| Author |
Message |
    
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 100
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 7:38 pm: | 
|
Here is link to a fascinating chart.
http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2006/50StateBushApproval060216Approval.htm
In 43 of the 50 states, his approval ratings are below 50%. Just a year after his innaugaration, I wonder if there is any chance he would win an election today.
On a previous thread, I posed the question whether we could at least agree on his incompetence. Many Bush defenders responded that I was out of the mainstream because the country reelected him in a landslide. Looking at theses numbers make me want to ask again-- what has caused this decline if not his incompetence? |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 772
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 8:37 pm: |
|
Kendall-
Newsflash: Kerry lost, get over it or get into therapy..... |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4382
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 10:06 pm: |
|
his chances of pushing through any of his bigger, dumber initiatives is now nil. No Social Security reform, and so on ...
get over it! |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 101
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 10:13 pm: |
|
It seems like the other day, when I made the point about the MBA President's incompetence...
"...it was only 16 months ago that the Board of Directors gave him a big vote of confidence. I guess they like what he is doing..."
I thought Southener made a good point back then. I was just giving an update. Maybe you needed an update as well.
And if you haven't figured it out yet, Scrotius, there must be a great number of people that regret that vote for Bush in 2004. They aren't looking for therapy, they're looking for correction. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 5763
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 11:36 pm: |
|
Actually Kendall many of them are looking for a job and trying to sort out the mess that is the new medicare prescription fiasco. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2616
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 2:21 pm: |
|
People can "get over" that Kerry lost and still criticize Bush.
Sometimes those who voted for the losing candidate are surprised at how pleased they are by the performance in office of the person they voted against. That doesn't seem to be the case with Kerry voters. They might "get over" Kerry losing but Bush has done nothing to win them over.
But serious people don't spend more than a minute "getting over with it" and don't seek therapy. They just begin organizing for the next election. |
bottomline
Citizen
Username: Bottomline
Post Number: 380
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 4:22 pm: |
|
"Just a year after his inauguration, I wonder if there is any chance he would win an election today?"
Sure he would, unless the Democrats were to come up with a vastly superior candidate than they had last time. The approval rating poll, in essence, is Bush running against himself. And he does very poorly, to nobody's surprise. But put him up against John Kerry, and Bush eked out the victory. In personal terms beating Kerry ain't much to brag about. Unfortunately for the country, beating John Kerry meant we got four more years of Dubya.
If the Democratic leadership had half a clue – just half – they could probably come out on top. But I’m not feeling optimistic.
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 686
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 5:17 pm: |
|
bottom,
Great post. Kendall, I get your point, but that question is moot. You Dems need to read and then UNDERSTAND bottomlines post. It is the ultimate source of all your frustration. I've said this many many times - Bush is not the reason you guys are so disgruntled. Your own Democratic hierarchy is to blame. And if they run Hillary or Gore again, you guys will be frustrated even longer. Us Repubs did the same thing with Dole but we learned a valuable lesson. I just wish more of you would would understand that Bush is the least of your worries. |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 102
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 5:19 pm: |
|
Maybe you have a point about the campaign run by Kerry. I voted for the guy, and I had admired him for years- but I was shocked by how weak his campaign was.
But I doubt your "Sure he would". Could Bush win Ohio? Could he carry the majority in the House? Would much of his majority just stay home if the election was today? Do you really believe he would carry Louisiana today?
I may be a democrat, but I'm not blindly partisan. I voted for Gore reluctantly in 2000 and hoped Bush was the moderate Republican he appeared to be. Any illusion I ever had about Bush has evaporated.
By the way, "Democratic Leadership" is a contradiction in terms.
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 687
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 7:33 pm: |
|
So Kendall,
What is your point? If the re-election were held today I think it would be a tie. No votes for Bush or Kerry because no one would know today is election day. You seem like a reasonable poster so when the Repubs win a few more Congressional seats in November will you at least help me with these Dems who don't understand their party is in total disarray. With all the so called scandals, the war, and a Veep who shot someone, I would think nothing less than a huge sweep by the Dems this November would be considered a disaster for that party. This coming election will be the true eye opener for the left. |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 103
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 8:27 pm: |
|
Southerner-- the thing is that there are so many strands withing the democratic party, it is almost impossible to create a coalition. Unless someone is extremely charismatic or is a grassroots phenom, or there is a stumble on the republican side, I have a hard time believing anyone will create magnet for all the groups to draw to. But thats on a national level-- I really expect the Dems to make some real strides in congressional races, particularly in some states that weren't redrawn in the last few years.
But are there some national candidates that could gel? Absolutely. Not Hillary, not Kerry, not Gore. Its still early, but I think Mark Warner of Virginia could surprise some people-- not exactly a lefty. And on the republican side, a few recent polls show Rudy drawing big numbers-- not exactly a conservative. Maybe there's some hope for some honest debate yet. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 689
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 8:39 am: |
|
Kendall,
Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is no longer time for honest debate. Did you hear the Democratic leaders last week after the hunting accident? Honest debate is dead. And I haven't seen anything that shows me the Dems will pick up seats. I think the local Repubs will run on local issues as well which makes Iraq a small issue (especially since everyone was on board to go in at the beginning). |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 104
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 10:22 am: |
|
Southerner--Sorry to burst YOUR bubble, but here is what I heard last week: Republican controlled House and Senate held hearings to reveal that in three short years we have been able to create a massive government agency that is as corrupt and incompetent as the most corrupt local government in America (Louisiana). Yeah, there were partisans on both sides making jackasses of themselves but when there is a turd on the table, there are people that are willing to call it a turd.
Here is the other thing I heard last week: a White House that had thought they would be able to eavesdrop on our conversations at will scrambling to negotiate with members of their own party that were horrifired at an executive branch power grab. Specter, Graham, Brownback all (to varying degrees)stating that FISA should be ammended to include the NSA type listening.
Oh yeah-- the VP shot a guy in the face. Seems to me that the shift in focus was the best thing that ever happened to Bush.
Let me be clear: I am a Democrat, but if Republicans start acting out of conscience and not out of blind loyalty, they will win. I have great respect for "Main Street" Republicans- in fact if there were a few left, I'd still be an (R). But across the country, people are tired of the BS. The Republicans have EVERY branch of government and have blown it. What do you want of us? |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 691
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 12:25 pm: |
|
Kendall,
I really don't know what we are arguing about. I think we see things pretty much the same way with a few differences. You are correct that there were many more important issues last week than the hunting accident. But, then why were the Congressional Dems all worked up about that sole issue? Reid and Hillary leading the way.
And like you, I would gladly vote for a Democrat on a national level if one ever espoused the positions I agree with. That happens in red states all the time. My entire city is run by Democrats whom I've voted for. But to most of my New Jersey friends you wouldn't recognize them because they aren't aligned with the far left crowd that controls the National Party.
Finally Kendall, I do like your posts and respect your position. But you've thrown me a flat pitch I can hit -
"if Republicans start acting out of conscience and not out of blind loyalty, they will win."
Where have you been the past 12 years? The Republicans have been acting out of their conscience and have won election after election. Are you one of these guys who think a win is a loss? Tell me where the Repubs have lost and maybe I'll agree with you, or are you making a prediction? You may not personally like where this admin and the Repubs have taken us, but many do including myself. You can say I have blinders on all you want but these guys are doing exactly what they said they would do and exactly what I voted for them to do. I think many of you just didn't take the time to do your pre-vote homework and now you feel really gullible. Maybe the person to blame for the way you voted is looking back at you in the mirror. If you can flip flop philosophies so easily then you definitely should be voting Democratic from now on. |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 105
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 3:42 pm: |
|
Maybe we agree on more than we disagree, but I still think we disagree more than you realize. The Democrats did not fully succeed when they held power, but the Republicans have controlled the Federal govt for 6 years now, and have controlled Congress even longer and proven themselves to be utterly incompetent. Not individually, but as a party there isn't much to be proud of. I know you've debated me on other boards before, no need to repeat here.
But I strongly disgree that Bush has been the President we expected. Bush famously said that he would not run an arrogant foreign policy, that he would be humble in his engagments. Don't get me wrong, I am not isolationist-- but is anything about his foreign policy humble?
Spending: And the man has spent money like, excuse me, a drunken rich kid. I didn't think a new kind of conservative meant this.
Ethics: Remember the good old days when conservatives complained that donors to the Republican party occasionally slept in the Lincoln bedroom? Kind of quaint now, eh?
Conservative Grover Norquist once set the goal of "shrinking government to the point where it could be drowned in the bathtub". If I was a conspiracy theorist, I would almost believe that the last 6 years was an attempt to reach the same end by creating such a mess that Americans could no longer expect government to have a role in solving any social problems. And, no, I didn't expect that. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 695
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 6:44 pm: |
|
Kendall,
Then you are a man without a home. I guess you'll never vote again because there has never been one politician who has lived up to every campaign promise. To go point by point a little bit, how is Bush's foreign policy arrogant? How do you invade another country without being arrogant? Arrogance is a key ingredient to being successful but I realize the liberal in you doesn't like successful people.
As for spending - doesn't Congress do this? I don't like any of this pork barrel but Reagan begged the Dems for a line item veto and was rebuffed.
As for ethics, the Repubs aren't perfect but we are no where near the Dems as far as corruption goes.
I know you don't agree with any of this which is fine with me. The way to settle it is to work hard to get your philosophy in office. I'm rather pleased at the current state of affairs in our nation. |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 107
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 7:22 pm: |
|
Point by Point back atcha:
Bush said he intended to avoid an arrogant foreign policy-- his words. This was in response to what he saw as the "democratic" sin of nation building in 2000. By your admission, his foreign policy has had an arrogant quality (although I will not agree with successful). Therefore Bush did not deliver as advertised.
Spending: last I looked Congress was more R than D. But even if we only look at spending through Bush proposals his Prescription drug plan and his extended tax cuts have resulted in more govt debt in a way that I find alarming. And I don't know if that is a wild eyed liberal notion.
And as for ethics, youre right, no one is clean on this one. But you have to admit, it would have been nice in Bush took the high road.
Lets agree to disagree, I suppose. If Bush fulfilled his promise in 2000 I would have gladly crossed over and voted for a moderate, reform minded, third way Bush. In fact I wanted to. Tis a shame. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 699
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 8:24 pm: |
|
I agree the Congressional Repubs haven't lived up to their billing, but I thought you were specifically talking about POTUS not Congressional Republicans. I think we can agree that Congress is a bureaucracy run amok. The difference is most liberals see this as something new, while I see this as just a continuation of the past century, and it won't change no matter who runs the committees.
As for the arrogance issue, I'll give you that point. But I don't think it is wrong. I want my President to be arrogant and have the kahuna's to take the next step. How many UN resolutions must be passed before someone enforces one of them (and I love that he went after the man who attempted to murder his father. What son wouldn't?).
I wish Bush were more arrogant not less. And if he had to make a few humble speeches to get the victory then so be it. I don't mean to sound arrogant with this following statement but come on Kendall, do you really believe what a politician says during a campaign speech? If you do then you probably believe Hillary is a moderate Democrat since she's been giving this type of campaign speech after speech for about two years now. Who knows, maybe she'll convince enough wishy washy back and forth voters like yourself to vote for her and she will win. Just don't be shocked if the next person you vote for isn't what you heard on a stump speech.
Politics is the dirtiest of games and I'd rather my pig be calling the shots than the opposing pig. |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 109
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 10:39 pm: |
|
Your contention was that Bush shouldn't surprise anyone, that he did everything he promised to do in the campaign. My point is that he didn't-- a point that Bush supporters don't usually deal with. Because Bush's "sins" were not the every day variety- I would think it would be easier NOT to invade a country, NOT to create absurd spending programs to support benefits that don't work...Usually politicians say they will do something and don't deliver. I'll give Bush this-- he certainly didn't break his promises the easy way.
This actually has nothing at all to do with my own beliefs about these issues. I agree that the President needs to have a strong, resolute profile internationally (although I'm not going to say arrogant).
It is just holding Bush to the same standards I thought you set out.
|
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5069
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 10:51 pm: |
|
Kendalbill's post reminded me of the conclusion of guest-columnist Sarah Vowell's piece in the Sunday New York Times -
Quote:I attended the president's inauguration in 2001. When he took the presidential oath, I cried. What was I so afraid of? I was weeping because I was terrified that the new president would wreck the economy and muck up my drinking water. Isn't that adorable? I lacked the pessimistic imagination to dread that tens of thousands of human beings would be spied on or maimed or tortured or killed or stranded or drowned, thanks to his incompetence.
I feel like a fool. All those years of Sunday school, and still the apocalypse catches me off guard.
I thought that made a good point. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page