Record Low Approval For Dem Congress

[red states rule]

Well the Dems finally accomplished something after 8 months in power

According to Quinnipiac, the Dems have attained the lowest approval rating since Quinnipiac has been taking polls

Dems are at 20% and the folks are seeing what fools they were for voting for them last November


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1093&What=&strArea=;&strTime=0

[Waffletush]

Good luck with any threads regarding Dems, poor performace, and low approval ratings. They won't touch those topics unless they can somehow blame Bush and/or point fingers at Bush.

[red states rule]

That is theor top talking point as they make their lame attempt to pass the buck

[Questerr]

I'd like to point out that the democrats only control 51% of Congress. That means that 49% of that 29% approval rating falls on the Republicans.

[preservanation]

I'd like to point out that the democrats only control 51% of Congress. That means that 49% of that 29% approval rating falls on the Republicans.
Political independents appear to agree with Republicans on this count—just 16% give Congress positive marks, while the balance give it a negative rating.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/8/15/182134.shtml?s=ic

[ViolaLee]

The low approval rating is because they are not doing what the people want them to do, which is IMPEACH the worst President and Vice President in US history.

You Bush lovers can post in glee about the low approval rating, but don't you feel foolish when you realize why they have a low approval rating?

[Labrocca]

Well since Pelosi stated that Impeachment was NOT the agenda even before the election that makes you mistaken.

While you might be right that the people want impeachment...it's not why they were elected and certainly has little to do with their approval numbers.

Impeachment imho...would lower even more their approval ratings. That's why I am all for impeachment...go for it Dems..knock yourselves out. Heck even Pelosi is smart enough to see impeachment as political suicide.

[ViolaLee]

If you really want the truth about the approval ratings here it is:

The Republicans have a 39.3% approval and the Democrats have a 49% approval.

So when the righties start spinning this story and making you believe the Democrats in congress have a low approval rating, just chalk it up to another one of their lies.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

[lily]

The low approval rating is because they are not doing what the people want them to do, which is IMPEACH the worst President and Vice President in US history.

You Bush lovers can post in glee about the low approval rating, but don't you feel foolish when you realize why they have a low approval rating?


I have to disagree.......Congress' approval rating was just fine, until they caved in, under being called names and thinking they would somehow stick and gave Bush every damn thing he wanted on the war spending. Since then it has been all downhill. It's only 8 months, they have time to get their act together. I'm disappointed, but I;m not giving up hope........well at least until October.

[Waffletush]

If you really want the truth about the approval ratings here it is:

The Republicans have a 39.3% approval and the Democrats have a 49% approval.

So when the righties start spinning this story and making you believe the Democrats in congress have a low approval rating, just chalk it up to another one of their lies.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/


Speaking of lies, let's go back to what you posted right before this...

The low approval rating is because they are not doing what the people want them to do, which is IMPEACH the worst President and Vice President in US history.

Hmmmmm, according to your 'sources', the Dems were elected to impeach a President. Yeah, I will take delusional for 500 Alex.

[Stoner]

This Do-Nothing-Congress is indeed one of if not the worst Congress in our history. They failed at their original "100 hour" goal, took off work to watch football, used our troops as political pawns while holding their money hostage, lied and gave false promises to the American people to get elected and put off important matters to pursue meaningless witchunts.

No wonder this Do-Nothing-Congress has such miserable numbers.

[Jaaaman]

A do nothing Congress with a do nothing Speaker of the House...

[NortheastCynic]

Would you guys prefer that the Democrats pass laws they'd like to see passed?

I love Congresses that do nothing.

-NC

[BoogyMan]

Would you guys prefer that the Democrats pass laws they'd like to see passed?

I love Congresses that do nothing.

-NC


That gave me a *very* cold shudder NC.

[CheesyMuslim]

Sorry bout that,

1. But, *Do something even if its wrong*.
2. Is what my dear ol Momma taught us.
3. Not just anything I supposed, but you get the gist of it right?
4. Neoliberals are *Doing Nothing* faster than anyone would of imagined!

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[lily]

You know, I wish they would come back from vacation and do something too, so you'll have something real to bitch about.

[AnnEsthesia]

lol lily

[ViolaLee]

For people interested in politics, some of you apparently don't pay much attention to the facts about what's going on in politics.



If you really want the truth about the approval ratings here it is:

The Republicans have a 39.3% approval and the Democrats have a 49% approval.

So when the righties start spinning this story and making you believe the Democrats in congress have a low approval rating, just chalk it up to another one of their lies.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/


Speaking of lies, let's go back to what you posted right before this...

The low approval rating is because they are not doing what the people want them to do, which is IMPEACH the worst President and Vice President in US history.

Hmmmmm, according to your 'sources', the Dems were elected to impeach a President. Yeah, I will take delusional for 500 Alex.


The Dems were elected to end the war. The people want the Dems to protect the constitution. Bush and Cheney are violating the constitution. The people want them impeached. Congress is not doing anything about either, so far. Congress has a low approval rating. The Republicans in congress have a lower approval rating than the Democrats. The people still have hope that the Democrats will do what the people want them to do. The Republicans couldn't give two shits about what the people want. Most of them anyway...Arlen Specter is one of the good guys. He should probably switch parties.


This Do-Nothing-Congress is indeed one of if not the worst Congress in our history. They failed at their original "100 hour" goal, took off work to watch football, used our troops as political pawns while holding their money hostage, lied and gave false promises to the American people to get elected and put off important matters to pursue meaningless witchunts.

No wonder this Do-Nothing-Congress has such miserable numbers.


It was Republican John Boehner who requested the day off to watch football as it was his state's team playing. And you blame the Dems for that? Way to believe the spin and the lies Stoner. You're such a good little Republican liar lover.

· Implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 commission.

Done

· Raising the minimum wage.

Done

· Halving the interest rate on college student loans.

Done

· Rolling back subsidies to big oil companies.

Done

· Stopping any privatization of Social Security.

Done

· Committing to no new deficit spending.

Done

· Authorizing the federal government to negotiate lower drug prices for Medicare.

Done

Of course some of these bills were vetoed by Bush. But the Democrats did what they promised. Now if the people want them to do more, they'll need to vote in more Democrats next election.

[Waffletush]

The Dems were elected to end the war. The people want the Dems to protect the constitution. Bush and Cheney are violating the constitution. The people want them impeached. Congress is not doing anything about either, so far. Congress has a low approval rating. The Republicans in congress have a lower approval rating than the Democrats. The people still have hope that the Democrats will do what the people want them to do. The Republicans couldn't give two shits about what the people want. Most of them anyway...Arlen Specter is one of the good guys. He should probably switch parties.

Do not confuse what YOU want with what the PEOPLE want.

Just becasue YOU hate Bush doesn't mean the general public agrees with what YOU want.

The gereral consensus after the election was people wanted change. Not that they agreed with what the Democrats wanted, but they wanted a change from what the Republicans were doing.

Funny that you use your blind partisanship and hate filled DailyKos content to bash anyone and everyone who supports Bush. Yet here you are supporting THE WORST CONGRESS EVER, and once again, what is your excuse for your party's failures?

It's all Bush's fault.

Of course some of these bills were vetoed by Bush. But the Democrats did what they promised. Now if the people want them to do more, they'll need to vote in more Democrats next election.


Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa!

The President exercised his Constitutional right to veto a bill and my party couldn't override it!

Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa!

My party's Congress is a failure, and I support THE WORST CONGRESS EVER.

Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa!

And it's all Bush's fault!

Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa!

Grow up, ViolaLee, grow up.

[AnnEsthesia]

As opposed to those who will call anyone who does NOT back Bush as being un-american, a traitor or a terrorist supporter?

[Waffletush]

They too can grow up.

[Stoner]

As opposed to those who will call anyone who does NOT back Bush as being un-american, a traitor or a terrorist supporter?


You neolibs come off as those things on your own. Bush has nothing to do with it. It's your actions. Nothing more nothing less.

[AnnEsthesia]

Hmm. I was not aware I had ever done anything that was traitorous. Could you please tell me what it was? Is it because I like pirogies?

[lily]

As opposed to those who will call anyone who does NOT back Bush as being un-american, a traitor or a terrorist supporter?


You neolibs come off as those things on your own. Bush has nothing to do with it. It's your actions. Nothing more nothing less.


In order for what you say here to make any sense Stoner, that would mean that Bush posts on this forum.[hr]

Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa!

The President exercised his Constitutional right to veto a bill and my party couldn't override it!

No, it would be more like Waaaaa! Waaaaa! Waaaa! Bush no longer has his rubber stamp congress and now uses his veto power for more than stem cell research.

[Waffletush]

Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa!

The President exercised his Constitutional right to veto a bill and my party couldn't override it!

No, it would be more like Waaaaa! Waaaaa! Waaaa! Bush no longer has his rubber stamp congress and now uses his veto power for more than stem cell research.

So override his veto.

[lily]

So override his veto.



I'm sure they will, once they get enough Democrats in the senate to do so.

[NortheastCynic]

Lily, I, like 'Tush, simply don't get what the complaining is about. THe President, like it or not, vetoed and the Congress doesn't have the votes to do anything about it. That's how our [flawed, broken and in need of abolishment] system of government works. Don't hate the playa, hate the game.

-NC

[lily]

NC.........I must be missing something here. I didn't see much complaining until Waffle put in the WAAAAA! WAAAAAA! I did see discussion though.

[NortheastCynic]

I understand, you haven't complained about the situation in this thread. Others, as I see it have, and as I said, I'm with them and you, the situation sucks, but that's how our government works.

-NC

[Labrocca]

If you really want the truth about the approval ratings here it is:

The Republicans have a 39.3% approval and the Democrats have a 49% approval.

So when the righties start spinning this story and making you believe the Democrats in congress have a low approval rating, just chalk it up to another one of their lies.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/


ViolaLee is caught in a lie.

Your quoting the vote record not the approval rating...guess that makes you a liar.

Hmm. I was not aware I had ever done anything that was traitorous. Could you please tell me what it was? Is it because I like pirogies?

I don't see anyone calling you a traitor. And I love perogies too.

http://www.channelm.ca/modules/ContentExpress/img_repository/feb24_perogies.jpg

If you ever visit NYC I can tell you where the best Perogies in the USA are.

[Stoner]

ViolaLee is caught in a lie.


I just assume they're always lying.

[Marley]

"If you ever visit NYC I can tell you where the best Perogies in the USA are."

I'll be there in a few weeks, where?

[AnnEsthesia]

As opposed to those who will call anyone who does NOT back Bush as being un-american, a traitor or a terrorist supporter?


You neolibs come off as those things on your own. Bush has nothing to do with it. It's your actions. Nothing more nothing less.




If you really want the truth about the approval ratings here it is:

The Republicans have a 39.3% approval and the Democrats have a 49% approval.

So when the righties start spinning this story and making you believe the Democrats in congress have a low approval rating, just chalk it up to another one of their lies.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/


ViolaLee is caught in a lie.

Your quoting the vote record not the approval rating...guess that makes you a liar.

Hmm. I was not aware I had ever done anything that was traitorous. Could you please tell me what it was? Is it because I like pirogies?

I don't see anyone calling you a traitor. And I love perogies too.

http://www.channelm.ca/modules/ContentExpress/img_repository/feb24_perogies.jpg

If you ever visit NYC I can tell you where the best Perogies in the USA are.


1st, every time I am debating someone and they start with the gem that 'all liberals =x' I assume that they are including me, considering they call me a liberal in each thread as well. So yes, when people start questioning the morals, patriotism and other aspects of dems/libs, I will question them on it. If you are willing to make such an inane statement, then you need to back it up. Stoner said us 'neolibs' come off as traitors and worse based on our own actions. I demand he tells me exactly what I have said and done that gives him the right to say that. Otherwise, he should back away from the stereotypes and start actually discussing things with the individuals he is talking to.

And no, the best pirogies come from my own kitchen, thank you very much.

[Waffletush]

1st, every time I am debating someone and they start with the gem that 'all liberals =x' I assume that they are including me, considering they call me a liberal in each thread as well. So yes, when people start questioning the morals, patriotism and other aspects of dems/libs, I will question them on it. If you are willing to make such an inane statement, then you need to back it up. Stoner said us 'neolibs' come off as traitors and worse based on our own actions. I demand he tells me exactly what I have said and done that gives him the right to say that. Otherwise, he should back away from the stereotypes and start actually discussing things with the individuals he is talking to.

And no, the best pirogies come from my own kitchen, thank you very much.


AnnEsthesia,

First and foremost, people are not questioning your morals, patriotism, etc, they are questioning your judgment. And rightfully so.

Your political stance is judgment based; who you support and who you think is right vs wrong. You have to be able to openly and objectively view the other side of the coin to see why people are questioning your judgment. Can you even consider the mere possibility that there is another point of view – that just may be opposite or yours? And please, let’s not fall back on the tired and worn out ‘You are making a personal attack on me!” that lots of people fall into. If questioning your political stance it making a personal attack, then everyone is guilty as charged. Your ideas, and your stance on issues are allowed to be challenged. It gets old seeing people spout off virtual rhetorical spew day in and day out, then play wounded bird when their judgment is challenged.

Second as far as ‘all liberals = x’ the two most biased Liberals on this site love to throw out the gamut of ‘neocon’, ‘fascist’, ‘extremist’, ‘liar’, etc anytime they refer to anyone who is a right-winger. I have yet to see you lift a finger in retort to their stereotyping.

Then again, I could be wrong.


On a side note - will ViolaLee come back, cowboy up, and admit her falsehood?

[Stoner]

On a side note - will ViolaLee come back, cowboy up, and admit her falsehood?


I have never seen a neolib admit they're wrong. Usually they'll deny it, use the term, "strawman" and either change the subject, run away or continie ranting on about the lies they were just debunked on.

[Labrocca]

"If you ever visit NYC I can tell you where the best Perogies in the USA are."

I'll be there in a few weeks, where?


Stage Deli on 2nd ave and St. Marks Place (8th street)...small little hole in the wall but AMAZING food...get some Kasha with Perogies.

Odd that ViolaLee has moved away from this thread. :)

I just assume they're always lying.

I may have to start assuming the same. Won't that make me a wonderful person? Seems to work for some here. Always assuming a certain group is liar lovers and other such names. Gets old very quick and doesn't do well for a persons character. Mistakes happen...people say the wrong things especially when under constant questioning year after year with cameras rolling.

So again..back to topic...Dems control a record low approval rating congress. Exactly how do you spin that?

[ViolaLee]

Your quoting the vote record not the approval rating...guess that makes you a liar.This is the approval rating of Republicans vs Democrats. It's a poll asking if you were voting today would you vote for a Republican or a Democrat. Here are the questions. http://www.tarrance.com/11363Qper.pdf[hr]What exactly are you trying to accuse me of lying about Labrocca? Are you trying to convince people that the Republicans in congress have a higher approval rating than the Democrats? Instead of accusing me of lying for saying the opposite, why not show us a poll that shows a higher approval rating for Republicans in congress than Democrats?

Here's a poll that shows Democrats have a 54% disapproval rating and Republicans have a 64% disapproval rating.

Are you still calling me a liar or will you apologize and admit you were wrong.

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm

[Labrocca]

Well let's look at the FACTS.


33% (approve) "Do you approve or disapprove of the job the Democratic leaders in Congress are doing?"
31% "How would you rate the job Democrats in Congress are doing: excellent, pretty good, only fair, or poor?"
36% "Do you approve or disapprove of the job Democrats in Congress are doing?"
43% "Do you approve or disapprove of the job the Democratic leaders in Congress are doing?"


34%(approve) "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are doing their job?"
21% "How would you rate the job Republicans in Congress are doing: excellent, pretty good, only fair, or poor?"
30% "Do you approve or disapprove of the job Republicans in Congress are doing?"
48% (approve) "Do you approve or disapprove of the job the Republican leaders in Congress are doing?"


Bold questions show the GOP higher

As you can see it's not nearly the landslide you said it was...and in a few polls the Approval rating of the GOP is HIGHER...explain the discrepency you have below. Did you just make these numbers up?

The Republicans have a 39.3% approval and the Democrats have a 49% approval.

Again...you aren't telling it how it really is. You are certainly ok with calling others liars and people that can't admit a mistake. Here you are ...in an OBVIOUS error and you are backpeddling trying to worm your way out of it. You should be a Republican.

See...now you are trying to add actual facts and even changing the subject. This is about APPROVAL RATINGS...not DISAPPROVAL.

Here's a poll that shows Democrats have a 54% disapproval rating and Republicans have a 64% disapproval rating.

I have caught you posting something that wasn't true. You tell me the proper reaction.

In case you are still unsure what I am talking about..

YOU SAID THIS:
The Republicans have a 39.3% approval and the Democrats have a 49% approval.

Now prove it. PROVE IT or else YOU apologize for lying. C'mon...you seem to think every republican is a liar unwilling to admit even the slightest error but now the shoe is on the other foot. How will you react?

btw...this link:
Here are the questions. http://www.tarrance.com/11363Qper.pdf
It doesn't have the word approval in the entire document.

And you haven't refuted my claim that without doubt the Democrats are LEADING the worst Congress in history...that's no small feat. Of course your spin is obvious...it's the GOP and POTUS doing right?? LOL

[ViolaLee]

Labrocca, I posted the link to where I got the numbers. No I didn't make them up. Do you click links? You certainly don't post them. Your numbers have no links whatsoever.

Show me your proof for your numbers. I already showed mine.

And again - I expect an apology for accusing me of lying. I have links to back up what I say - ALWAYS -

It's not my fault if you don't click them. You've made a mistake Labrocca.

[lily]

Um, Viola there is a link in Labrocca's post.

[ViolaLee]

Oh. :dizzy: I think I better go to bed.

Anyway, I posted links in my thread too Labrocca. Don't ask me where I got my numbers from as if I made them up. They're right in my links.

[Labrocca]

Viola if you even bothered to read the link YOU posted you would notice that all my quotes are from those pages.

Quote for me the area that says the approval rating for Dems is 49% and that the GOP is 39%. Find that on the page because I don't see it. It's not there and that's the problem. You are making a claim which is NOT TRUE. Saying something that's not true makes you a ______. So...back up your claim with a direct quote.

[Lazarus]

In the words of Bill Jacks
" Jesus Christ Jesus Christ Jesus Christ!!!"
http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/mad/mad0052.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net)

* * * * * * * * * *
WHY are Dems so low in the polls?
Obviously, unlike The Reps, Joe or Jane Democrat/Independent are not hesitant to voice their disapproval.

CBS latest poll illuminates this fact; may the forum gods smile upon me while I attempt to post these screenshots. ( After-action : they didn't )
http://bp2.blogger.com/_MnYI3_FRbbQ/RssfVOex-pI/AAAAAAAAAOs/-BEWF9k-2vM/s1600-h/poll.png

http://bp2.blogger.com/_MnYI3_FRbbQ/RssgnOex-qI/AAAAAAAAAO0/bIt-Ztvdmb0/s1600-h/poll1.png

The Dems HAVE failed.
1 - They have failed to curtail the Iraq fiasco

2 - They have failed to tighten the reins on Junior over anything of consequence

3 - They have failed in their investigations over Bush' illegalities/mis-steps/etc.

If - after recess - the Dems want to regain credibility, they have to increase the pressure on Junior over items 1 + 2.
Their capitulations are what is bringing their #s down.

Will they have found their 2nd wind?
I sure as Hell hope so.

[Labrocca]

I agree and while the dems might have more approval than the GOP it's certainly very close in most polls. I have a real problem with the Dems being elected under a false pretense. Many were claiming that once Dems took office the White House would be under investigation, the troops would come home, and accountability would return to government. They promised to curtail earmarks as well. Pretty much every key point they were elected under they have not done. I think it's a shame because imho when a person or party is elected one would expect their promises to be met. I feel this way if a Dem or GOP was in office. I felt this way under Clinton and that his Health Care promises didn't go ANYWHERE. As a matter of fact LESS people were insured when he left office. I always think to myself when there is a winner that hey...lets hope they do what they promise since that's why they won.

Very disappointing imho for everyone.

[ECW]

Democrats had no idea that Republicans would help grind the process down to zero once they got ousted. They did it with the earmarks legislation by tripling the number of earmarks so there was no way all of them could be looked at before being inserted into relevant legislation. They wouldn't pull that stunt if they were in power so they waited and caught the Democrats off guard. The Democrats eventually made the right choice but it took some time.

They also did not realize that a president that never listened to a republican congress sure as hell wouldn't listen to a Democratic Congress. Hellfire. The dumbass at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue couldn't even get the name of the party correct because he had been mispronouncing it all his adult life.

Just to show them who was boss he INCREASED the numbers of troops right after Democrats won the election. Tell me it wasn't a political move and I'll show you a bridge I own that I would like to sell to you.

While the Democrats in the minority in the Senate tried to play ball and not gum up the works at every turn, the Republicans in the minority are plain everyday obstructionist requiring damn near every vote to be 60+ in order to pass. Democrats are afraid of the filibuster. If I were Harry Reid, I would keep the Senate in session 24/7 and make the same Republican hold the floor the entire time to break any filibuster attempt. Do it on every bill until the GOP realizes that they would certainly get more done by cooperating than by being obstructionist.

People want something to got done. What they fail to realize is that now it is the GOP that is the roadblock to progress still led by George Bush and his failed presidency wringing every last drop out of his turnip.

[TheStripey1]

Well the Dems finally accomplished something after 8 months in power

According to Quinnipiac, the Dems have attained the lowest approval rating since Quinnipiac has been taking polls

Dems are at 20% and the folks are seeing what fools they were for voting for them last November


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1093&What=&strArea=;&strTime=0


The problem is that the democrats need a few republicans to jump ship in order to bring the war to an end... because, as I have told you countless times on the other boards we've been at, it takes more than 51 senate votes, to override bush's vetoes... it takes 67...

Is 51 larger than 67 in your world, rsr?[hr]
Good luck with any threads regarding Dems, poor performace, and low approval ratings. They won't touch those topics unless they can somehow blame Bush and/or point fingers at Bush.



pffffffft... :nana:
[hr]
That is theor top talking point as they make their lame attempt to pass the buck



talk about lame ducks... :nana: ya got bush, that's fer sure... ya got Rove... Gonzo... my but you have a whole slew of lame ducks to claim as your own...
[hr]
I'd like to point out that the democrats only control 51% of Congress. That means that 49% of that 29% approval rating falls on the Republicans.



to mathematically challenged republicans like rsr, 51 senate votes means that the democrats are in control... even though it takes more votes than that to override bush's inevitable vetoes...

ALL the democratic majority can do now is conduct investigations.
[hr]
The low approval rating is because they are not doing what the people want them to do, which is IMPEACH the worst President and Vice President in US history.

You Bush lovers can post in glee about the low approval rating, but don't you feel foolish when you realize why they have a low approval rating?


They can't... It takes more votes than they have.

[hr]

The low approval rating is because they are not doing what the people want them to do, which is IMPEACH the worst President and Vice President in US history.

You Bush lovers can post in glee about the low approval rating, but don't you feel foolish when you realize why they have a low approval rating?


I have to disagree.......Congress' approval rating was just fine, until they caved in, under being called names and thinking they would somehow stick and gave Bush every damn thing he wanted on the war spending. Since then it has been all downhill. It's only 8 months, they have time to get their act together. I'm disappointed, but I;m not giving up hope........well at least until October.



Bush vetoed the bill... the Democrats didn't have the votes to override it... they need at least 17 republicans to come to their senses before anything can happen vis a vis ending the war in Iraq.
[hr]
This Do-Nothing-Congress is indeed one of if not the worst Congress in our history. They failed at their original "100 hour" goal, took off work to watch football, used our troops as political pawns while holding their money hostage, lied and gave false promises to the American people to get elected and put off important matters to pursue meaningless witchunts.

No wonder this Do-Nothing-Congress has such miserable numbers.


I suppose you'd like to go back to the daze of the republican controlled congress where all they did was sit on their asses and give bush everything he wanted, with absolutely no oversight whatsoever?

No thanks.

[hr]
Sorry bout that,

1. But, *Do something even if its wrong*.
2. Is what my dear ol Momma taught us.
3. Not just anything I supposed, but you get the gist of it right?
4. Neoliberals are *Doing Nothing* faster than anyone would of imagined!

Regards,
JamesofTexas


it takes more votes than the democrats have to override bush's vetoes... they need republicans to come to their senses before any progress will be made.
[hr]

As opposed to those who will call anyone who does NOT back Bush as being un-american, a traitor or a terrorist supporter?


You neolibs come off as those things on your own. Bush has nothing to do with it. It's your actions. Nothing more nothing less.


riiiiiiiiiiiight, bush has done nothing to earn the disdain he gets from the left...

have you been under that rock all this time, stoney?
[hr]
Hmm. I was not aware I had ever done anything that was traitorous. Could you please tell me what it was? Is it because I like pirogies?


you like perogies too? wow... I love the hot sweet mustard...

[hr]


As opposed to those who will call anyone who does NOT back Bush as being un-american, a traitor or a terrorist supporter?


You neolibs come off as those things on your own. Bush has nothing to do with it. It's your actions. Nothing more nothing less.


In order for what you say here to make any sense Stoner, that would mean that Bush posts on this forum.[hr]

Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa!

The President exercised his Constitutional right to veto a bill and my party couldn't override it!

No, it would be more like Waaaaa! Waaaaa! Waaaa! Bush no longer has his rubber stamp congress and now uses his veto power for more than stem cell research.




even if 100% of the democrats in the senate voted to overide bush's vetoes, it would STILL take 16 more republicans to make it happen... republicans always try to sweep that fact under the rug... ever wonder why?

because they're trying to shift the blame...

the blame falls on the shoulders of the REPUBLICAN PARTY... the same folks that got us into the mess in the first place with their ruubber stamping ways...



[hr]



So override his veto.



I'm sure they will, once they get enough Democrats in the senate to do so.



Or once some republicans decide that the future of the nation is more important than their own political leanings... it will take 17 republicans to come to their senses... will they?

damn I sure hope so, but I have no illusions that they will...
[hr]
NC.........I must be missing something here. I didn't see much complaining until Waffle put in the WAAAAA! WAAAAAA! I did see discussion though.


perhaps waaaaa waaaaa is how waffle gets what he wants in his neck of the woods... it isn't in any adult household, but it could be that way in waffle's...

[hr]
I just assume they're always lying.

I may have to start assuming the same. Won't that make me a wonderful person? Seems to work for some here. Always assuming a certain group is liar lovers and other such names. Gets old very quick and doesn't do well for a persons character. Mistakes happen...people say the wrong things especially when under constant questioning year after year with cameras rolling.

So again..back to topic...Dems control a record low approval rating congress. Exactly how do you spin that?


Why not... I think most republicans are liar lovers since most republicans love bush/gonzo... are you still among them? OR have you come to your senses yet?

what will it take for you to see that you have been backing the wrong person/party all along?

[hr]

Your quoting the vote record not the approval rating...guess that makes you a liar.This is the approval rating of Republicans vs Democrats. It's a poll asking if you were voting today would you vote for a Republican or a Democrat. Here are the questions. http://www.tarrance.com/11363Qper.pdf[hr]What exactly are you trying to accuse me of lying about Labrocca? Are you trying to convince people that the Republicans in congress have a higher approval rating than the Democrats? Instead of accusing me of lying for saying the opposite, why not show us a poll that shows a higher approval rating for Republicans in congress than Democrats?

Here's a poll that shows Democrats have a 54% disapproval rating and Republicans have a 64% disapproval rating.

Are you still calling me a liar or will you apologize and admit you were wrong.

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm


Perhaps 54% is greater in his world than 64%... it isn't in mine and it obviously isn't in yours... are ALL republicans this bad with math?

[Labrocca]

Character assassination ehh...old method tried and true. Whenever I see the term "liar lover" I can only think one thing..."ahh...a partisan".

what will it take for you to see that you have been backing the wrong person/party all along?

What will it take for you to read my party affilation in my profile? How about reading my posts before making assumptions about who I "love"? Coming to my senses? Nah...just making my own decisions based on information I am provided.

Perhaps 54% is greater in his world than 64%... it isn't in mine and it obviously isn't in yours... are ALL republicans this bad with math?

Do you have a hard time with reading comprehesion? Check out the thread title. It's about APPROVAL RATINGS..nothing more..the attempt to bring in other parameters doesn't work with me. I know what the topic is about. I can't speak for ALL republicans...I can only speak for myself and yes 64% is a higher percentage than 54%. Now you can have complete faith in my personal math skills.

[TheStripey1]

I agree and while the dems might have more approval than the GOP it's certainly very close in most polls. I have a real problem with the Dems being elected under a false pretense. Many were claiming that once Dems took office the White House would be under investigation, the troops would come home, and accountability would return to government. They promised to curtail earmarks as well. Pretty much every key point they were elected under they have not done. I think it's a shame because imho when a person or party is elected one would expect their promises to be met. I feel this way if a Dem or GOP was in office. I felt this way under Clinton and that his Health Care promises didn't go ANYWHERE. As a matter of fact LESS people were insured when he left office. I always think to myself when there is a winner that hey...lets hope they do what they promise since that's why they won.

Very disappointing imho for everyone.



which part of the fact that they don't have the votes neccessary to override bush's inevitable vetoes are you failing to grasp?

is it the math part? Labrocca... do REALLY you think they can overide vetoes with only 51 votes?

please tell me you don't...[hr]
Democrats had no idea that Republicans would help grind the process down to zero once they got ousted. They did it with the earmarks legislation by tripling the number of earmarks so there was no way all of them could be looked at before being inserted into relevant legislation. They wouldn't pull that stunt if they were in power so they waited and caught the Democrats off guard. The Democrats eventually made the right choice but it took some time.

They also did not realize that a president that never listened to a republican congress sure as hell wouldn't listen to a Democratic Congress. Hellfire. The dumbass at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue couldn't even get the name of the party correct because he had been mispronouncing it all his adult life.

Just to show them who was boss he INCREASED the numbers of troops right after Democrats won the election. Tell me it wasn't a political move and I'll show you a bridge I own that I would like to sell to you.

While the Democrats in the minority in the Senate tried to play ball and not gum up the works at every turn, the Republicans in the minority are plain everyday obstructionist requiring damn near every vote to be 60+ in order to pass. Democrats are afraid of the filibuster. If I were Harry Reid, I would keep the Senate in session 24/7 and make the same Republican hold the floor the entire time to break any filibuster attempt. Do it on every bill until the GOP realizes that they would certainly get more done by cooperating than by being obstructionist.

People want something to got done. What they fail to realize is that now it is the GOP that is the roadblock to progress still led by George Bush and his failed presidency wringing every last drop out of his turnip.


Exactly... very good post, ECW, very good post.

[hr]
Character assassination ehh...old method tried and true. Whenever I see the term "liar lover" I can only think one thing..."ahh...a partisan".

what will it take for you to see that you have been backing the wrong person/party all along?

What will it take for you to read my party affilation in my profile? How about reading my posts before making assumptions about who I "love"? Coming to my senses? Nah...just making my own decisions based on information I am provided.

Perhaps 54% is greater in his world than 64%... it isn't in mine and it obviously isn't in yours... are ALL republicans this bad with math?

Do you have a hard time with reading comprehesion? Check out the thread title. It's about APPROVAL RATINGS..nothing more..the attempt to bring in other parameters doesn't work with me. I know what the topic is about. I can't speak for ALL republicans...I can only speak for myself and yes 64% is a higher percentage than 54%. Now you can have complete faith in my personal math skills.


when you state that you will soon start viewing all libs as liars, is when I will say what I said... you said it... I said it...

so?

what will it take for you to decide you have been backing the wrong party?

[hr]
Well the Dems finally accomplished something after 8 months in power

According to Quinnipiac, the Dems have attained the lowest approval rating since Quinnipiac has been taking polls

Dems are at 20% and the folks are seeing what fools they were for voting for them last November


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1093&What=&strArea=;&strTime=0


from your link:

26. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job?

..............Tot Rep Dem

Approve 20% 22% 23%




Thread Opener's link shows that the Democrats in Congress get a higher approval rating than the republicans...

IN THIS POLL... that is...

oh gawwwd... I just noticed that when rsr started this thread, he misread the finding of the poll... he quoted it as saying the democrats were at 20% approval... when it actually states the dems are at 23%...

let this be a lesson for y'all.... always check rsr's links to make sure his conclusions are what is actually the case...

[Labrocca]

which part of the fact that they don't have the votes neccessary to override bush's inevitable vetoes are you failing to grasp?

is it the math part? Labrocca... do REALLY you think they can overide vetoes with only 51 votes?

What part of an incompetent congress do you not understand? The Democrats have been ineffective at working with GOP to get things done even though the GOP doesn't really support the president. Certainly the GOP has less support for Bush than the Dems had for Clinton. Clinton was loved even when hated. The GOP is raving mad about Bush. It's practically a full-on mutiny. None of the GOP candidates want to be associated with Bush.

When Bill Clinton was in the white house the GOP lead Congress got bills passed. They even managed to impeach Clinton..something the Dems have failed to do even though their base is screaming for it.

105th congress that impeached Clinton..

Republican Party 55 (shifted to 54 twice)
Democratic Party 45 (shifted to 46 twice)

So that's a lame excuse...obviously 67 isn't required to get an impeachment done.

what will it take for you to decide you have been backing the wrong party?

Not much since I already stated as much months ago.

[maineman]

it is classic RSR to misstate the poll numbers for congress as the poll numbers for the democratic congress....


whenever the public is asked to differentiate between the democrats in congress and the republicans in congress, the democrats come out way on top.... it is the republicans who are dragging the public approval of congress into the toilet.[hr]he doesn't even show up at USMB anymore....he got laughed off the site, and it is predominantly republicans. I think he was embarrassing them.

[TheStripey1]

which part of the fact that they don't have the votes neccessary to override bush's inevitable vetoes are you failing to grasp?

is it the math part? Labrocca... do REALLY you think they can overide vetoes with only 51 votes?

What part of an incompetent congress do you not understand? The Democrats have been ineffective at working with GOP to get things done even though the GOP doesn't really support the president. Certainly the GOP has less support for Bush than the Dems had for Clinton. Clinton was loved even when hated. The GOP is raving mad about Bush. It's practically a full-on mutiny. None of the GOP candidates want to be associated with Bush.

When Bill Clinton was in the white house the GOP lead Congress got bills passed. They even managed to impeach Clinton..something the Dems have failed to do even though their base is screaming for it.

105th congress that impeached Clinton..

Republican Party 55 (shifted to 54 twice)
Democratic Party 45 (shifted to 46 twice)

So that's a lame excuse...obviously 67 isn't required to get an impeachment done.

what will it take for you to decide you have been backing the wrong party?

Not much since I already stated as much months ago.


67 votes is what is neccessary to override bush's vetoes... is 51 larger than 67 in your world? cuz the democrats only have 51 votes on a good day... they need republicans... but those republicans would rather see our troops continue to die in Iraq than go against the president's wishes...

and they say they support the troops... what a frigging joke...

[Labrocca]

The math lesson doesn't work in politics. You didn't address the issue of how Clinton got impeached without this magical 67 votes you speak of. Are you for or against impeachment of Bush? Would you like it to happen or not? If so then why can't the Dems get it done?

[ViolaLee]

The math lesson doesn't work in politics. You didn't address the issue of how Clinton got impeached without this magical 67 votes you speak of. Are you for or against impeachment of Bush? Would you like it to happen or not? If so then why can't the Dems get it done?


Dude, the House impeached Clinton. The 67 votes is referring to the Senate.

[Labrocca]

The math lesson doesn't work in politics. You didn't address the issue of how Clinton got impeached without this magical 67 votes you speak of. Are you for or against impeachment of Bush? Would you like it to happen or not? If so then why can't the Dems get it done?


Dude, the House impeached Clinton. The 67 votes is referring to the Senate.



Ahh..you are correct Viola. Does anyone know the breakdown in the house for the impeachment? I am willing to bet it's similar.

Hey...look what I found...

http://encarta.msn.com/media_701500271/Partisan_Breakdown_of_Seats_in_the_House_of_Repres entatives.html

So basically the House has a BIGGER margin today than it did in 1998. So why can't the House of Representatives impeach Bush???

I really this thread is about Congress so I might have to make a new one.

[TheStripey1]

The math lesson doesn't work in politics. You didn't address the issue of how Clinton got impeached without this magical 67 votes you speak of. Are you for or against impeachment of Bush? Would you like it to happen or not? If so then why can't the Dems get it done?


I don't know how Clinton got impeached. I wasn't paying attention then... I was more concerned with making money when money was to be made... and besides, I was a republican back then...

when bush vetoes any appropriations bill that calls for a troop withdrawal, they need 67 votes to override it... that's where the 67 votes come into play.

Impeach bush? why? It'll take longer than he has left to get'er done... I'm all for getting our troops home in a phased withdrawal... How about you? Do you favor impeaching him or do you think the time would be better spent trying to end the war...

[ViolaLee]

Ahh..you are correct Viola. Does anyone know the breakdown in the house for the impeachment? I am willing to bet it's similar.


The house needs 219 out of 435 to vote yes to impeach.

Then the senate needs 67 to convict and remove.

The house might be able to impeach, but we don't have enough votes in the senate to remove, so what's the point?

[David Hume]

Just to get the facts out during the trial. ;)

[ViolaLee]

There doesn't have to be a trial. They could call a vote and have it over in one day.

[Marley]

"There doesn't have to be a trial."

LMAO

Well now! There's a new tag line!

[ViolaLee]

Emale, the house impeaches with a vote. There's no trial.

The conviction and removal, or acquittal is in the Clinton case, happens in the Senate. That's where the trial is. There's no trial for impeachment.

[mammalicious]

The math lesson doesn't work in politics. You didn't address the issue of how Clinton got impeached without this magical 67 votes you speak of. Are you for or against impeachment of Bush? Would you like it to happen or not? If so then why can't the Dems get it done?


Personally, I am against the impeachment of Bush...because to do so would put Cheney in charge...meaning, where's the change?

I am another that voted for something to be done regarding the start of withdrawl from Iraq. I am happy that there is no longer a rubber stamp Congress. Ever notice how much more frequently Bush looks like a petulant child? Why is it that no matter who has the majority, a great many republicans feel it is upon the democrats to ''work together'' and get along to get things done? What that sounds like is ''just do what the repubs want, cause we ain't bending.'' Republicans need to have the same expectations of willingness to work for the country placed upon them.

The reason they will not break with Bush is because there is a die-hard base that still supports him on the war, and they still have to consider their political futures...so they will only keep him at arms length...they will not completely disassociate with him, the leader of their party, and look 'soft on terrorists'. Look at all the GOP debates...there is no open criticism of the president or his policies/scandals (excluding Ron Paul). It's always flipped back to 9/11 or ''look what the dems did''

[maineman]

As I read through this thread, I have to wonder what has happened to the process of teaching civics in America. The lack of understanding surrounding a pretty fundamental legislative process is staggering.

[maineman]

and in addition to the lack of understanding of the process of government, there seems to be a certain naivete about politics itself. Democrats saw the republican party's image damaged by their headlong rush to impeach Clinton. The process was time consuming and jammed up governmental functions for months on end. Why in the world would Democrats see any benefit to putting America through that sort of process when (1)they SAW how little it gained the republicans when they tried it... (2)the country is bogged down in a war that needs attentive congressional oversight... and (3) they do not come anywhere NEAR having the 67 votes in the senate necessary to convict Bush... and (4) impeaching and removing Dubya from office only puts Dick "Shooter" Cheney with his finger on the nuclear trigger???

[Marley]

Since when is the power of the US government to be exploited for partisan purposes AT ALL? EVER?

When, for you Democrats, does the country ever get placed above the party?

This ENTIRE thread illustrates how Democrats have no sense of legitimate democracy at all. Every post is from a partisan perspective, using the raw power of government for partisan purposes, absolutely NOTHING from a perspective of proper democratic (small d) governance. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch, zero.

Pathetic.

In light of how you Democrats look at impeachment, obviously you all would have zero problem with sending out the FBI, DEA, ATF, et all to simply ARREST EVERY REPUBLICAN the day before election day!

Same principles and ethics at play, right? Party first, screw the country, right Democrats?

[AnnEsthesia]

Um... I have never voted along party lines or held an ideal just because the Democratic Party tells me it is their opinion. As for the rest of your idiotic rant, no, I would not send people out to arrest all Republicans. How dumb of a statement is that?

[Marley]

Impeachment is a tool of democracy to to eliminate bad apples, criminals, like Clinton, busted committing a crime. It's a stop gap to prevent disctatorships from springing up under the constitution (i.e. arrest republicans, a notion to get you to think, oh well I tried)

It IS NOT a tool to manipulate political power.

This entire thread is a bunch of leftist playing arm chair quarterback in power games, cluelessly bumbling along spouting utterly unethical opinions.

Pathetic.

So where's the line?

Once you start exploiting constitutional provisions for power plays, where's your ethical line? Does it exist at all anymore?

Let me guess, you bumble around with whatever feels good, right? No sober, serious thought to participating in demopcracy and governing in accordance to the written understanding of the constiution, right? Just whatever feels good.

[AnnEsthesia]

So, you have a problem with people wishing that two bad apples who have dragged the country through the muck would actually be held accountable? Yep... more important to impeach someone over a BJ than over misuse of power and office. Yep.

[maineman]

Since when is the power of the US government to be exploited for partisan purposes AT ALL? EVER?

When, for you Democrats, does the country ever get placed above the party?

This ENTIRE thread illustrates how Democrats have no sense of legitimate democracy at all. Every post is from a partisan perspective, using the raw power of government for partisan purposes, absolutely NOTHING from a perspective of proper democratic (small d) governance. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch, zero.

Pathetic.

In light of how you Democrats look at impeachment, obviously you all would have zero problem with sending out the FBI, DEA, ATF, et all to simply ARREST EVERY REPUBLICAN the day before election day!

Same principles and ethics at play, right? Party first, screw the country, right Democrats?


I do not understand why republicans, who themselves fought so hard to gain control of all branches of our government - in order to enact a platform of initiatives that they truly believe would make America better - continually cast democrat's desires to regain control of government FOR EXACTLY THE SAME DAMNED REASON as "putting party OVER country".

[Marley]

Ann, darling, Clinton wasn't impeached "for a BJ."

Why do you have to resort to out right lies?

[AnnEsthesia]

Oh, so sorry. He lied about a blowjob. So much worse than lying about reasons for which we went to war.

[Marley]

He broke the law dear.

Simple stuff.

Breaking the law for a president of the USA is like your virginity.

You either are a crook, or you're not!

[Elrathin]

Oh, so sorry. He lied about a blowjob. So much worse than lying about reasons for which we went to war.


Regardless of the what he lied about, he commited a felony. That is the one black mark on Clinton that I will not stand up for.

Clinton's biggest mistake was not standing on the podium, looking right at Ken Starr, and saying "Yeah I banged that, and did some kinky stuff to. What you going to do about it?"

He wouldn't have gone though impeachment hearings and Ken Starr would have been the one with egg on his face for investigating a blowjob.

[AnnEsthesia]

Oh, of course he lied and he got what he deserves, but that does not, as far as I am concerned, make him *oh so much worse* than Bush. I will take someone who lies about a BJ (convicted or not) over someone who lies and sends us to war.

[AnnEsthesia]

Frankly, I hope the next president is a Dem, that they overturn Bush's little presidential record law that allows records to be hidden and exposes all the illegal, unconstitutional and fucked up crap that Bush has been hiding from view. And don't give me the line that he has not done anything wrong. No one goes to the lengths that this administration has gone to in order to hide from scrutiny if they are completely above board and nothing has been done that they would be censured for.

[Elrathin]

And don't give me the line that he has not done anything wrong.


I am no Bush supporter at all, however regardless of what people may think, he has not done anything that has been proven illegal yet. Innocent until proven guilty.

I agree there is a strong possibility that he has done something (Only opinion though), but legally he hasn't done anything illegal that has been proven or convicted of yet.

People can have their doubts and that is fine, but I hold Bush up to the same protection that people accuse Kerry of being a traitor. It has never been proven nor has he ever been tried and/or convicted for it.

[AnnEsthesia]

I never said he has been proven guilty. However, as I said, I am sure that there is a good reason why they are dodging and weaving constantly in order to hide from view. Why not allow the VP office to be reviewed? Nope, better to claim it is not part of the executive branch. I hope Cheney never tries out for "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?" because clearly he does not remember his civics classes.

[Elrathin]

What I am more worried about is if future Presidents take the precedence that Bush has setup to REALLY screw with things to an almost dictatorship.

The wheels have been greased for just such a thing if future presidents don't overturn some of the stuff this administration has done.

[AnnEsthesia]

Which is why I hope for a Dem who will invalidate Bush's presidential permission law and open up the records for full scrutiny.

[Elrathin]

Which is why I hope for a Dem who will invalidate Bush's presidential permission law and open up the records for full scrutiny.


I don't know, the way the dems have been going, I don't think I would trust one of them to overturn it. Secretly I think they like it so when they get into the white house, they can use it for themselves. It's about power and dem politicians are no more saints at that then republicans.

I have no real faith in the politicians I'm seeing so far.

[AnnEsthesia]

I think the Dems are more likely to overturn it than a fellow republican. A republican has a vested interest in not adding more dirt against the republican party and like it or not, what Bush has done would taint the republican party.

[Elrathin]

I think the Dems are more likely to overturn it than a fellow republican. A republican has a vested interest in not adding more dirt against the republican party and like it or not, what Bush has done would taint the republican party.


Yes, but again, those that want power will want to keep it even if they haven't done nothing yet. Dems are no more Saints in that department. The only difference is in the past Democrats haven't had a war to hide behind like we have one now to get away with this stuff. But in the future, they can.

[TheStripey1]

As I read through this thread, I have to wonder what has happened to the process of teaching civics in America. The lack of understanding surrounding a pretty fundamental legislative process is staggering.


That's one of those subjects that got tossed in the dust bin... you know, along with music, shop and mathematics...

[TheStripey1]

So, you have a problem with people wishing that two bad apples who have dragged the country through the muck would actually be held accountable? Yep... more important to impeach someone over a BJ than over misuse of power and office. Yep.


Quite true... on both counts...

[TheStripey1]

Since when is the power of the US government to be exploited for partisan purposes AT ALL? EVER?

When, for you Democrats, does the country ever get placed above the party?

This ENTIRE thread illustrates how Democrats have no sense of legitimate democracy at all. Every post is from a partisan perspective, using the raw power of government for partisan purposes, absolutely NOTHING from a perspective of proper democratic (small d) governance. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch, zero.

Pathetic.

In light of how you Democrats look at impeachment, obviously you all would have zero problem with sending out the FBI, DEA, ATF, et all to simply ARREST EVERY REPUBLICAN the day before election day!

Same principles and ethics at play, right? Party first, screw the country, right Democrats?


I do not understand why republicans, who themselves fought so hard to gain control of all branches of our government - in order to enact a platform of initiatives that they truly believe would make America better - continually cast democrat's desires to regain control of government FOR EXACTLY THE SAME DAMNED REASON as "putting party OVER country".


damn good question, maineman, could the answer be that they ( the republicans that is) are hopelessly partisan?

[TheStripey1]

Oh, so sorry. He lied about a blowjob. So much worse than lying about reasons for which we went to war.


Apparently that makes all the difference in the world to emale...

:scared:omg, omg, omg, clinton lied about getting a blow job... :scared:

so emale... how many innocent lives were lost when bill lied about getting his hummer?

[TheStripey1]

Oh, of course he lied and he got what he deserves, but that does not, as far as I am concerned, make him *oh so much worse* than Bush. I will take someone who lies about a BJ (convicted or not) over someone who lies and sends us to war.


another good point... you're on a roll today... :evil: :thumbsup: