Proof that Broder’s boy is enjoying a comeback and that the people love the surge.
President George W. Bush hit his lowest rating ever in an ABC/Washington Post poll released Tuesday, showing him for the first time below 33 percent approval.
“Just 32 percent of Americans now approve of the way Bush is handling his job, while 66 percent disapprove,” the poll says. “Bush’s work on the economy has likewise reached a new low. And he shows no gain on Iraq; despite reduced violence there, 64 percent say the war was not worth fighting, 2 points from its high.”
The poll further shows that 77 percent of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track, topping a record high in early 1996, when Republican congressmen shut down the federal government in a dispute with Democrats over funding.
Sixty-four percent say the war is not worth fighting. How many of them will vote for McCain over the Democrat because the Democrat is a Mooslim or a dyke or spends too much on haircuts, or whatever they decide our candidate’s problem is?
Dyke?
Incoming!
😀
I thought Richardson dropped out…
Anyone who has the slightest expectation that these facts will get anywhere near a national broadcast, news break or front page publication owned and operated by the mainstream corporate media is, undeniably, a total fool. It will not be discussed, evaluated or dissected in any way. There will be no attempt at interpretation or to seek any cause and effect between these facts and the status of the current campaigns.
They don’t want anything in this campaign to be about Bush’s total and complete failure as a President and as a leader. And they certainly don’t want any linkage between his massive failures and any of the Republican candidates.
This has to be about inane trivialities, not substantive issues. The people must stay ignorant. The people must not have their questions answered. The people must not have their concerns addressed in the public media forum.
The media mantra is, and remains, “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!!!”
True, but I don’t see the Dems ever taking even the opportunities they do have to make the point about Bush. Now is the time that they have the spotlight, but they’re all too timid, or too busy sniping at each other. And it’s not just the candidates — same story in Congress.
I just don’t see that “this is damage Bush and the Republicans caused, and here’s how we’ll fix it” is a very difficult sell, yet nobody’s hammering away on that case. I think whoever managed it would be the runaway winner. But instead they all stand in a line and hide behind vague chants about “Change” while scrupulously avoiding any clear statement of what we need to change from.
C’mon people, now is your time — don’t let us down again.
Sigh…………Sadly, I have to agree. Wish I felt more confident.
I was reading at TPMmuckraker this morning about Mukasey’s testimony coming up at the end of this month before the Judiciary Committee.
As has become the habit, why are my expectations so low when it comes to confronting anything about this administration’s failures?
Leahy’s gonna “grill Mukasey” about the magic disappearing tapes and waterboarding. Huh, really?
Wow, I’m on the edge my seat……again.
wonder if leahy’s seen this, and will ask ag muckasey some real questions:
when pigs fly, eh
lTMF’sA
I read the Reuters piece earlier. McConnell was such a shithead in how he responded to questions outlined in the Reuters piece. I thought my head was going to explode.
Asked if waterboarding would be, to him, torture…”McConnell said that for him personally, it would.”
WTF???
Because according to McConnell,
Really??? Please explain.
And, to me, the coup de grace:
Tons you say!! TONS BY TORTURING!! That is so cool, dude.
Damn it, damn it, damn it!!! These are the leaders in our f$@&ing government saying this shit!!!
There is only on conclusion I can draw. Our government is evil. No wonder we are so loathed in the world. I don’t know about you but when I read stuff like what McConnell said here, I am ashamed.
l had the same reaction…WTF!!!
l’m in complete agreement with you mike…l have ceased to be surprised at the complete lack of morality, conscience, or compassion of not only the government but the majority of the population.
l have no optimism that things are going to improve in the foreseeable future.
lTMF’sA
So why doesn’t this feeling show up in poll match ups? Most have any Dem barely beating almost any Rep. Either people really don’t care about Iraq anymore, or no Dem has made the case that s/he can or will do anything about it. While the Reps have somehow managed to distance themselves from Bush. Dems have been hammering away at “change”, but apparently voters aren’t buying that they represent it. But then why aren’t they voting for Edwards, even Kucinich?
Or has Bush succeeded in persuading a large majority that nothing can or will be done to get the country back on a right track, ever? That’s my guess.
I’d vote for Bush again before I would vote for Hillary.
!!!(so many reasons)!!!
I kinda see them as the same where it counts, so a vote for Hillary is a vote for continuation of the policies that were overtly implemented under Bush, but covertly implemented/planned under many previous administrations. Unfortunately, I can say the same thing for Obama and Edwards.
Vote for Dennis “The Eggman” Kukukachoo-cinich, please?
I am tired of the non-stop ‘i told you so’ posture the Bush administration has kept me in for 8 years. Why put me and the country through 4 more years of that?
“I’d rather lose an election than lose a war.”
Voting for ANY OTHER Democrat is ceding the ‘war’ to the Repugs.
Endless occupations and resource wars, skyrocketing healthcare costs that you MUST pay and promises of going along to get along with the Repugs are what the other candidates bring (sorry Edwards supporters, but unless you watched that fool behave around 9/11, you don’t know him).
Why not get it right the first time yourself?
Just goes to show you that a rumor that’s .00000000001% true trumps 64% of America being against this war.
They’ll vote for McCain because Obama might possibly be connected to somebody that at some point may or may not be linked to a number of people who could theoretically have something to do with activities that almost give the impression of being related to something approaching being related to functions that smack of being partially tangent to terrorism.
FOX said so.
WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! Multi-colored Ponies everywhere!
WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!