US public pissed at Dems, EVEN MORE pissed at Reps, study finds - Political Forum

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · 11-02-2007, 08:22 AM

The angry voter: Bad news for Dems - John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei - Politico.com

Quote:

The angry voter: Bad news for Dems
By: John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei
Nov 1, 2007 06:01 AM EST

Congressional Democrats certainly know the power of a throw-the-bums-out message. It vaulted them to power a year ago this week. Little wonder anxiety is boiling over inside the new majority as lawmakers ponder a succession of polls and reach an inescapable conclusion: Lots of people think they are bums, too.

The anti-Washington mood in the country — aimed at both a Republican president and a Democrat-controlled Congress — has reached breathtaking levels. One has to reach back almost 30 years, to the low points of Jimmy Carter’s presidency, to find a time when there was such simultaneous disdain for both the executive and the legislative branches, as measured by Gallup approval ratings.

.....

“We’ve never seen people as angry and frustrated as they are now, ... even more than in ’92,” he said.

As it happens, however, Greenberg is firmly in the stay-calm camp of the Democratic debate. Along with pollster Mark Mellman, who also consults with Democrats, he has been trying to reassure anxious members with this sunny-side-up message: The public dislikes Republicans even more than they dislike you.

“It’s certainly true that people are disgruntled with Congress and lukewarm about the Democrats in general,” Greenberg said, adding that, “However modest Democrats’ numbers are, Republicans’ numbers are much worse and dropping. “The main story is Republicans are seen as backing the Iraq war, backing Bush and blocking change,” he said.

Greenberg’s favorability index (voters are asked to give the “temperature” of their feelings, from “very warm” to “very cold”) showed that the public had a negative perception of congressional Democrats by four points, and a negative perception of congressional Republicans by 17 points. Mellman said that Democrats in part are confronting disappointment from their own backers, who are hoping for more immediate results from the new majority, particularly on Iraq.

According to Democrats who have seen a poll he conducted last week, however, Democrats in Congress had a 48 percent favorable rating, with 44 percent reporting an unfavorable opinion. Republicans in Congress had just a 32 percent favorable rating, with 62 percent unfavorable.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel, who led the House Democrats’ campaign committee during last year’s election, said he can live with these numbers for now. “I would not call it a grand slam, but you are on a base,” he said Tuesday. He appealed for realism: “If 70 percent of the country feels rotten about how things are going, you are not going to get them to feel positive about any institution or person.”

Mellman said history supports Emanuel’s confidence: “There’s no consistent relationship between congressional approval and electoral outcomes.” Weak approval ratings for Congress did lead to a change in power benefiting Republicans in 1980 and 1994, and benefiting Democrats in 2006, Mellman noted. But Democrats scored big gains, even with lackluster approval ratings in 1982, and suffered only modest losses despite abysmal ratings in 1992.

On issues such as protecting the environment (higher CAFE standards for automobiles) and product safety (cracking down on dangerous Chinese toys) and, above all, the war in Iraq, the public is much more sympathetic to Democrats than Republicans, Mellman’s data found. That’s why Emanuel is urging his members and political reporters alike to take a breath. “The biggest problem for Bush and his party — besides his unpopularity — he has no agenda, and they have no agenda,” he said. “We are the ones proposing. ... Over time, that comes across. At least we are offering to do something.”

Still, Republicans know that dissatisfaction with Congress at least offers them a potential opening. A survey by the Field Poll in California last week showed that in her home state, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for the first time in her new job has a plurality of voters disapproving of her performance — 40 percent to 35 percent.

And at a news conference Tuesday, House Republican Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.) chortled, “Never has a Congress spent so much time to accomplish so little.” In making this case, the GOP has been getting a boost from Jay Leno, who mocked House Democrats in his monologue on Monday and Tuesday nights, in particular the recent news that Democrats are backing off their 2006 campaign pledge for longer workweeks. “I guess they realize they don’t need a full five days to do nothing,” Leno cracked. “They can now do nothing in four days.”

I think the public favors Democrats right now because of the Iraq war, as well as the multitude of problems between Bush and his base. Still too far away to say what will happen a year from now. I guess we can count on getting nothing done in the Congress until then though.

Grez · 11-03-2007, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W.E.B. Du Bois

I think the public favors Democrats right now because of the Iraq war, as well as the multitude of problems between Bush and his base. Still too far away to say what will happen a year from now. I guess we can count on getting nothing done in the Congress until then though.

Yep, and we should be pissed at both. They both only care about whats best for their parties, not America and its never been more evident. Its been frustrating to say the least. The campaigning for 08 started way too early, so really nothing has been accomplished other than bitching back and forth at each other, and as you said, nothing will get done until its over, if then.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · 11-03-2007, 04:32 AM

I just don't think that anyone could possibly be as bad as Bush. Even if it's Thompson (who is probably the most like Bush), even then for some strange reason I'm optimistic that it just can't be as bad as it was from 2001-2006.

Grez · 11-03-2007, 05:43 AM

Bush has been a major dissapointment and I'm ready to see him out. The problem that has been with the Bush presidency is that the media tries to blame everything on Bush, whether its his fault or not, a lot of times its not. This is getting old and I'm quite tired of it. My fear is that the politicians have built up so much hate between the parties that it will continue on. The Iraq war has obviously been the main reason for all of this. The thing I hate the most is that a lot of Democrats seem to want the Iraq war to fail, just so they could tell you I told you so and further their party and vice versa with most Republicans. I would hate to see us pull out and have everything be in vain, just to see everything go to complete hell there. I'm all for getting the troops out now if we knew for sure that it would be the right choice, but we don't know for sure that it is the right choice.

Troianii · 11-03-2007, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W.E.B. Du Bois

I just don't think that anyone could possibly be as bad as Bush. Even if it's Thompson (who is probably the most like Bush), even then for some strange reason I'm optimistic that it just can't be as bad as it was from 2001-2006.

Just out of curiosity with no intent to debate, could you tell me why your opinion of Bush is so low? I mean I'm not going to put him up on a pedestal, but I've been looking around and, apart from the war in Iraq (and I suppose immigration), he seems to have done a pretty good job. Basically, apart from the issues currently at the forefront, Bush has done a good job.

SamInTheSouth · 11-03-2007, 12:43 PM

I wish all that anger at the two parties would push people towards voting for someone who isn't a member of either in the elections next year, but alas, I'm know I'm asking for a miracle.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · 11-03-2007, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troianii

Just out of curiosity with no intent to debate, could you tell me why your opinion of Bush is so low? I mean I'm not going to put him up on a pedestal, but I've been looking around and, apart from the war in Iraq (and I suppose immigration), he seems to have done a pretty good job. Basically, apart from the issues currently at the forefront, Bush has done a good job.

Well I guess you could say that I have my own political ideological reasons for not liking him (Democratic complaints) and some objective complaints as well.

Democratic Complaints
* Gave out massive tax cuts for the rich
* Tried to destroy the public school system with NCLB
* Massive increases in military spending
* Tried to destroy affirmative action without leaving something in its place (massive funding increases for failing schools)

Objective Complaints
* Ruled with a "mandate" despite having lost the popular vote to his rival, ruled with extreme arrogance and disregard for the left, just steamrolling the left on every issue, not seeking any consensus, just using the 1-2% of extra seats the Reps held in the Congress to do whatever they wanted

* Constantly lies
* Is incompetent, failed in Iraq and Katrina
* Alienated the rest of the world and reduced the US prestige in the world
* Extreme arrogance of Bush and his Republican cohorts just completely degraded everyone who disagrees with him, created an extremely divided nation
* Put POLITICAL PARTISANS on the Supreme Court - the damn judges are little more than political activists

* Created a huge deficit
* The dollar is worth as much as toilet paper

apawllo · 11-04-2007, 02:02 AM

Time to get back to basics. The Congress simply has too much work to do. They've gotten themselves in over their heads by expanding our empire and the scope of the federal government's powers. This is one of many reasons why the framers of the constitution established the 10th Amendment in order for the powers in government to be separated between the states and the federal government.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · 11-04-2007, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MountainMike

Pelosi and Reid do not constitute leadership. Democrats are in desperate need to change directions and all of the old time incumbent, veteran insiders are bankrupt on viable ideas.

Republicans backing Bush flat out need to get slam dunked out of office.

I disagree. Pelosi and Reid are just normal leadership, no better and no worse than any other leader. I guess you expected them to pull the plug on funding in Iraq. Had they done that, then the Republicans would win in 2008. People are not in favor of pulling the plug on funding the troops in Iraq. That is why it does not get done. That is not the fault of Pelosi and Reid. Whoever you could pretend to substitute in their place, be it Ron Paul, Noam Chomsky, Ralph Nader, Michael Moore or Cindy Sheehan, could not get the Democrats to cut funding for the war. Why? The American people are not in favor of doing that.

WEB

Bird of Prey · 11-04-2007, 12:38 PM

If this trend continues, it will be in the best interests of the country. It's the proverbial perfect storm. Any candidate that has the guts to capitlize on it and run independent - if he has any traction at all - will win. And a third party is exactly what this country needs. Ron Paul or even Obama would be perfect. Giuliani would make a wide sweep at the polls.