Jul 03 2007
Poll: Congress A Failure, Yet Dems Preferred
Any doubts the GOP is tanking when, in historically low poll numbers for Congress, Dems still hold a double digit lead in preference over the Reps?
Just 16% of American voters now say that Congress is doing a Good (14%) or an Excellent (2%) job. That’s down from 19% in mid-June and from 26% at the end of May. Today, 35% say Congress is doing a Fair job while 46% say Poor (see history).
The current ratings for Congress are just a single point above the ratings for the Republican controlled Congress heading into Election 2006.
…
While voters are frustrated with Congress, Democrats continue have reclaimed a double-digit lead on the Generic Congressional Ballot. Voters continue to trust Democrats more than Republican on nine of ten key issues tracked by Rasmussen Reports.
I noted previously the fact that Rassmussen, the GOP’s most favorable pollster, showed the dems growing their lead during the immigration bill debate from 7 to 12 points over the Reps. So while Congress is getting hammered, the Dems aren’t. If the GOP hasn’t figured out what this means then there is no hope for them to figure out really tough questions facing this nation.
Checkout this funny little tidbit.
From RealClearPolitics:
excerpt from:
“In Defeat, a Bush Opportunity
By Patrick Buchanan
…What should Bush do today? Graciously accept the “thumping” on amnesty, and seize the leadership of the border-security coalition — 90 percent of the nation — with a tough new bill that liberal Democrats will choke on, but the country will unite around. And kiss Kennedy goodbye…”
I wonder if Buchanan is aware that the Democrats control the Congress. Also, I wonder if he understands that the 90% figure he cites also includes people who want border security enforcement as part of a comprehensive approach. HA HA HA.
So out of touch!
Also, I wish we could all kiss Ted Kennedy goodbye!
I believe we are concentrating a little to much on today’s polls. We are, after all, nearly 18 months out. In fact, I suspect the very low approval ratings are more an anti incumbent indicator and less a reliable indicator of what will happen in 2008.
It is interesting to see that Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona, a Democrat, just signed an immigration enforcement law. So, just maybe enforcement is important. Maybe, comprehensive reform can wait until after we prove we can enforce the laws we already have.
Rick
I do not agree with that analysis. Bordersecurity was the main issue for the downfall of this so-called ‘comprehensive’ bill. Especially now, after the islam jihadist attack in London.
Everyone knows, that the MS13 gang assists Al Quaida to get into the US by accepting thousands of dollars in return.
I also believe, if the american people were truly informed by an honest media, they would agree that after securing the border, or at least get control of the border, without jailing border agents for doing their jobs, people would not mind dealing with those already here in a compassioned fashion.
I also want to point out, that there is more to this issue than the american people are being told. A handful of influental elitists are working hard for open borders to integrate Mexixo, Canada, and the US. This is not a myth, but reality, and the next meeting regading the next step will be in Agusut 07 in Canada.
While I do not know, how many politicians are aware of that, it should not be withheld from the american people. It is almost as though the way the european union went about, and people were informed only after it was too late, without a voice.
Whatever is going on, and behind the secne whatever the intent of the ‘comprehense’ bill suppose to establish was surely not to secure the border, but it was rather a farce.
Anyone who read the bill, and studied it, knows that border security was not an issue. For that reason alone, people should be asking questions, and don’t stop until an honest answer is given, what the motives are behind that, and whether the SPP is part of it.
cali sun,
I think you will find us ‘conservatives’ like Bush and Kyl and McCain were and still are all for border enforcement, but we know to track down dangerous individuals (or at least isolate them from the non-dangerous ones) we needed the Z-Visas. The hypochondriacs wanted to go after nannies and cooks who violated small process crimes. That is why they lost focus on the big issues.
Great posts, Reader!
You know……I read such crap as cal_sun wrote and now I want to ask a question and would like an answer from ALL the ’round em up/ship em out’ crowd.
Are you trying to sell me on the idea that President George W Bush does not care if the USA is attacked??????????
Are you trying to tell me that President George W Bush is so blind, dumb and stupid that he has not studied our problems with Mexico and everything South of it????????????
Are you trying to sell me on the idea that a man that has been vilified around the world and constantly by the LEFTY screwballs over every single protective measure to protect our azzes is willing to deliberately lay down and let Terrorists come into our country…………….as long as they promise to do so through Mexico???????????????????
Are you trying to tell me that President George W Bush, who has the guts to stand up to the world and Russia over the shields……willing to break those famous concreted treaties that fail to protect us………..but make the rest of the world happy……is so in love with his Self/Power (what the heck)Meirs/Gonzales that he can’t stand up to Mexico????????
Are you trying to say that a man that was willing to let himself be painted as a ‘Torturer’ and buck the easy way on every issue that concerns our safety, just ignores our Mexican border???????????
Gonzales/Chertoff/McCain are not exactly favorites of mine but the ’round em up/ship em out’ crowd forces a decision. News flash: I did not even like some of that last bill. But Terrye wrote something a while back about Newt sitting up there and doing nothing………and now out lecturing on the subject. There is something wrong with that crap and the entire bunch of wimpy Pug Congress hypocrites that decided to POINT and supervise.
So get real. A lot of people bought some snake oil and it wasn’t me. Otherwise……..you explain the answers to those questions. We had some Speechwriting/Bookwriting/Elitists that played the Pied Pipper and a bunch of spineless Congressmen said to let them in that line. Promoted by the old MSM and the newly formed MSM.
Apologize cali_sun for picking on you when actually what you said was so mild compared to what is usually written.
Owl,
I was in no way implying anything you wrote regarding Pres. Bush, I am a supporter of Pres. Bush for the longest. However, I also feel that he lost his ‘mojo’ just a little, supporting Gonzales vs the lite sentence of Berger among other crimes committed by dems, and not proscecuted; I do not believe that Condi doing a good job, but rather implement a continuation of Clinton’s policies, such as Iran, Israel.
I will continue to support Pres. Bush, only not in the ‘comprehensive bill’, because I believe that there is more to the story than we know.
I have no problem with hardworking latinos, illegally or not, and many do work hard.
There are other elements I have problems with, 2 out 3 murder warrants in California are illegals; the gangs so severe in California etc..my city is a sanctuary city, and brings nothing but chaos.
Owl, apology accepted!
Thanks cali_sun. I came in from reading other sites and blew the gasket. Truly have tried to stay offline since I link the Nov elections directly to this issue. Does not matter what is true/not true but the perception of this issue is killing the Pugs.
Also…….I have great sympathy for your severe CA problems. Texas border land owners need relief also. I have wanted something done about this problem for many years. My gripe is the Tarcredo/Malkin’s have turned this into a “Republican” problem and virtually insured that nothing will be done. Nothing. The Dem base hates the illegals more than Pugs but that is not written in the Mex papers. They have so flamed the issue that I am now forced to dodge the issue with old friends that worked for citizenship and now vote. Same new voters that I convinced to vote for Bush (Pug). Good hardworking people that I can not look in the eye over how Bush has been painted by the Malkins. They were raised on the pap of ‘Dems good, Pugs bad’, the same as Blacks. Bush was the first to make a true dent into that voter block. And you must be in the majority to effect change. Standing on principle is fine but it won’t do a bit of good if you don’t have the power to back it up.
That does not address your problems. It is a crying shame that politicians can not show up for work……..and WORK. Every one of your CA criminals should have been rounded up and shipped out….. I wish it would happen. The problems occur when it is taken to the next step……..people willing to crash our economy, put many small businesses/farms out of business and punish hard working family orientated people. Compassion is needed and that includes compassion for your problems. Good luck!
Pat Buchanan thinks that just because Americans want to see more border security, they are just like him now. Well I have news for Pat, he is a holocaust denying loon and the border wall was considered a joke for years because he supported it and that in itself was enough for most people to laugh it off.
The last time this guy ran in 2000 he got less than 1% of the vote. Bush won a second term. So I don’t think that Bush needs political advice from Pat Buchanan, in fact if the Republicans want to finish their party off for good, just make this guy poster boy for border security.
And it is true, when Gingrich was Speaker that border was a lot more open than it is now. Bush has put more people and resources on that border than anyone in history. Was Gingrich in favor of law breaking back in the 90’s or what?
And California is a special case, because it made itself one.
AJ,
The poll results from Rasmussen don’t support either contention of your contentions about Republicans or Immigration Amnesty.
First, the debate on immigration _helped Republicans_.
See this:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/republicans_gain_trust_on_immigration_dems_still_have_edge_on_ten_key_issues
“Republicans Gain Trust on Immigration, Dems Still Have Edge on Ten Key Issues
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Voters continue to trust Democrats more than Republicans on ten key issues tracked by Rasmussen Reports. In fact, the latest tracking update on five of these issues shows Democrats gaining ground modestly on four of the five issues. However, there is one major exception to the trend—immigration.
A month ago, the Democrats had a fourteen-point advantage on the immigration issue. Following the Senate debate, the Democrats’ advantage has been cut to five points. Forty percent (40%) of voters now trust Democrats more than Republicans on immigration while 35% have more confidence in the GOP. The Republicans still lag Democrats on this issue, but they lag on every issue. Immigration is now tied with taxes as the GOP’s strongest issue. It’s also the only issue on which unaffiliated voters trust Republicans more than Democrats.”
Second, _The_American_People_ really really hated this Senate Bill:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/immigration_bill_failure_proves_rasmussen_s_first_law_of_politics
“The final Rasmussen Reports national telephone poll before the vote found that just 22% of Americans supported the legislation. No amount of Presidential persuasion, Senate logrolling, and procedural tricks was able to overcome that solid bi-partisan lack of public support (although it’s breathtaking to consider how close a determined leadership could come to passing such an unpopular bill).
The real mystery in all of this is why the Senators and their cheerleaders didn’t anticipate the public response. Perhaps they fell in love with their own rhetoric and forgot how it might sound to others.
Near the end of the debate, supporters of the doomed legislation often stated that the status quo is unacceptable. Most Americans would agree on that point. In fact, they might even hold that feeling more strongly than the Grand Bargainers of the Senate–72% of American voters believe it’s Very Important to reduce illegal immigration and enforce the borders. But controlling the border was never a focal point of the Senate debate. Instead, the Senators spent most of the time debating the fine points of various approaches to legalizing those who are here illegally. For voters, those topics were definitely a second-or-third tier aspect of the issue.
Because the Senators and the White House never showed much enthusiasm for reducing illegal immigration, only 16% believed the Senate bill would accomplish that goal. Forty-one percent (41%) thought passage of the legislation would actually lead to more illegal immigration. In other words, even though voters consider the status quo unacceptable, they had every confidence that Congress could make a bad situation worse.
It is impossible to overstate the significance of this basic fact. Outside of 46 Senators, hardly anybody thought the legislation would work. That’s why it was defeated. It wasn’t amnesty or guest-worker programs or paths to citizenship that doomed the bill. Each of those provisions made it more difficult for some segments of the population to accept. However, a majority would have accepted them as part of a true compromise that actually gained control of the border.
In that environment, the only way for political leaders to prove they are serious about enforcing the border and reducing illegal immigration will be to do it. That’s the next logical step in the immigration debate. ”
Lets repeat this basic fact you wish to gloss over:
>Forty-one percent (41%) thought passage of the legislation would
>actually lead to more illegal immigration. In other words, even
>though voters consider the status quo unacceptable, they had every
>confidence that Congress could make a bad situation worse.
This comment I got from a friend on the issue sums up the current state of the Immigration debate and all your histronics over Amesty won’t change them:
>It’s money. Business interests want cheap labor, and that is all they
>care about. They give campaign contributions to incumbent
>Congressmen and Senators to not enforce the law. Bush is a big
>government AND a big business conservative, so what big business
>wants, it gets.
>
>This is a simple issue for the public. The government’s refusal to
>enforce existing law means that ANY new law will only make things
>worse. So the status quo, i.e.. no new law is preferable to change,
>because change will only make things worse.
>
>The ONLY way to change the public on this will be to dramatically
>reduce illiegal immigration by successfully enforcing existing law.
>But business doesn’t want this, so Congress won’t pass the
>appropriations to enforce the existing laws.
>
>This won’t change until we get at least a five figure fatality single
>terrorist incident.
The short story is that the American people have lost all faith in the current American political elites — all of them — be they Republican or Democrat.
After the next mass casualty Terrorist Attack here in the States, this stasus on immigration will change.
However, the qustion won’t be about granting Amnesty. It will be how long a the pause in _any new immigration_ will be and how many people we will have to deport to secure the American homeland.
Trent,
yeah, they do. And so do other polls. And you know what – we will find out soon enough and I am not worried about being proven wrong. The GOP should be worried if I am right.
AJ,
You seem ignorant of what the anti-illegal immigration movement is up too.
There is now what amounts to an on-going information campaign by anti-immigration activists in talk radio and the internet against “catch and release” policies for illegal immigrant repeat felons that is aimed at both the Feds and the “Sanctuary City” movement.
This effects of this information campaign will be part of the 2008 election political landscape.
The “Open Border Oligarchs” are going to have a tough time answering this particular political argument by the likes of Tancredo:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-tancredo5jul05,0,4922284.story?coll=la-home-center
>”Attrition through enforcement,” Tancredo called it, sipping green
>iced tea on a shady patio before opening his campaign office in
>Ames, home of Iowa State University. “If people cannot get the
>thing for which they came — a job — they go home.”
>
>Some look at the immigration issue and see a complicated and
>confounding tangle of interests and emotions. Not Tancredo.
>
>”I have a solution,” he told a Friday night crowd of about 100 at the
>Quality Inn in downtown Des Moines. “It’s a radical one. Scary.
>Enormously controversial.” Then he paused and spaced his words
>for effect. “It’s called: Enforce … the … law.”
This particular argument is what shot down McCain-Kennedy and it is what will fuel the state and local level enforcement of Federal Immigration Laws.
The American public believes any change by the current political elites will result in more illegals via an amnesty and no border enforcement, just like from 1986 to 2007.
So why trust the Feds with any new immigration laws if they don’t enforce the current ones?
The money flow from the “Open Border Oligarchs” will keep the Feds from enforcing the law, but the talk radio/internet blog coverage of felon “catch and release” policies by the Feds and the sanctuaries localities will torpedo the credibility of elected federal officials.
Thus further poisoning the public for any amnesty based comprehensive immigration reform further down the road.
AJ,
This is too easy. The Pubs increased registration by a percentage point (also reported by Rasmussen) in the weeks following the death of the amnesty bill, Dem registration stayed unchanged.
Sounds like you need to make a few phone calls to that great mass of Pub defectors that you claim are so incensed by the cloture vote. They’re headed in the wrong way.