Democrats Find Their Courage In New Round Of Poll Numbers

[Mark E. Smith]

US NEWS & WORLD REPORT 2/25/07

Swing voters want Congress to stand up to President Bush more aggressively regarding Iraq, according to new
focus groups sponsored by Democrats. Their polls also find that 60 percent of Americans disagree with the
president's policy in Iraq. "People are angry," says a Democrat with access to the research. These findings,
more anti-Bush and anti-Iraq war than public surveys, help explain why Democrats seem so eager for a
showdown with Bush over the war. While a nonbinding Senate resolution criticizing Bush's troop surge was
stopped by the GOP, Democratic senators have a new gambit: to try to repeal the 2002 resolution that
authorized the Iraq war. For its part, the White House says it's not Congress's job to micro-manage a war.
That's the argument that Bush advisers will take to Republican loyalists and Democratic centrists to try to slow
down the anti-war movement on Capitol Hill.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070225/5whitehouse.htm

This "micro-manage" defense strikes me as being absurd. Bush's micro-management of the Iraq War, which
has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars plus the lives and well-being of thousands of our military people,
has given us absolutely nothing in return.

So when can we say Bush has failed miserably in Iraq and it is time to take the responsibility of running
this war away from him? That to me is a far more pressing issue than this "micro-manage" canard.

[IWantAChange]

1. Can an email campaign to influence elected officials be as effective as rallies/marches/etc?

I would venture the opinion that there are a fair number of Repug Senators/Congressmen who would cave to 100's of thousands - possibly millions - of STOP THE MADNESS OR ELSE type emails rather than risk losing an upcoming election. The electronic/internet age has replaced the old venue of organized demonstrations and protests as a means to influence our elected officials.

[Amonester]

4. (Also) Call Congress (and spread these toll-free 800 numbers in your neighborhood)

I know it's a dupe (but it sure is worth it).

1-877 851-6437
1-800 828-0498

Even if Rep. and/or Sen is a republic, call and urge them to stop the dicktraitor$.

[Warpy]

8. My neighbor across the street calls the White House

at least twice a week and unloads on the poor slob at the other end.

I'm a bit more timid and just let my pantywaist Democratic Senator have it.

[bvar22]

18. E-Mail is almost worthless.

1,000,000 E-Mails can all be deleted with a single keystroke.
Truth is, most congresscritters don't keep track of their E-Mail. Their excuses for not tracking E-Mail range from,
* "I can't tell if those sending me E-Mail are from my district or state"
to
* "It is easy for a single person to send me a million E-Mails, so it can't be trusted".
Most E-Mail simply gets deleted.

If you want to get noticed, send your opinion by snail mail.
They ALWAYS open snail mail because it might contain money!
(They probably throw out your letter after they check for money, but at least it gets opened.)

[liberaldemocrat7]

21. What about 1000 emails, mail letters saying the person won't spend money with their contributors

unless their CEO gets the congress to enact legislation or action?

I call this economic sanctions against the GOP.

[Straight Shooter]

2. Congress most certainly should "micro-manage" any war

Our fellow citizens are dying and being maimed

Our dollars are being spent/wasted by the billions while, at home, the needy suffer

Our national security is threatened by mismanagement of any war

Congress is the voice and body of the American people, by proxy. This war, unfortunately, belongs to all of us and we all must have a say in how it is conducted. You can bet that most people would rather have our troops home than to stay in Iraq, bomb Iran, to get cheaper oil.

[John Q. Citizen]

3. Congress can't manage the war, but it can cut off funding by not passing bills to

fund the war.

Congress can impeach.

[rodeodance]

14. both of those are off the table.

[Straight Shooter]

15. They can't, but they *should*.

That was my point, not what they can do but what they should do. bush is like a bull in a china shop. He needs to be reined in, and someone with a sense of responsibility take over, even if it means a whole group like Congress.

I won't hold my breath for them to cut off funding. :(

[Amonester]

7. Cheaper oil...

I know you didn't mean it, but oil ain't gonna be cheaper after the a-W-offa-Lying boy-king decide$ to bomb Iran (and Iran retaliates at helliburton's & house-of-saud's oil rigs & and tanker...).

Call Congress toll-free (see sig or post #4)

[Straight Shooter]

13. Not in the short term, but they *think* it will in the long term.

You're right. I just recently read an article explaining how the price of oil goes up when there is speculation of an attack on Iran, because the buyers are forward-looking.

People who think the *cough* (p)resident can't control the price of gas are full of it. Whoever is in the White House is capable, in many instances, of controlling the events which lead to gas price increases.

[niceypoo]

5. Um, I dont understand.....why do the democrats need "courage"

to do their job? When will this, "professional, milquetoast democratic politician," crap ever end?
They shouldnt need to be, "bolstered by the polls."

[youngdem]

6. Has nothing to do with courage, it has to do with political reality

If the Dems push too hard, Lieberman is gonna bolt and the Dems are gonna be in the minority again. That CANNOT happen. There are too many other issues that we can work on.

Plus, there are some pro-war Dems that are holding us up. These Dems plus the Repukes can easily block any bill of substance from coming to the floor for a vote.

The sad fact is the best this congress can do on Iraq is to try to prevent it from growing larger or much worse, and to prevent any action against Iran or Syria. Otherwise, we need to focus on getting to a point where we don't need Joe as a party in 08 - then and only then can we have any initiative of substance go forward. Well, that and having a Dem president will help a whole lot too. :headbang:

[Amonester]

10. Swamp the switchboard of Lieberman and all the other republics

too (depending on where you pay your taxes and vote).

They cannot continue to ignore your "orders" 'cuz they R supposed to be your employee...

Also make flyers of the 800 numbers at post #4 above (or below), and either post them up in public places (malls, laundromats, etc.) or leave stacks of them on decks or tables near the door (even "silently").

[Hippo_Tron]

17. Olympia Snow said that she would consider caucusing with the Dems

If Joe bolts the party.

[gratuitous]

19. Lieberman shouldn't dictate Democratic policy

I don't give a hang if Lieberman "bolts" a party he doesn't belong to any more, and the Senate Democratic caucus shouldn't let consideration of what he might or might not do stop them from doing the right thing.

Sixty percent of the electorate. People seem to be tuned into what's going on, and they've figured out (pretty much all by themselves) who is responsible for how wrong Iraq has gone and who has messed things up. If the Republicans really want to blow their chances for 2008 totally out of the water, they'll welcome Lieberman to their caucus. If Lieberman "leaves" the Democratic caucus, he can meet with the Connecticut for Lieberman caucus, because I don't think the Republicans are all that anxious to get themselves any further into this mess they've created. And Lieberman will find himself after 2008 in an even smaller minority, which I don't think is really something he wants to contemplate -- he seems to be feeling lonely enough already.

[truthisfreedom]

9. It has to do with the truth, which is that bushco rushed us into war with lies, and there is no end

in sight. It has to do with the will of the American People, which is MORE IMPORTANT than the will of the administration.

[ulysses]

11. there go my people! I must go and lead them!

Or whatever the exact quote is...

[unblock]

12. nice of usn&wr to dismiss a groundswell as mere "poll numbers"

as if there's nothing to it any more than a random blip.

democrats couldn't POSSIBLY have found their courage in a major electoral victory or in a dire situation in iraq or in the fact that we know we're right.

no, we have courage only because we're slaves to polls and we got lucky this time.

:eyes:

[Kurovski]

16. The most aggressive way to deal with the Iraq issue is to impeach BushCo. (nt)

[AtomicKitten]

20. I would think the last election would have given them courage.

I realize the Dems are skittish with Rove's unmatched talent at swiftboating during elections, but ending the war is clearly what the majority of Americans want, if not by cutting off funding which could be politically dicey, but through the retraction of the IWR and cutting Junior off at the knees through legislation.