 11:31 am
You got me laughing, DTOM Smile

<You're actually pretty funny...you ever consider stand-up?>
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 11:34 am
Why is it embarrassing?

Say that it turns out I became deaf because of the use of a specific antibiotic. This antibiotic was known within the company that made it to carry this risk, but the risk was internally covered up because they didn't want to take the financial hit. As this develops and is proven, I start a protest and demand to speak to the CEO of that company. I become the public face of the struggle, and gain notoriety and backing from many major organizations -- National Association of the Deaf, ACLU, whatever. They offer PR advice to me -- they offer to assist me in making my cause (getting the CEO to admit responsibility, stopping the production of the faulty antibiotic) successful. I get interviewed on TV (and my makeup is touched up).

Where is the shame?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 03:18:52