The latest Zogby poll results were released today. Guess what! Nothing new here. Americans are still displeased with President Bush and Congress. (yawn)
The Reuters/Zogby Index, which measures the mood of the country, also fell from 98.8 to 96 -- the second consecutive month it has dropped. The number of Americans who believe the country is on the wrong track jumped four points to 66 percent.
Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low.
"There is a real question among Americans now about how relevant this government is to them," pollster John Zogby said. "They tell us they want action on health care, education, the war and immigration, but they don't believe they are going to get it."
Throw the bums out! (Oh, if only I could be the one that gets to define the word 'bums' here.)
The bleak mood could present problems for both parties heading into the November 2008 election campaign, Zogby said.
"Voter turnout could still be high next year, but the mood has turned against incumbents and into a 'throw the bums out' mindset," Zogby said.
I think he is wrong about voter turnout. I predict voter apathy will be at its highest in 2008. Oh, how I wish Americans would adopt the "purple finger" mentality and take pride in their voter rights. It really does take courage to take a stand and vote your conscience. However, I suppose when constantly faced with the "lesser of two evils" choices, the zeal for voting loses its zest. What a shame.
I agree with you and voter apathy levels in our country. I fear the conservatives, in particular, will sit home instead of stepping up and voting to support the Republican candidate. Then we'll have a Democrat for sure.
On the other hand, I am encouraged that the Dems aren't thrilled with their politicans either. I think the presidental election is up in the air, no sure thing for Hillary.
From the Reuters article:
The dismal assessment of the Republican president and the Democratic-controlled Congress follows another month of inconclusive political battles over a future path in Iraq and the recent Bush veto of an expansion of the program providing insurance for poor children.
With such misleading and incomplete reporting as that it's no wonder so many people have a negative opinion of Bush.
"However, I suppose when constantly faced with the "lesser of two evils" choices, the zeal for voting loses its zest. What a shame."
As Winston Churchill said, "Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Thant's because, well, government sucks. And that's why I became a conservative in the first place.
Conservatives will stay home. Congress has such low approval because Democrats don't think it's Democratic enough, so they'll turn out to make sure things go their way.
Republicans know they've messed things up and are ashamed. (As they should be.) True conservatives will stay home or vote for a 3rd party candidate from Dobson's group.
I award greg barton the wishful thinking comment award for the day.
On a related note: I've noticed several lefties commenting on the poll by saying Democrats are mad at congress for not getting the ball rolling on impeachment. If that's true, then where are all these people howling for impeachment? I mean..I know there are some; I see pictures and read of them quite often, but it's a small group of people.
my father refers to people who say and do stupid things as "Dinky Doo Heads." I have no idea why. But for anybody who thinks that voting for a third party candidate is a viable option, then they are Dinky Doo Heads. A conservative that votes third party might as well vote Democrat. Because the net result will be the same.
If you see a kid playing in traffic, you are obligated to try and save them. Conservatives pondering a third party are acting like idjit kids.
Why Boosh is annoying
He traded Sammy Sosa and fired Bobby Valentine. He hasn't fired Cheney.
He killed a protected bird called a killdeer and paid a fine (1994).
He ran 3 oil companies and the country into the ground.
He pled guilty to a DWI.
He's the current record holder for most executions by a governor.
He has poor reading, speaking, and cognitive skills. To all you Boosh supporters out there, cognitive means: relating to the process of acquiring knowledge by the use of reasoning, intuition, or perception.
After meeting British PM Tony Blair, the press asked him if they had anything in common and he said, 'Yes, we both use Colgate Toothpaste.'
His grammar is horrible and sub-normal, he says 'Me and Laura' and extends words to non-valid parameters (i.e. 'common sensical, do-badders, etc.').
He got so excited while watching an NFL playoff game, that he choked on a pretzel and fainted (January 13, 2002). Actually, this, under the right circumstances, could have been an asset.
Although both he and his father declared war, not one of his twenty plus children, nieces or nephews have served in the armed forces.
He opted for the National Guard (using privilege to push ahead of others) during the Vietnam War, and there is a question if he fulfilled his military obligation.
He said: 'If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier - just so long I'm the dictator' (December 18, 2001). Well, he's certainly the "dick" in dictator.
He invaded Iraq on the basis that it illegally had weapons of mass destruction and they, like some of his military records, were never were found.
He is against gay marriages.
He uses the bible as his guidebook (See "cognitive skills").
He fell off his bicycle before his daughter's graduation - Spazz (May 2004).
He likes to trade on his good 'ol boy southern charm yet he is from Connecticut.
He declared his Iraqi invasion as 'Mission Accomplished,' yet hundreds of American troops died after that declaration.
He is against the minimum wage and health care to help America's working poor but is for reducing the tax burden on the wealthiest.
He exploited America's fear on terrorism during his 2004 campaign for re-election.
He favors censorship, not trusting Americans to decide for themselves.
Why he might not be annoying
He gave Saturday Night Live's Will Ferrell a new character (This is borderline).
He risked his life to visit and thank troops in Baghdad, Iraq for Thanksgiving in the middle of a war. He was the first American President to visit Iraq. But come to think of it, the turkey he served was plastic, so that makes him even more annoying.
RE: who's howling for impeachment:
http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer
They're almost up to a million signatures on their petition, they say...
These are some sandpaper rough days to be a republican. The inbred NASCAR fans back in Iowa, Texas, Colorado, Florida, and other primeval palookavilles of this great country are wearing paper sacks over their heads in shame because their team is getting bitch-slapped out there. You can throw a rock (and make it a big one!) in any seedy public lavatory throughout the country and hit at least one deeply conservative, self-righteous, holier-than-thou congressman, senator, or mega church pastor, leaving the true deceivers/believers to wonder--WTF?
"Oh heal them, Lord, in the beautiful blood of the lamb!" they beseech in prayer, "I heard voices, and I heeded the call, as I selected these, my public servants, these Godly soldiers, these nadirs of probity, to represent both me and your will and enforce that same unchanging certain correctness on my town, my state, and this whole nation. I empowered them so that they might smite the harlot-filled Babylon of Hollywood, so that they might purge the filthy restrooms of various Gomorrahs throughout the country, so that they might force the accursed liberals and other fornicators from the dank dens where they blaspheme. I trusted them to raise high the blow torch of decency, restore the fear of god, and enshrine your holy will in law, by this holy Jihad!"
Yet, it is dumbfounding to consider how many professed conservatives have been violating the traditional values they profess to hold dear. For every knucklehead you recognize--Larry Craig, David Vitter, Ted Haggard, Ralph Reed, Jack Abramoff, Tom Foley, Tom DeLay, Randy Cunningham, John Doolittle--there are hundreds at state and local levels whose hypocritical indiscretions never make it CNN. And don’t even get me started on all those pedophilic Catholic priests out there. They count too.
Isn't it incredibly obvious that those who align themselves with social conservatism are far more likely to engage in inappropriate behavior than those who call themselves liberals. I’m not talking rocket science here.
We all have urges, some we’d prefer not to see the light of day, but these are people who seemingly lack the skills of introspection, or even common sense. And along with the obvious repression they struggle with, the repercussions of their stunted emotional state are likely to be exacerbated because the same factors that make self-examination impossible--loveless parenting, strict religious upbringing, for example--also tend to magnify their less-savory natural urges.
And that is the reason so many conservatives, doubtful of their own ability to control their sleazy desires, and projecting their own failings and bewilderment on the rest of humanity, come to be what they are. That is why they push for strictness in the home and to have morality rammed into law. They recognize a looming menace from which we must be protected, but cannot grasp that the foundation of the danger lies within themselves.
This is not to suggest that the majority of those who appear to be values-fixated Republicans are in fact pedophiles-in-waiting, repressed homosexuals, or thieves, waiting for opportunity? They are probably generally decent, doing their best to get by and perhaps willing to live and let live. But it also means that there is something in their experience with their family or community that guides them to believe that people are not to be trusted to contain their seamy urges.
It is not hard to identify those who pose the greatest danger to us, those who are incapable of self-examination, and are oblivious to their own transparency, for they are the ones that shout the loudest, spew warnings of moral rot and disobedience, that seek to exploit the fear they provoke to advance their own power and influence, that seek to raise an army of the self-righteous to march on the seat of wickedness and double standards. Imagine their shock when they realize that the seat is made of porcelain. That they themselves are the one besieged and the army they raised waits for them, right outside the stall door.
Carl Gordon... You nailed it! That is the root of extreme, moral conservatism: fear of their own desires, their own lusts leads them to judge others as they do, and seek out strong, fatherly authority figures to lead them, to be "tough on crime" (meaning without pity), and to seek a rigid sameness in everyone in order to keep themselves in check. I grew up in a very conservative part of the US — Orange County, California — and believe me, this was rampant. Sadly, what we've both just described used to be a fringe of the Republican Party, whose conservative beliefs had more to do with protecting American core values, and limiting the power of the government than with policing individual morality. As we have seen in the past six years, this is no longer the case. The party is now the party of the frightened, fear-mongering ones who have turned its values around 180 degrees. It saddens me and shames me that I now live in a country where torture is accepted, as are secret prisons, and renditions, and holding people in jail indefinitely without charge... It's ironic that this president has "protected" America by dismanteling it. It's encouraging to know that the majority of the nation has finally come to realize that.
Of course polls also show that Americans favor Democrats in Congress over Republicans.http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=1600
A close look at the Gallup poll website will be GRIM reading for Republicans
A close look at the Gallup poll website will be GRIM reading for Republicans
I took a look at the graphic on your link. Did you look at the overall approval/disapproval numbers and compared them to the years when the GOP was in control versus when the Democrats were? I noticed some trends there that were just as telling. Look at the rise in numbers when the GOP took Congress.
The current overall approval numbers this year haven't been this low since, um, the Democrats were in control in the early nineties.
I think the problem is that if a Democratic party member disagrees with their party line, they vote against it. If a Republican disagrees, they still vote the party line. This means that the Democrats need a much bigger majority than Republicans to get anything done. A Congress that doesn't get things done is not very popular.
How long were the Democrats in control of Congress until the early nineties? I'd be interested to see what their approval ratings were in the first ten years or so. (Is that information available?)
"I think he is wrong about voter turnout. I predict voter apathy will be at its highest in 2008. Oh, how I wish Americans would adopt the "purple finger" mentality and take pride in their voter rights. It really does take courage to take a stand and vote your conscience. However, I suppose when constantly faced with the "lesser of two evils" choices, the zeal for voting loses its zest. What a shame."
This has got to be the worst slab of inconsequential musing I've read in awhile.
- "I think he is wrong about voter turnout. I predict voter apathy will be at its highest in 2008."
Uh, why? These kinds of definitive statements of certitude without any analytical support are worthless.
- "Oh, how I wish Americans would adopt the "purple finger" mentality and take pride in their voter rights."
Oh, how I wish we would be less dependant on foreign oil. Oh, how I wish we weren't mired in Iraq. Oh, how I wish we had a better system of political representation in this country such as would inspire more of a "purple-finger mentality."
Again, I'm just flummuxed at such fluffy assessments of real issues. Wish in one hand and shit in the other, as my grandfather used to advise....
- "It really does take courage to take a stand and vote your conscience. However, I suppose when constantly faced with the "lesser of two evils" choices, the zeal for voting loses its zest. What a shame."
Oh yes - what a shame. But it also takes courage to vote one's conscience for neither of the two evils.
On last point, how the hell does "zeal" lose its "zest"?
Jason,
1)Please read my mission statement.
2)My prediction doesn't require scientific data. It is complete supposition based on: the lack of real interest in any political candidate demonstrated so far; the low percentage of Americans per capita who have historically turned out to vote; and the threats of various groups to vote third party or not vote.
3)The real issue I was trying to assess is the will of people wanting to vote, regardless. People in Iraq who voted took risks because they had a strong desire to vote, some who had never had an opportunity before. Why don't Americans want to vote and choose to be apathetic (or worse lazy)? It is a right which people take for granted. That was my point.
4)If your point was that it takes courage to vote 3rd party, then I agree. If your point was that it takes courage to sit on your butt at home, refusing to vote and then whine about how awful things are, then that is the epitome of cowardice.
5) In the context, zeal = passion and zest = gusto.
Thank you for commenting on my "worst slab of inconsequential musing[s]", "worthless" [opinions], and "fluffy assessments."
It pleases me that you took the time to critique it. Again, please read my mission statement, so that in the future, should you take the time to comment, you will understand what my blog is all about.
Oh, and I am a bit flummoxed about your use of the term "flummuxed."