May 15 2007
Dems Sink Below Bush
As I predicted previously the Democrats are sinking in the polls because of their mindless and stubborn desire to surrendering Iraq to Al Qaeda.
According to the May 10-13, 2007, Gallup Poll, 29% of Americans approve and 64% disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job. Congressional approval is down 4 percentage points since last month, and is 3 points lower than the 32% average measured during the first five months of the year.
…
There has been little meaningful change in the public’s rating of the president in quite some time. Thirty-three percent of Americans now approve of the way Bush is handling his job as president, while 62% disapprove.
Now Nancy and Harry can claim a historic role as Congressional leaders. They successfully made an unpopular president look good in comparison. Congrats Surrendercrats. Job well done (and done swiftly). The SurrenderMedia will, of course, not get this poll.
This might be interesting if you actually understood Gallup’s numbers. Congressional approval among Republicans is way down – because Congress is finally investigating the corrupt and incompetent practices of the Bush Administration. Republicans’ approval of Congress has gradually declined, from a high of 37% in mid-January to 25% in the latest poll.
Congressional numbers are down with Democrats because Congress is taking so long to get down to impeachment – which is what a majority of Democrats want. Democrats’ ratings of the job the Democratic-controlled Congress is doing are down from 44% in February to 37%.
Instructively, Congression approval is up for both Independents and Democrats since January of 07. When Congress removes Bush and Cheney – look for their numbers to soar.
AJ: did you get my email?
SS:
You trying to get some Kool aid packets in the mail like Rosie? How funny is that, the most corrupt politicians are doing the investigating to keep the heat off of themselves. Why is it when Democrats are caught with their hands in the cookie jar they don’t take responsibility, other Democrats try to protect them, and then just go along as if nothing happened? I mean this was supposed to be the Senate that cleaned up all the corruption, but it’s worse then it’s ever been. Pelosi should be frog marched out of her office in an orange jump suit and most of the Democratic leaders (leaders in crime) should follow right behind in a conga line to a federal lock up where they all belong. How the Democratic a party can keep a known murderer in their midsts, and look upon him as a leader is beyond me. Google Kennedy and Chappaquiddick and tell me the Democratic party shouldn’t have forced him out long ago.
Scaulen: I do find it “funny” as in ironic, hypocritcal, childish, and arrogant, the Democratic “activism” of such Leftists as Soothsayer, and you are exactly correct:
1) what is the only party to have a member serving in Congress, who was a member of the KKK?
2) what is the only party to have a member serving in Congress, who SHOULD be guilty of manslaughter, at the LEAST??
3) what is the only party to have a member serving in Congress, who was caught in a blatant lie, and plagerism, during a Presidential run?
4) what is the only party to have a member serving in Congress, who is an impeached and removed Federal Judge?
5) what is the only party to have a member serving in Congress, that has TWO of it’s major leaders, guilty of steering MILLIONS of dollars in contracts to companies owned by family members and associates?
6) what is the only party to have to have a member serving in Congress, who is guilty of passing legislation, that allowed family members to buy federal and state land, at below market values, and then reap the financial benefits months and even years later, when monies were approved by that same member of Congress, for lucrative Road and transport lines, running near those properties, that substantially increased their value for devlopers and real estate companies???
If you answered “Democrat” for each of those questions, you are CORRECT!
And if you need the answers, Soothsayer, then you are just not paying attention, and so blinded by partisan hate, that you really are a lost cause!
The thing that Soothsayer ignores is that it took the Republicans several years and Mark Foley to get to where Nancy and her friends have gotten to in a few short months.
26 bills have been passed and 12 of them were name changes to buildings. They have not done anything they promised. I know Ellsworth was promising success in Iraq, no amnesty for illegals and cheap gas when he won in my district. Liar liar pants on fire.
Let’s see, Pelosi has been caught in some shady business concerning her family’s business and her position, Feinstein was caught in some funny business concerning her family’s business and her position, Murtha was caught in some shady business deals concerning corruption. But hey, that D is like a talisman. You can get away with all sorts of stuff.
Suddenly, the internals of a poll matter. **grin**
Not helping anything to remind a few that the internals don’t match the headline, Sooth. Welcome to our world. **grin**
SS:
Ruh Roh, looks like Iraq is now the epicenter of AQ not Afghanistan. Can you imagine, why would they leave the safety of the mountains to be slaughtered in Iraq? They know that they can’t control anything from Afghanistan, they need the resources, and open borders of Iraq. Put down the meds, open your eyes and take a look at the war, not the talking points.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070515/ts_nm/iraq_alqaeda_dc
I love how an expert (for Loyd’s of London) says if we turn tail and pull a surrendercrat we’ll be back in there in a couple of years and have to start all over.
Kool-Aid, Kool-Aid, tastes great
You’ll love Kool-Aid – don’t wait!
Scaulie . . . the reason AQ is now centered in Iraq is that’s where the George W. Bush Memorial Shooting Gallery is located.
Installed and maintained by US taxpayer dollars, the $.5,000,000,000,000.00 target range is replete with body-armorless GI’s and Humvee’s, over-worked and over-stressed soldiers, Iraqi turncoats, a Green Zone and TV cameras.
The Bush Gallery allows AQ trainees from all over the globe to launch RPG’s, set road-side IED’s and take sniper practice at US troops while Iraqi politicians take 2 month vacations and Warpublicans exercise their atrophied mental muscles coming up with a succession of lame excuses for the quagmire they have created out of whole cloth.
Sooth
If someone does not have body armor , they just chose not to wear it that day. Up armored Humvee’ s are rule rather than the exception.
The two month vacation is being backed off from.
LA, Detroit, Washington DC, New York and Atlanta are more properly classified as a quagmire than Iraq.
Have you noticed the current kill rate in New Orleans?
Poor SS – Here is having a BAD week.
Harry and Nancy will not like this poll:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=264035762651225
A majority (54%) of the 903 adults surveyed last week disagree with Reid’s assessment that the war is lost, with 30% disagreeing “strongly.” Meanwhile, 78% say Iraq should be stabilized before troops are withdrawn. Fully 48% believe this is “very important.”
In short, the idea of stabilizing Iraq before withdrawing troops has universal appeal, and the idea could potentially unify support behind the president.
In fact, our poll shows this concept appeals not only to Republicans, 91% of whom agree with it, and Independents (80%), but to a solid majority of Democrats (66%). Even those who believe we have lost the war believe stabilization is important.
To recapture public support, therefore, President Bush might consider casting the current and immediate-future phases of the war in terms of stabilization rather than victory or defeat. This stabilization aspect is key and must be accentuated.
Stabilization takes on added importance considering that the president does not favor a deadline. Such a deadline, he said recently, would be setting a deadline for failure. But a majority of Americans (54%) do not agree with him on this point. While most Republicans (62%) oppose a deadline, 65% of Democrats and 56% of Independents prefer that one be set.
The deadline is attractive to some because it could ensure the U.S. commitment to Iraq is not open-ended. Others believe a deadline can be used to pressure Iraqis to get their act together.
Staying in Iraq, however, is contingent on our ability to affect a positive outcome. Can we do it? If you ask the president, the answer is “yes,” and his optimism that the U.S. will succeed in Iraq is shared by 56% of the public.
But that percentage is down from 58% in February, when we asked the same question, and 60% last December. Only 42% of Democrats and 49% of Independents think we’ll succeed, next to 80% of Republicans.
Similarly, 61% of Americans believe victory in Iraq is “important,” compared with 65% in February and 66% in December. Independents (61%) align with Republicans (84%) here vs. 44% of Democrats who don’t think victory is important.
For years now, everyone’s been talking about a “global war on terror,” a phrase first popularized by President Bush after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. More recently, however, the appropriateness of this phrase has come under attack.
This was apparent during the recent debate among Democratic presidential candidates. When moderator Brian Williams asked, “Do you believe there is such a thing as a global war on terror,” only four of the eight candidates — Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Bill Richardson and Christopher Dodd — raised their hands. John Edwards, Joe Biden, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel kept their hands down.
Even one of our strongest allies, the United Kingdom, has decided to scrap the phrase. According to Hilary Benn of the governing Labour Party:
“We do not use the phrase ‘war on terror’ because we can’t win by military means alone and because this isn’t us against one organized enemy with a clear identity and a coherent set of objectives. It is the vast majority of the people in the world — of all nationalities and faiths — against a small number of loose, shifting and disparate groups who have relatively little in common apart from their identification with others who share their distorted view of the world and their idea of being part of something bigger.”
Americans don’t buy that, however. Two-thirds think we’re fighting a global war on terror, including 52% of Democrats, 81% of Republicans and 65% of Independents.
Our poll also reveals a potential for backlash if Congress projects its authority on how the war is conducted. In fact, Americans are decidedly against Congress’ meddling. Asked whom they’d like to see the president rely on more for advice on the conduct of war, fully 71% preferred field commanders and just 23% favored Congress.
What’s more, any meddling may be perceived as motivated by political gain rather than by genuine concern. Sen. Clinton, for example, recently called for a repeal of the authorization the Congress gave the president to go to Iraq. But nearly three of five (59%) of those polled believe that any such proposal would send the wrong signal to our troops.
Here is a little more about that poll:
In fact, they believe the war is winnable and that victory is important. They are not against a timetable for withdrawal, but feel stabilization of the country should come first. They also believe that conduct of war should be left to generals, not Congress, and Congress’ war authorization should not be repealed.
Harry and Nancy are LOSING their War against the War! LOL
SS, getting desperate, your now pulling stuff out yer ass. 🙂
Ordi
Thank you for your posts. I expect support for the war to increase significantly when the fight is taken to al Qaeda in Diyala, which might well be their last sanctuary in Iraq.
Ah, HA! Soothsayer *IS* the troll formerly known as Ken!!!!
He just outed himself with a certain quirk of style that Ken used when he was pressed. HAHAHAHA!
He’s a sockpuppet!
Imagine you are playing a game of chess. At some point you move your queen out in an attack. As time and several moves pass you discover that your attack plan isn’t going quite as well as planned. Imagine that is the point where we are now. We have not only moved the queen but the opposition is in a different configuration from what it was when we initially decided to move it.
The Democrats want to just put that queen back in its original position regardless of the configuration of the rest of the board. This is an extremely stupid strategy. As if just “undeploying” her will make everything back to the way it was. It is simply insane. If we remove those troops right now, the consequences would, in my opinion, be a disaster and result in many more Americans and many more Iraqis killed.
The Democrats are simply idiotic as far as any real vision goes and are simply playing to media sound bites and slogans and talking points. They are politically retarded.
Terry Gain
Glad to be of help!
AQ’s last stand is Diyala.
If you have not already check out AJ’s post above entitled: US Has Kidnappers In Iraq Surrounded. We need to say a praye and cross our fingers. Life teaches us, Doing anything worthwhile is always hard but you can’t quit because it is hard.
Crosspatch, if you’re still reading this thread…
IIRC, a few weeks back you mentioned something about Murtha essentially being blackmailed by the Left. You stated that the Soros-types had the goods on him, something to do with corruption, and they were essentially using the threat of exposing Murtha’s misdeeds in exchange for his turning against the war.
Could you elaborate on what you meant in your earlier post, as I had not heard this before. (I know about Murtha and ABSCAM, but that’s old news.)
In July of 2005 or 2006 the LA Times ran an article about Murtha’s brother’s consulting work and certain contracts being awarded to his brother’s clients.
Very shortly after that Murtha became VERY outspoken. I had never heard of him before that article was published and he had been considered a “hawkish” Democrat. He did a complete 180 after that article came out and since he has been so outspoken on the Iraq issue, not a single other paper has picked up on the story.