Bush, Congress at record low ratings: Reuters poll

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

Bush, Congress at record low ratings: Reuters poll
Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:34am EDT

By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush and
the U.S. Congress registered record-low approval
ratings in a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday,
and a new monthly index measuring the mood of Americans
dipped slightly on deepening worries about the economy.

Only 29 percent of Americans gave Bush a positive grade
for his job performance, below his worst Zogby poll
mark of 30 percent in March. A paltry 11 percent rated
Congress positively, beating the previous low of 14
percent in July.

The Reuters/Zogby Index, a new measure of the mood of
the country, dropped from 100 to 98.8 in the last month
on worries about the economy and fears of a recession,
pollster John Zogby said.

"Since the last time we polled we have had the mortgage
crisis, and we are hearing the recession word a whole
lot more than we've heard it in the past," Zogby said.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1844140220070919

[Catch22Dem]

1. 2008 should be big...repukes shouldn't look positively at that congress rating

There's going to be another sweep and it's going to kick out more repukes. My buddy at work is laughing that the congress rating under the Dem congress is lower than the last repuke one. I tell him that it's because there still aren't enough Dems in there to get the job done, but there will be in Jan 09.

[MidwestTransplant]

5. Exactly, they are low because they haven't done enough on the war. So Dems are neg and Rethugs

dislike them anyway because they are Dem. so it's a double whammy. But when it come to the ballot box, people will vote for Dems if they think it will end the war. Definitely not for Repubs in any event.

[regnaD kciN]

2. The problem here...

...is that when everyone gets bad ratings, the conclusion many people draw is that "government stinks as a whole, therefore the only good government is the smallest one and, since it's well-known :eyes: that Democrats are the party of 'Big Government', it follows that we need to elect Republicans."

Now, it may be that the conventional wisdom that Democrats equal big, intrusive government and Republicans equal small, hands-off government may have been dealt a death-blow by the excesses of the Bush Maladministration. But old habits die hard, and you can count on the Publicans to continue the drumbeat of "Disgusted with politicians? Vote for us -- we'll keep government off your back." Whether it works or whether that argument's time has run out is something we won't know until at least next November.

[underpants]

4. I can't ever remember polls about Congress being reported along with the POTUS

Funny how the press has a "oh yeah but them too" angle.

They couldn't be more obvious.

[Toots]

9. Not to mention the fact that so many Democrats are so pissed they may not vote at all.

I might just be one of those...I have yet to be shown anything worth voting for. It is plain as day that unless they Impeach they will not accomplish anything at all. Yet Impeachment (all legislation) is "off the table" I am pissed that the criminals will not be held accountable. It just seems to me like they are all in it together and if that is the case why should I vote for more of the same..

[paulk]

10. "fact"??????? that's just your opinion, toots

an opinion that is not reflected by any polling I've seen, unless you count the anecdotal accounts here at the DU "I hate Democrats" circle jerk.

Personally, I think you're full of shit.

[lligrd]

12. I Hardly Think Calling Disallusioned Dems "Full Of Shit"

is going to help win any elections. People have a right to be angry and disheartened by the inaction of those we did elect.

[paulk]

13. then don't vote! I mean, really - if you're going to be so ignorant

as to say that the Democrats aren't doing anything, why do you even bother?

[lligrd]

23. I Never Said That

What were you saying about ignorant?

[paulk]

28. oh? you're not the "people" in this statement of yours?

"People have a right to be angry and disheartened by the inaction of those we did elect."

Or is it just that they're just not doing the "actions" you want?

[lligrd]

32. Never Said I Wouldn't Vote

Are you saying we don't have a right to feel angry and disheartened? And hell no, they are not doing the actions I want, if by actions, you mean going along with the idiot administration. All I did was attempt to tell you that you are not helping the cause by being so caustic and I stand by that.

[paulk]

34. "toots" did, though. And many others on this website say it on a

daily basis.

This place is infested with that sort of thing. I've spent years here coddling these crybabies. I'm not going to do it any more. Anyone who threatens to sit out 2008 or vote 3rd party is acting like a spoiled little brat and deserves to be treated as such. We, as a nation, cannot afford another Republican administration, and if a poster is actively trying to spread the "don't vote" meme, then they are working toward just that.

[Toots]

16. Well the FACT is that Congress is polling at less than half of Bush* approval

IMO it is because of people with an attitude like yours. A very shiity one I might add. Everyone in America is wrong but you in that 11% range..:shrug:

[paulk]

18. you're the one with the shitty attitude, toots

threatening to not vote and all...

and the approval rating of Congress is because of my attitude? Real faulty logic there, IMO.

[depakid]

17. Well, I hear sentiments like that ALL THE TIME

From people that I know and work with.

They tend to be under 35, and either independent or (gasp) registered Democrats. The widespread perception is that Congress has been complicit- and in failing to stand up to the Bush administration or hold them accountable, the Democrats now look even weaker than they did when they were in the minority.

That's a pretty sad state of affairs- and it'll be reflected in the turnout next year.

[paulk]

19. yeah, sounds like the same bunch of apathetic fucks that helped

Bush win in 2000. Part of that 50% that talks a good game, but never shows up. Like always.

You and the rest of the boo birds want to lay some money on voter turnout for 2008? This country is sick of the Republicans and their war and they're going to come to the polls and turn them out of office. With or without the help of you whiners.

[depakid]

20. Just being realistic

and I suspect that- as happened more often than not over the past 13 years, the Dems are going to be in for a surprise.

Parties that alienate their base and pander to the ephemeral center end up standing for nothing and absent a complete meltdown of the opposition, tend to lose.

[lligrd]

24. Makes Me Wish Dean Were Running Again

That was his message. Unfortunately, the DLC dems didn't like that message.

[ProudDad]

26. Hey, paulk, I got a good idea

instead of crapping on your potential allies...

Why don't you build a bigger fire under your DINO friends in Congress?

How about telling them that if they don't get their asses in gear, you're not going to vote for them?

It's a near certitude that the Congress' low approval rating is because except for some slight tinkering during the first "100 hours" (almost NONE of which has been signed into law), they ain't done SHIT but shovel more money into bush's war...

[paulk]

27. anyone who is threatening to sit this one out or vote 3rd party

is not an ally. Period. You act like I'm the only one who's going to be hurt by another Republican administration... well, go ahead and cut off your nose to spite your face then. Hold your breath until you turn blue.

The idea that threatening someone by withholding your vote is somehow going to force them to do your bidding is just about the stupidest goddamn thing I have ever heard. It shows such an ignorance about politics and politicians that it is hardly even worth comment. Politicians go where the votes are - if the left wants to play that game, the Democratic Party will get their votes somewhere else. Why do you think the party has moved even farther toward the center since the 2000 election, where many did go 3rd party?

All that strategy does is completely marginalize the left - which doesn't make me happy because, as much as you'd like to pigeonhole people who don't agree with you, I am not a centrist. I am not any happier with these people than you are.

----------------------

And this constant referral to the low ratings of Congress as somehow backing up your POV also shows a lack of understanding. Republicans vote in those polls too, you know. There reasons for trashing Congress have no relation to yours. I also think Congress is doing a lousy job - but I blame Republican obstructionism far more than I blame the Democrats.

[ProudDad]

30. But I have seen little to indicate

that anyone's sitting it out just yet.

Many are saying that if we're just going to get another republican lite Congress with a republican lite president...why bother? (except maybe for the next SCOTUS nomination but with the way the pukes have stacked the entire Federal Court system -- SCOTUS don't matter as much)...

The left is always marginalized until co-opted...but this Dem "Congress" is really beyond the norm for that...Those fuckers won't even try to co-opt us...

The pukes are mad 'cause they think the Dems are in charge...period...that's enough for them...

Most Dems are mad 'cause they think the Dems SHOULD be in charge and are still giving bush whatever he wants...or doing nothing...

The "independents" have been convinced by decades of propaganda that government is either their enemy (the libertarian loonies) or is the "problem" -- ray-gun Dems, etc...

I don't know about that 11%. I think they just ain't payin' attention at all... :shrug:

[ProudDad]

25. Here's a FACT

after that bullshit giveaway to her health insurance mafia friends...

if hillary's in, I'm out...

[paulk]

29. you better include the rest of the candidates then, since their

plans aren't much different...

well, except for DK, who's running such a serious campaign that he can't even be bothered to put an office in Iowa. Or a staff worker.


------------------------


Guess that means you'll be sitting it out next year, huh? I mean, why not - the Republican plan is apparently good enough for you...

[ProudDad]

31. you are commiting egregious logic errors again, my friend

I said hillary is a lost cause...

I think Obama and Edwards can be lobbied on Single-Payer. I think hillary's too far gone for that...


As for Kucinich's "serious campaign", there was a post in a thread earlier today that linked to an article that ranked money to poll numbers (anyone out there remember the tread -- I'm too tired to find it right now)...

The MOST interesting point was that even though Kucinich was nearly LAST in fund raising his poll numbers were only eclipsed by ObamClintWards -- in other words, he's getting the BIGGEST bang for the buck because he has the BEST message and the best policies...the ones most humane and most resonant with the population, at least those who pay attention and have some modicum of compassion...

If he had even Edwards' money -- he'd be the one in the lead...

[lligrd]

33. Agreed, Hillary's Plan

scares the chit out of me. For one, it is Little better than what we have now and once we are in it, it will be that much harder to ever get single-payer. I dislike Hillary more and more each day and I used to think she would have made a better President than Bill.

[paulk]

36. and yet the right wing thinks Hillary's plan is a step on the road

to socialized medicine.


hmmm.....


I guess people see what they want to see.

[paulk]

35. you are disconnected from the political realities of this

we are not going to get single payer any time soon, if at all. That you write off the current Dem poll leader says a lot about your grasp of the American polity.

I'm interested in what is achievable, not in some pipe dream. I, personally, don't have the luxury of putting the perfect before the good.

[lligrd]

11. We Vote Them In Next Time So They Have No Excuses

and if they continue to screw us we begin replacing them with activist Democrats. In the meantime we scream and let them know we mean business. I see no other plan. Allowing the neocons to continue drowning America by not voting certainly won't help. I, by the way, am as angry as you, if not more so.

[jefferson_dem]

3. There's a sour mood out there, friends.

Obviously, this bodes well for the "out party" in the POTUS race.

Details and trends for their index here, if you're interested -->
http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/rzi

[fasttense]

6. This might have something to do with the 85 holds republican senators

have on legislation. I heard on Thom Hartmann yesterday that republican senators have 85 holds on legislation. Nothing is getting done because the republicans are preventing legislation from coming to the floor. They are obstructing congress and blaming it on the Democrats.

Here are some links on the subject:
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1186973762249160.xml&coll=7

http://www.azcongresswatch.com/?p=3202

[paulk]

38. but, but, but....

that's reality! We can't have that!

We have to find a way to blame this on the Dems!


:hi:

[Vidar]

7. Both ratings are richly deserved.

[CountAllVotes]

8. K&R

:dem: :kick:

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

14. Take a hint, Pelosi & Reid.

You know exactly what you can do to turn things around, but you're just too frickin' cowardly.

IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH

[Solly Mack]

15. Gee, I can't imagine why

[gulfcoastliberal]

21. Member of the 71/89 percenters

A pox on all those smug DLC/DINO fucks in the senate (and house).

[unkachuck]

22. people are fed up....

....with their corporate controlled government and the corporate stooges that service that government....

....a year ago Nancy and Harry had it by the ass....the brass ring was theirs for the taking....people voted for an end to war and to have their government refocus on their problems....

....so what do they get, more war, and bush, appointed-war-spender-in-chief, bitching about our government helping with our childrens healthcare....and of course, the poor Dems, won't have the necessary corporate votes for a veto over-ride....yah, right here....

....if moving the country away from corporate interests and into a more egalitarian direction was Nancy and Harrys goal, then they've failed miserably....and 89% of the people know it....

[LeFleur1]

37. I Don't Believe We Would Be Having This Conversation

if our representatives and senators would stick together on important issues such as FISA, Corporate giveaways, habaeus corpus, all those freedom robbing bills that some of them have voted to PASS, occupation funding, Webb's Bill, free speech censure, it would show constituents that they differ from Republicans, that they haven't lost their groove.

If constituents see them as just an extension of the Republican beliefs, why vote for them? What would the difference be if they aren't elected?

They have to prove to us, out here in the USA, that they are different, that they still value our constitution, the lives of our troops, and our country. When they side with Republicans on these issues, their loyalty to Democratic principles come into question