« McCain's Iraq Speech Today Mentions Al Qaeda 15 Times | Home | Despite Illness, Sen. Johnson Hauls In $600,000 In Campaign Funds »
Poll: Bush At 33%; Congress Drops To 24%
Still more warning signs for the Dem-controlled Congress: A new Associated Press-Ipsos poll finds that while Bush's approval rating remains mired at 33%, Congress' has dropped well below that, to 24%. That's less than one out of four people, students.
The poll does break out Congressional Dems versus Republicans, and those numbers won't cheer Dems too much. It finds that approval of Congressional Dems has plummeted 21 points, from 48% in May to 27% now. The Repubs are stuck at 20%.
We'll bring you the full poll when it's available.
Advertisement
Funny how the Senate GOP filibusters everything these days and the online left heaps as much scorn on the Dems as the GOP. Ironically, this scorn leveled at the Dems is likely to help the GOP spin a withdrawal from Iraq to their benefit. All you'll need is a few "brave" GOPers who break the "deadlock" to spin it as a GOP initiative. Or, perhaps they'll pull something like they did with DHS.
July 13, 2007 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the Democrats would just let the filibuster take place, so everyone would see what the republicans are doing, maybe the press couldn't keep spinning events like a 56 (yea)/44 (nay) vote split as a defeat by a MAJORITY.
July 13, 2007 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Keep in mind, the Dems who aren't happy with the Dem-controlled Congress are hardly going to vote for Republican congressional candidates when the next election rolls around.
July 13, 2007 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or the press could just do their jobs!
July 13, 2007 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to bring up a poster's spelling errors but yours is rather egregious.
Of course you meant "Republicans" instead of "Dems."
So now you have:
Don't you think that's much better?
Actually the GOP is hoping and praying the Democrats will nominate Hillary but hopefully the Democrats will choose a Democrat instead.
Best, Terry
July 13, 2007 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn right! Camp out in the chamber and let the fuckers talk 'til they can't then hold the vote.
OR camp out on the floor after each blocked vote and send the next five or so hours spinning into the microphone like Kermit . . . Sorry . . . Newt Grngrich did in the 90's. CSPAN will broadcast ALL NIGHT LONG. It is their mandate.
This is about getting the job done and not about being polite.
July 13, 2007 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's already happening. New Headline from MSNBC.com: "New GOP measure challenges Bush Iraq policy". Good ol' intrepid Republicans trying to end the Iraq war !!!
Really, the GOP has a very obvious script that we fall in line with. Whether we blame Hillary Clinton or other "spineless" Dems, its still part and parcel of the GOP's game plan to take credit for the eventual withdrawal. Getting out responsibly is obviously more important than politics, but the reality is that any GOP gains in Congress or the presidency will probably result in more wars--look how they are all trying to out "tough" each other.
Maybe it's my own personal bias, but those who say Clinton is similar to the GOP have as much credibility as Ralph Nader now has...or the Discovery Institute.
July 13, 2007 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Scorn is being heaped from the left because, with a majority in both houses, Democrats caved in to Bush on funding the war. Bush can't fund it unless he gets a majority in both houses to pass an appropriation for it, though Democrats and their apologists like to lie and claim that only a veto-proof majority can end the war.
For their fecklessness and deceit, Democrats deserve all the scorn they are getting and more. As for other legislation being blocked, Reid can force Republicans to hold the floor even if they have to do it by reading phone books. But he can't even muster statements of outrage.
But yes, as a result of this, the GOP would be able to spin a withdrawal from Iraq to their benefit.
July 13, 2007 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ralph Nader, Ross Perot and John Anderson got votes on little more than their credibility. They had no label (Nader was not a Green but rather the Greens chose to use his name to promote themselves). They didn't have the machinery of power. All they had was issues and a distaste by voters for the empty rhetoric fed to them, as do the occasional third party winners like Jesse Ventura.
Clinton stands for privilege and war and power. She stands for more for those who have more and less for those who have nothing.
Sounds like a Republican to me.
Sorry.
Best, Terry
July 13, 2007 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bill and Hillary are joined at the hip. And with Bill being all buddy-buddy with the Bush crime family paterfamilias....
July 13, 2007 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nobody expected much of anything other than what they've always done from the Repubs in Congress -- that's what their being stuck in one place reflects. Dems, OTOH, did disappoint. Dashed hopes are harder to forgive.
July 13, 2007 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you are exactly right, libra.
An aide came to Governor Earl Long in distress during a heated session with contributors, who had been promised a bridge and weren't getting it.
"What do I tell them?" asked the aide.
"Tell them I lied," ordered the Earl.
You just don't see that kind of thing among the Democrats in Washington anxious to support the troops by keeping them in Iraq.
Best, Terry
July 13, 2007 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink