Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Democrats are supporting Bush? The record shows otherwise. "Bush Success Rating at Historic Low"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:27 AM
Original message
Democrats are supporting Bush? The record shows otherwise. "Bush Success Rating at Historic Low"
Edited on Tue Sep-04-07 08:30 AM by TwilightZone
I have seen many claims on DU and elsewhere that Congressional Democrats are just rubber-stamping Bush's agenda. According to the following article, this claim couldn't be farther from the truth, at least where the House is concerned.

President Bushs success rating in the Democratic-controlled House has fallen this year to a half-century low, and he prevailed on only 14 percent of the 76 roll call votes on which he took a clear position.

-snip-

A separate analysis of so-called party unity votes, in which a majority of one party votes against a majority of the other, showed the possibility of another historic first for House Democrats. So far this year, Democrats have backed the majority position of their caucus 91 percent of the time on average on such votes. That marks the highest Democratic unity score in 51 years.

http://public.cq.com/docs/cqt/news110-000002576765.html

House votes are at a 50-year low in terms of supporting the presidential agenda, and Democratic party unity in the House is at a half-century high.

Sounds like the "opposition party" to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
1. Against Bush when it doesn't matter 76% of the time. It's the 14% that sucks.
It's like a pilot on a coast-to-coast flight who complains he didn't get credit for the 75% of the flight that went perfectly smooth -- before he crashed into the Rockies.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Waiting for the damn Rockies to save us!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
28. 100% - 14% = 86%
But, who's counting?

So, the 86% of the time that House Dems opposed Bush is completely meaningless?

Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. DEFLECT! DEFLECT!
I only used the numbers posted in the article. Give it a rest. You know the point doesn't change in the slightest...an airplane making it 86% of the way to its destination is NOT considered a success.

Interesting how you didn't get that.

:eyes:

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #32
35. Interesting how you don't get that Congress isn't an airplane.
Nor do you understand that 100% opposition to the President is COMPLETELY UNPRECEDENTED.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #35
41. I'm not asking for 100% opposition, only you are claiming that everyone is
And your record here is legendary, Vash. And if you think I'm a dumbass for not realizing Congress is not an airplane, what does that make an adult who doesn't know what an analogy is? Some sort of DU political genius, I guess.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. Just because you make an analogy, that doesn't make it smart.
So if you AREN'T asking for 100% opposition, please explain to me what you are complaining about then. I'm obviously some kind of a retard and need my hand held on this one, but what exactly do you want - 90% opposition? 95%? What would make a political master, such as yourself, happy?

And for the record, I'm quite pleased with taking zealots to task on their purist agenda, thank you very much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #44
55. You could stop fucking with people and be honest, for a start
You know EXACTLY what this discussion is about, yet you'd rather just twist it around and lie and claim that all the down-in-the-DUmpsters are demanding 100%.

You KNOW that is not the case being made, yet you and your little band of cheerleaders keep hammering that point, just like a good little spin doctor. But it's bogus, it's full of shit, and so is your condescension and sarcasm. How's it working out for you, btw? Getting many converts?

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #55
59. You could start by not dancing around my question.
I don't think there's anything dishonest about my asking you, after making an idiotic analogy about a plane crash, what exactly you would term as success. You say 86% isn't good enough - okay, well, what is? Stop dancing and answer it. When you do, I won't make the case otherwise.

I think it's rather hypocritical that you call me out for using sarcasm in the same sub-thread where you make a sarcastic and condescending remark about Congressional Democrats. Tell me, are YOU getting many converts?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #59
63. Here's why I won't answer it: because I already have, a hundred times.
And so has everyone else on this thread, directly or indirectly. What IS 100% is the clarity with which you are demonstrating your bullshit deflection tactic. I don't care if the analogy is squirrels hiding 100% of their nuts...I don't care whether you think it's stupid. You are only demanding an explanation from me to allow you to keep deflecting from what everyone else has already said...

Voting against Bush 86% of the time on bills about who is on a commemorative stamp, or what day National Love Crawford Texas Day is, is bullshit because the 14% of the votes they voted WITH him on were the tough votes that required leadership and balls and listening to the will of the people. No one was clamoring for Congress to shoot down the legislation calling for a plaque to historic brush clearers, we wanted them to stop this fucking war. On that, they failed MISERABLY.

How about a clearer analogy...a college course where you miss your grade by 1 point. Are you in there whining to your professor that you should get an A because of all the cool questions you got RIGHT?

Piss off. We all see right through your game.




(Oh, and don't you bother to write back to point out that the legislation I named was all fake. I know it is. It was just a quick way of making my point).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #32
45. The airplane analogy is ridiculous.
Interesting how you don't get that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #45
52. BWHAHA!
Not interesting at all that YOU would chime in in support of Vash The Apologizer.

:rofl:

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #52
57. You responded to me, not Vash.
I responded in kind. Taking your silly airplane assertion further, I guess the Bush Administration's plane crashed five years ago, yet it's still flying.

I don't know either you or Vash, so I'm not sure what your point is. I think you're seeing a conspiracy where none exists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #57
60. No kidding.
I responded to you because I intended to respond to you. You've consistently been Vash's #1 cheerleader, got his back on every post.

So now you're trying to twist this into me seeing CONSPIRACIES? Two people posting on the same topic is a CONSPIRACY? You're loonier than Vash. And I meant that comment for you, too.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. Consistently?
I haven't posted on DU "consistently" in months and couldn't care less about your apparent issue with Vash or anyone else. I'm responding to you about your ridiculous assertions because they're ridiculous, not because Vash is responding to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #61
65. Tit
Tat.


Yeah, sure. Whatever.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #65
68. How thoughtful.
I'm convinced by the brilliance of your argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #60
64. Are the people who agree with you YOUR cheerleaders?
Heaven forbid someone take a viewpoint opposing yours. It seems you expect Congressional Democrats to act as childishly as you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #64
66. No, they're just smarter than you.
Edited on Tue Sep-04-07 11:02 AM by Atman
Deal with it.

:hi:

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #66
67. Now THAT'S comedy!
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

And since I know how juvenile you are, no, it isn't "funny because it's true."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greeby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. Ah, but it's what gets through that counts
More money dumped directly into the MIC's coffers, and allowing der Shrubler to do whatever he wants on wiretapping. And so on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #2
43. Yep. We stop a bridge in Alaska, but let warrentless wiretapping,
torture, the 'surge', and the upcoming attack on Iran slide on through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #43
47. Did most dems vote for the awful 6 month FISA bill?
What torture legislation are you talking about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #47
48. Enough dems voted for the FISA to let it get through.
And as for the torture legislation, THERE ISN'T ANY. Which is exactly the problem. Where is the bill to stop torture, stop extraordinary renditions, shut down Gitmo? We are in charge of congress - so where are those bills?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #48
51.  there is legislation
Edited on Tue Sep-04-07 10:39 AM by cali
about stopping torture. Don't know about rendition or Gitmo. I'm willing to be you don't either. Legislation barring torture and rendition passed in 2005. Asshat made a signing statement, of course.

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/06/115222.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
3. we criticize our own no less stringently than we do the opposition
as we must. but they seem to be following our lead most of the time. Maybe the 9 % of the time they back Bush represents the BIG issues like Pat Act, Iraq war, etc. These are the ones that make us all so crazy, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
19. If it weren't that 9% that was most important, it'd be another 9%.
If they voted with us on the Patriot Act, Iraq, etc, but not on the environment or education issues, the same people would be bashing them in exactly the same way. The truth is that these DUers aren't Democrats and have no desire to support our party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #3
21. I think we criticize them more stringently a lot of the time.
The criticism of Democrats often seems even more vehement than that of Republicans.

There are certainly cases where the criticism is fully warranted. I'm mainly trying to point out that the Democrats *are* acting as the opposition party, contrary to many claims.

Could they make improvements? Most definitely. Are some of the issues where they have supported Bush unacceptable? Certainly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
5. that means nothing to a 100% purity mentality
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. 100% purity vs. 0% conviction -- hmm.... if I'm going to err, let me see which side I'll err on....
You can use your cheap phrases all you want. It's old. It's tired. And guess what else? It isn't convincing anymore as you can see by how mainstream honest criticism of a weak and ineffective democratic party has become.

No one who continues to be a Democrat is talking about 100% purity. The only people talking about that are people who left the party or Democratic Apologists such as yourself - people who act like it is a crime to actually be critical of the conduct of the party to which you belong.

Being a Democrat does not mean standing for nothing. And it doesn't mean quietly sitting there while the leaders of your party do (or fail to do) anything they want. It doesn't mean silent consent! It is OKAY to have values. It is OKAY to have convictions.

If we don't stand for anything, then we're good for nothing. People making HONEST criticisms on DU aren't 100% purists. They are people who agree there should be AGREEMENT in the core principles of our party, and FREEDOM in the non-essentials. Right now we feel that congressional democratic leadership is not doing the right job in honoring those CORE PRINCIPLES, along with too many congressional democrats - and we have a RIGHT and an OBLIGATION to criticize that.

So you can take you're snide, tired, old, cheap-ass horse-shit dismissive sloganism and shove it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. your reply is just a lengthy version of what I wrote.
"mainstream honest criticism of a weak and ineffective democratic party."

"Democratic Apologists"

"So you can take you're snide, tired, old, cheap-ass horse-shit dismissive sloganism and shove it."

YAWN!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. That's fucking laughable.
Get off your high horse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
6. Doesn't mean much if they're not there when it matters.
Edited on Tue Sep-04-07 08:38 AM by Exiled in America
Sorry, but this is just yet another blind apologist argument for something which is indefensible.

It doesn't really matter much if on matters that are most serious to the country congressional democrats and congressional leadership are nowhere to be found. It is the Democratic Congress and leadership that re-authorized and ill-advised and illegal foreign occupation while the death toll climbs into the hundreds of thousands (London source guesses - since we won't keep count - that its pushing 1 million). It is the Democratic Congress and leadership that rubber-stamped Bush's plans to expand surveillance at the expense of rights and freedoms enumerated in the constitution.

This president doesn't have much of an agenda besides fighting illegal wars, murdering our men and women and destroying civil rights - and on those issues the democratic leadership and key democratic members of congress and capitulated every time. Stop fucking excusing and apologizing for that outrage. Please.

Are all democratic congresspersons bad? No, absolutely not. But the leadership DESERVES criticism. Blue Dog Democrats DESERVE criticism. Anyone voting for war authorization without a timetable for withdraw and anyone voting to allow bush's shredding of the constitution deserve criticism.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. That's funny - blind followers don't usually have statistics to back them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #14
22. Back them with what? That 76% of the time it doesn't matter?
It's just as someone posted above.... the devil's in the details. It's that pesky 14% of the time when it is really critical that counts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #22
25. And who made YOU the sole arbiter of "when it is really critical"?
According to you, it doesn't matter that they've opposed the President more than any other Congress in 50 years, it only matters that they don't do it when you want them to. Pretty damn childish, if you ask me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #25
80. I'm not the sole arbiter. I have a pretty broad base of agreement
I wouldn't say that I currently sit "outside the mainstream" in my definition of critical issues. There seems to be a fairly significant level of agreement that the choice to reauthorize the war by caving on all conditions and a timetable is one, and that the decision to blanket grant the bush administration everything it wanted on surveillance is another.

Pretending that all issues have the same level of significance in order to apologize for weak democratic leadership and poor congressional performance - now that's what's childish.

By the way, could you list for me please, ten significant things this congress has opposed the bush administration on and hindered its agenda? This administration has only one real agenda and that is the continuing prosecution of this illegal occupation of Iraq. Everything else is an incredibly distant second. Certainly there have been SCANT FEW policy initiatives in the year that this democratic congress has been active, and of the few major issues that have come up, there have been few victories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #22
27. 100% - 14% = 86%
Nothing of substance was accomplished by the 86% of the time that they opposed Bush?

Sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #22
34. You know what's really funny?
You have no flippin' idea what that 76% represents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. It's my job to track what Congress does.
So I'm guessing I know far, FAR more about what that 76% represents than you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #14
23. Ah, you know what they say
There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

The Congressional Dems may have opposed Bush 76% of the time, but what is their batting record when it comes to truly important matters, matters that the voting public put them in office specifically to take care of, you know, like the war?

Rather abysmal if you ask me. Not only have they failed to end the war(which they could do via defunding it), but they have even continued to support it by continuing to approve the funding for it.

There are other matters also that they have failed on. It is all well and good to oppose Bush when the stakes are small, but where are they when the matters are great, life and death, like the war? Oh, yeah, making meaningless gestures and then caving. So much for opposition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #23
37. So you've analyzed all those votes?
No? Then how do you know what they opposed bushco on?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. Oh, so then the Dems have defunded the war? Wow, what an absurd question.
Geez, open your eyes and look what is happening around you. Are our troops home? Have we stopped inflicting death and destruction on innocent people? Whoops, no, we're still there, despite a mandate given by the American people to Congress last fall telling them to end the war ASAP.

But hey, just for your own edification, yes, I do read and analyze extensively what goes on with my government. Things like the Congressional Record and such. You?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. Yes, I frequently peruse
varied sources, including Congressional Record.

And oh c'mon. Do I think the dems should introduce legislation to defund the war? Yes. Would it pass? No fucking way. That doesn't absolve them from not having done it, but you might try living in reality instead of some delusional world where all the mean old dems need to do is wave a magic wand and all our troops will be home. Oh, and in case you didn't realize it, the "mandate" was, as all electoral voices are, a mixed one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #42
46. Apparently you're not reading the Constitution very carefully however
Since the Dems don't need to bring legislation to the floor to defund the war. All they have to do is simply hold up each and every single supplemental war funding bill in committee, thus preventing it from either being voted on or becoming law, and they would thus defund the war and force the troops home. No, it isn't a magic wand, but it is a hell of lot better than passing meaningless resolutions and sitting on their thumbs, which is their current M.O.

Oh, and if you go back and take a look at the exit polls and the exit interviews and suchlike from last fall, you'll find that the overwhelming reason that people voted Dems into majority power is so that they would end the war ASAP. If that isn't a mandate, or *gasp* a directive from the people, I don't know what is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #46
49. Yes, I'm aware that they could potentially hold
it up in Committeem, but that presupposes that all Dems on any given committee are going to vote to do so. Not exactly likely.

And if you check out current polls, you'd find that only a minority of Americans support defunding. Gasp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #49
56. Ummm, actually the committee chair can hold up the bill
Basic Civics

But hey, even if it required a committee vote, the Dems should all damn well be voting to hold the bill up in committee. Otherwise they're just as complacent in this war as the 'Pugs.

And by the by, I was talking about American support for ending the war, not defunding it. Right now, and for almost a year now, support for ending the war ASAP has been running at about seventy five percent.

But on the subject of defunding, yes, a minority of Americans favor defunding the war, about forty eight percent. However an even smaller minority, about forty six percent are against defunding the war. This leaves a fair number of undecideds out there, but the clear message is that defunding the war is an option that more Americans favor than not. This is from a Fox poll. Sorry, I don't have a link, but if you google I'm sure you can find it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #56
58. Show me a poll. that 48% support defunding
Show me the last time a committee chair held up major funding. The realities in Congress are a little different than your easy answers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #58
62. I've got one that says 18% support defunding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #62
71. Umm, no, go back and reread that
"Just 18% said cutting all funding for the war in Iraq to bring troops home would be the best showing of Congressional support." Not the same thing as saying that only 18% support defunding the war. Gotta watch out for those weasel words on polls. Zogby is notorious about using them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #58
70. First, I told you how to find the poll, I'm not going to spoon feed you
Secondly, just because the Dems haven't held up a bill in committee doesn't mean that they can't do so. If you don't believe me either go read the Constitution or take a basic Civics class. Educate yourself.

As far as realities, the real fact of the matter is that people are dying while the Dems are playing politics with their lives. Harsh but true.

On second thought, I will spoon feed you a bit, simply because I know how you'll reply if I don't(funny, how many times have we had this conversation) And remember, this is a Fox poll, which means that their own personal take would be against defunding the war, so poll bias plays no part in this one<http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/030107_Bush_Iraq_Ir... >
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #6
20. Blind apologist?
Ah, name-calling. How productive.

I don't disagree that some Democrats deserve criticism on many issues, and the "war" in Iraq is most certainly at the top of the list.

What I reject is the wholesale "they're no better than the Republicans" garbage that passes for "discussion" on DU, and the never-ending complaints that the Democrats are approving Bush's every whim unchallenged. That claim is about as inaccurate as it gets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #20
24. That's not "name calling" - that's exactly what it is.
Someone who categorically rejects all criticism and excuses every action of a person or a group is a "blind" "apologist" for that person or group.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #24
29. Show me where I categorically rejected anything. Quite the opposite, actually.
It is you who is categorically and blindly accepting the premise to which I am objecting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #24
38. Ugh.
Calling someone a "blind apologist" is absolutely name calling. DUH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
8. They still are bush dogs and not blue dogs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Now there's a meaningful comment! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
11. Only the "Democrats"in Congre$$,
Unfortunately, the only "Democrats" who seem to matter nowadays.

Check the Ratings for Congre$$.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Far more important than the #'s of Congress, is what the #'s...
show for each district and each state.

Most people don't care for other districts Congresscritters, but they love thier own. There lies the fault in "Congressional Ratings". All politics is local, and what the people in a district in say, OR, KS, ME or wherever, think their Congresscritter is bringing home the bacon, then they see others as being lame, regardless of how lame their Critter is.

Congress has rarely had more than a 25% positive rating as a whole....but the locals love their own and re-elect them in droves until they screw up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
39. Ya know, I keep hearing that statement, but I sure can't say it's ever
been true in MY case. I've lived in 6 different States, and I can't ever remember "loving" my Rep. Under the current fiscal situation, I say shame on ANYONE who thinks it's a good idea to "bring home the bacon"! Of course, when I criticized some of the Ga. Reps for earmarking $$ for several projects, a lot of other DUers hammered me because things like "bike paths" and "walking trails" were GOOD THINGS! Of course they're good things, but to me if you don't have the $$, it doesn't matter how good the idea is, YOU JUST CAN'T AFFORD THEM NOW!

I think the congressional re-election rate has a lot more to do with the ability to raise money and name recognition than it does with people loving their own Rep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #39
69. SurveyUSA.com is a pretty good source for comparisons.
They tend to have a lot of information on individual approval rates by state, rep, etc. Individual approval rates are consistently much higher on average than the overall Congressional approval rates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #69
73. I guess it depends on who they survey...or maybe I'm just an oddball! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #73
74. No, you're right.
Polls can obvious vary depending on the target audience - all voters vs. registered voters vs. likely voters, etc.

It does seem, though, that the overall Congressional approval rating is vastly different than the ratings for the average Congressperson. Otherwise, it seems that no one would ever get reelected.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #39
76. here's the thing, people who vote for their Reps, are the ones
who put them in office. Those who don't vote, and still complain are the real villains in all of this.

Name recognition has a little to do w/it, but the whole concept of R vs D has a lot to do w/it as well. However, the Gerrymandering is the most vile aspect of the situation. Hence, there is a "love" for the candidate as they generally take 75%+ of the vote.

A lot of this is slowly changing as people are becoming more mobile and districts are changing within the boundaries. Here in NE, I got stuck w/Fortenberry(R 1st Dist) is really disliked. He only won by 7% lat election, and that is unheard of in NE. It was the usual that a GOP lapdog was guaranteed a set, now, things are changing for a # of reasons. (i had to laugh last year when he showed up at the Comm College in a $1000 suit talking to people about how he was a "man of the land, a true farm figure." The man is a real ass, he lost a lot of votes right there, from the coverall crowd. These people are NOT stupid).

I can do little to defeat a congresscritter from another district/state once someone walks in to cast their ballot. But I can make some waves before the voter makes his/her mind up. Planting seeds is the best way to deal w/this stuff, and let people vote their conscience. Voters do not like being embarrassed by their Critters, it is unbecoming.... :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #76
77. The Fortenberry result was surprising.
It seemed to indicate that things are changing in Nebraska. As you noted, a seat like that was usually a piece of cake for the GOP, but that race was much closer than I thought it would be.

Same thing with Lee Terry's 55/45 win - much closer than expected and another sign that the GOP can no longer take those seats for granted.

If we can be competitive in NE, we can be competitive anywhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #77
78. The changes here in NE are amazing...slow, but amazing.
A lot has to do w/the bush regime and it's screw ups, but there are other things at work as well. Farmers are not happy w/the current economic outlook. Even w/ethanol taking off, the caution is there as they have seen farm subsidies, food stamps and other items that directly affect them on the ropes.

We are still 20 years behind everyone else in many instances, medicine and pain treatment are still stone age around here, and the way they deal w/lawbreakers is absurd, (minor offenses often become ridiculous jail sentences, and larger crimes are mishandled to the point of embarrassment).

It takes time to change things, but when I see NE changing relatively quickly, I know the GOP is in deep stuff.

An aside, when Fortenberry was here in Northeast NE for his debate w/Maxine Moul, he was a blathering idiot, Moul knew her stuff and handled him adeptly, but there was just that dumb mindset, "he's GOP, her must be good". I don't think that will happen again. One of his aides had an American Flag tie on that evening, and I said that if I ever felt like burning a flag, it would be the one he was wearing, while he was wearing it, because under the US Code, he was defacing and demeaning the flag. He almost dropped dead on the spot. Later, I asked Fortenberry if he ever had an original thought, or if he was just given a GOP rag to read. It was the only time I ever saw the guy w/beads of sweat on his forehead... :) I had to ask if that was the first time he ever sweat, as I know he never did a days work before in his life. Lot's of GOP'ers behind me got out of the line and walked away from the "greet & meet", looking disgusted I might add.... :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. I love your Fortenberry story
He seems like such a knucklehead. I haven't seen anyone this unqualified to be in Congress since Jon Christensen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #79
83. That idiot from AZ who got popped out last year, the one
from Phoenix, he was a sportscaster, and I just can't recall his name, but he was the DUMBEST person to sit in congress for years!

Fortenberry is giving his stupidity a run for the money... :D

Actually, I'm surprised I haven't been audited or some other weird thing, since my e-mails to the "fort" usually sizzle. He only comes to town for fundraisers up on The Hill, where the somewhat wealthy live. Bereuter, the guy Fortenberry replaced, was actually pretty good about coming around for Town Hall meetings and such, we could count on him twice a year, and although 60% of what he voted for was a complete RW agenda, the other 40% generally helped out the state and the nation as a whole. I did get escorted out of one of Bereuter's meetings though, after I asked why some of the elderly people in the audience could not get the meds they needed, but congress could talk all day about flag burning and denying various citizens their basic human rights... :) I was escorted out, but I left to a standing ovation!... :woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #83
84. I think you're my hero.
I lived in Nebraska for close to twenty years, and unfortunately, I often felt as though putting pressure on local politicians was a futile exercise. You're definitely making me think I was a little too quick to think that. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #84
85. J.D. Hayworth was the moron I was thinking of...
I lived in NW AZ when he first got elected...not my district, but he was an incredible embarrassment to the whole state. Idiot extrodinnaire! Kind of makes Fortenberry look like he made it past the 5th grade, but barely... :D

BTW, always question these people. You may actually agree w/them on some things, (doubtful, but possible), but make them answer questions, hold those feet to the fire and watch them squirm. When people see they can't answer questions on their own, they tend to vote against them...surprising how often they fold...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #85
86. True...Hayworth was a piece of work.
Re: question these people - I grew up in South Dakota, quite the bastion of conservatism, and I spent quite a bit of time making people uncomfortable by questioning their political allegiances. :)

I thought SD was conservative until I moved to NE. Western Nebraska, in particular, is about as red as it gets.

I recently moved to Austin, Texas, and I'm quite happy to be in a much more politically diverse location!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 06:08 AM
Response to Reply #86
87. From what I understand, Austin is one of the bastions of
progressive ideology in TX. I think Molly Ivins was from Austin.... :D

God, I miss Molly... :(

I was stationed at Ft Sam Houston for a while, San Antonio was a pretty nice city...loved the Riverwalk at night. Other than that, I just passed through the panhandle several times going from AZ to NY... :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #87
88. I've only been here for a few months...
but, I really like it here. The longer I'm here, the more I like it.

Yes, Molly was from Austin. Unfortunately, so is Karl Rove. The politics here are all over the place, but that's part of what makes it interesting. Some of the suburbs are pretty conservative, but the core of the metro is very progressive. The liberal seems to outweigh the conservative in many respects, and that's a very welcome change from the places I've lived most of my life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #88
89. Well...I had my fill of TX, but I don't disparage the place, it's
just not for me. I got the impression that about half of the Texans I met tried to push the "Wild West" down a lot of throats...but, if they ran afoul of the law or their neighbors, they cried like kids. Then again, that is just about anywhere you go these days, and have to deal w/the RW... :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
15. K&R. DUers need to see this.
Otherwise, we'll start having plenty of "morans" over here too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Too late. They're here. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
17. DUers just like ripping Democrats....
... Predictably, they'll say something like "that 1 vote was THE important one!!!".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Yep. and then some Congress Critter will say or
do something they like, and there'll be mass adulation, until he or she says or does something they don't like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #17
26. Yeah.... there's absolutely no justification whatsoever for being critical
... of Democratic Congressional performance right? I mean how DARE we express dissatisfaction with the behavior of our congressonal leadership or so-called blue-dog democrats! :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #26
30. IF ONLY individual posts could be Recommended!
:evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #26
31. Sure there is. 14% of the time, apparently.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #26
33. Then justify it.
Edited on Tue Sep-04-07 10:05 AM by Vash the Stampede
You say you want more opposition to Iraq - tell me how Democrats go about doing the following:

1) Obtain 60 votes in the Senate to override a filibuster, AND
2) Obtain 66 votes in the Senate to override a veto, AND
3) Obtain 290 votes in the House to override a veto.
-or-
4) Overcome public opinion that states that only about 18-40% of the American people support completely defunding the war.
http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1343
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/08/schneider.iraq.p...

If you can tell me how they can accomplish that and you'll be justified in your criticism. Good luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #26
72. Still waiting on that justification Exiled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #72
81. Sorry - I've been getting my master's degree all day.
Edited on Tue Sep-04-07 03:40 PM by Exiled in America
Sorry I couldn't immediately respond to your demand. But I'm home now.

Congress doesn't need 60 votes. Congress could have sent the same bill to Bush over and over again and LET HIM BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEFUNDING THE WAR IF HE SO CHOSE. And if they lost enough votes to get it to the White House, then they could still control what bills were voted on in Congress, and put the responsibility on the whole REPUBLICAN PARTY for "defunding" the war by refusing to support a responsible alternative.

Congress could have placed the blame for "defunding" on an obstructionist administration that refuses to adjust from disastrous policy and that kills our boys and girls needlessly, and that congress is ready and waiting to authorize a plan that provides appropriate money for an EXIT STRATEGY that does not leave our troops hanging but DOES defend them from a disastrous course of action that has totally failed.

It's ok if only 18% of the public supports total defunding of the war (however, as was pointed out above, that's not actually exactly what your polls say) - because it wouldn't be democrats in congress doing it. They could and should have had the guts to point the finger back at this administration - an administration that has record low approval ratings too - and present themselves as ready, eager and in fact desperate for the administration to stop obstructing and start supporting a better course of action in Iraq.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stimbox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
50. Two cheerleading threads about Congressional Dems.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Must be some talking point memo going around. You kneepad wearers are supposed to spread these out a little.

:rofl:

:hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #50
53. Wow, two people posting a thread about the same thing. Unprecendented!
That *never* happens at DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #50
54. nothing like nice little mindless adhoms
There are generally oodles of threads around here calling dems everything but babykillers. There's a difference between criticism- and there's much to criticize dems for- and zombie rhetoric.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
75. War. More War. Warrantless Wiretaps. What Subpoena? nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #75
82. QED.
There is token opposition to the * Agenda, and sometimes it is more than token. By and large, though, our "representatives" are too comfy to work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 21st 2014, 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC