061fc99b338e…

This is a do nothing congress (unless you consider finally naming all unnamed Post Offices after fellow Demoncrats)

I’m happy to enlighten you. Question 53 in the new Times poll shows 76% of the public wants “large numbers” of U.S. troops out within two years. Of that 76%, 54% want them out in less than a year. In the new WaPo poll, per questions 12 and 13, 58% say they want troop levels decreased and the vast, vast majority of them want it done either “right away” or by the end of the year.

This is not news. It’s the same 50-60% who have wanted the US out within a year for more than a year. It’s not a good thing, inasmuch as it enabled the Dems to regain Congress, but it also means the electoral fallout is likely limited to the vulnerable Senate seats… and that may be mitigated, depending on who the nominees for POTUS are. And, as AP rightly notes, the conditions in Iraq are also a major known unknown.

Here are the numbers:

The NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll had 57-61% saying the US sould reduce its number of troops now that Iraq has adopted a constitution throughout 2006.

CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Dec. 16-18, 2005: Only 38% think the US should have a significant number of troops in Iraq for more than a year.

Time magazine’s Nov. 29-Dec. 1, 2005 poll had 49% wanting troops out in a year.

CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Nov. 11-13, 2005: 52% wanting troops out in a year.

Through most of 2005, the Harris Poll had about 60% wanting troops out in a year.

Question for San Fran Nan Belicosi; How does it feel to know that the Iraqi parliament is making you look even more incompetent than you have already proven yourself to be?

GOD BLESS AMERICA!
paratisi

- The Cat

I always get mixed-up on this; but, as between Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, which one is the old lady?

Sorry for the confusion.

OhEssYouCowboys on September 12, 2007 at 4:53 PM

I get confused myself sometimes, theres nothing to be sorry about. Harry is the old lady while Nancy is actually one of the Greys

- The Cat

Sorry for the confusion.

SouthernDem on September 12, 2007 at 3:06 PM

Sorry SD, I have been away from the computer. The answer is this. A major chunk of the conservatives stayed home because,

A. The are disenchanted with Bush over domestic spending and other core issues

B. They are even more disenchanted with the Republicans in the Senate and the House and their lack of “stones” in dealing with the Dems and some of the above mentioned issues.

or C. All of the above.

I can’t tell you how many conservatives have told me they didn’t vote because they really didn’t see any differance between Dems and Repubs anymore.

Unfortunatly, little has changed since then.

Who does Reid remind you of: Howdy Doody, or Alfred E Newman? I can’t quite decide…

You’re right on both counts. He’s both a puppet-on-a-string and an imbecile.

So let it be spoken. So let it be done…..but only if we can get 3 Republicans to quit the courage of their convictions.

HarryStar on September 12, 2007 at 2:33 PM

Well, that doesn’t exactly prove a point, but I digress.
None the less, I haven’t seen an answer. If Iraq wasn’t the big factor, then what was it? (I will laugh my ass off if someone uses a poll)

Both are rank and raw failures. “Ethics?” give me a break, DirtyHarry!

From what I see on these polls, these are not even “likely voters” In the first one 25% didn’t even vote in the last election.

Spin ‘em however you want, guys. I sincerely hope you’re right.

Only the far left, faux conservatives and country club Republicans know that.

Incidentally, CI, since you seem to have such contempt for my “faux conservatism,” why do you continue commenting here? Every time a comment from you pops up, it’s in some sense sneering at something I’ve said.

No one will arrest you if you don’t want to read the site, you know.

And I don’t buy into the theory that the Dems won in the last election because of America’s disgust with the war.

Exactly, as all politically astute individuals know we lost far less than the average of any president in his 6th year. By that standard we actually did pretty well. Only the far left, faux conservatives and country club Republicans know that. It’s far too easy to be intellectually lazy and blame the losses on Iraq.

I agree that polls don’t mean squat.

If MSM (or whoever) does a poll and the results don’t jibe with the message they want the poll to project, they simply don’t release the results of the poll.

However, if the results confirm their position, they send the poll results to all media outlets to trumpet.

omnipotent on September 12, 2007 at 1:31 PM

I would love to seem some facts supporting this statement.

I’m as skeptical as the next guy of media bias. However, having worked in a newsroom, I’m more measured in my attacks on mainstream news organizations. That is not to say that they are unbiased; most reporters are democrats. Rather, I choose objective criticism over engaging in an equally biased backlash.

It’s very en vogue to attack the MSM, I know. But some of the mantras are so partisan and biased in the other direction, we really do run the risk of sounding unhinged.

There are only a handful of bloggers, citizen-journalists and crowd sourcers who actually break news. The vast majority are commenting on someone else’s reporting.

Even if you only read blogs, you still get most of your news from one of the wire services. How do you know when to believe what they say? Are only stories about politics affected by media bias?

RE: Nancy Pelosi
The only thing more embarrassing than having her as Speaker during a war is the fact that Republicans do nothing to refute her lies.

The thing is, people are more than willing to believe polls whenever it benefits them. Including the right.

SouthernDem on September 12, 2007 at 1:56 PM

Very very true, on both sides. That’s one of the reasons that I laugh at politicians who bring up these polls. Lead for cryin’ out loud, just lead!!! Believe in something and get the people to follow.

The thing that kills me about many in Washington is that they look at the polls to determine what to do.

That to me is NOT a leader and one of the reasons that I truly loved Reagan as President. There were many times that he was told that “Don’t do that because people will be upset (SDI, Berlin “Tear down the wall”, etc).