February 5, 2008 Super Tuesday

[Vincent Vega]

And thank god, eh? Your frequent mentioning of Truman is starting to get me thinking that it actually matters.

Yes, I don't know. Only because Bush's approval rating is slghtly above Truman's that now means Bush is loved by the majority? How does that work?
Approval ratings between 20 and 30% mean that 70 to 80% are against you. No matter what, the majority doesn't approve of you.
But maybe someone falls for that cheap trick.

 

[verte76]

Romney won some primary, I just saw an email about it.

 

[verte76]

Bush is stubborn and ignorant.

 

[Bluer White]

I never really looked into that. Do you have the full quote of what Romney said?

This was an issue in the late innings of a close Florida race. The state was must-win and I think it was unfortunate that McCain threw this accusation out. Would you have been comfortable with Romney as commander-in-chief?

SIMI VALLEY, Calif. - Republican Mitt Romney accused John McCain of using dirty tricks by suggesting the former Massachusetts governor wanted a deadline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, in a spirited debate Wednesday night that underscored the intensity of their presidential rivalry.

"I have never, ever supported a specific timetable" for withdrawing troops, Romney said. McCain's accusation on the eve of Tuesday's primary, he said, "sort of falls into the dirty tricks that I think Ronald Reagan would have found reprehensible."

McCain stuck to his guns, saying, "of course he said he wanted a timetable" for a withdrawal. McCain had made the allegation in Florida as he tried to shift the debate from the ailing economy, a stronger issue for Romney, a former venture capitalist and businessman.

Last April, Romney said U.S. and Iraqi leaders "have to have a series of timetables and milestones that they speak about" in private.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-republicans-debate,1,3508375.story

 

[2861U2]

Approval ratings between 20 and 30% mean that 70 to 80% are against you. No matter what, the majority doesn't approve of you.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Whenever I bring up the Democratic Congress, most people here blame the Republicans for the failure to get anything done. Clearly, the Democrats are doing a superb job. It's just those pesky minority Republicans.

 

[Vincent Vega]

I remember an article about Democratic senators and Democratic representatives accusing each other of being responsible for the poor showing since they gained the majority, posted by U2Democrat if I recall correctly. Many posters here responded to that thread and agreed that performance of both wasn't that great, and they did so in other threads. No one there has talked of a "superb job".
However, you are ignoring some basic differences between the reasons for the disapproval of Bush on the one hand, and of the Democratic Congress on the other: Bush get's disapproved of for his very actions, and his habit to exploit his veto rights.
The Congress gets disapproved of for it's perceived inaction, which might partly be true, but is also to some extent the result of Bush's vetoes.

Also, there is a difference in the powers Bush has to "get something done", and those of the Congress consisting of hundreds of people from both parties. The minority power of the Republicans as well as the veto power of Bush certainly is an important factor why nothing gets done.

To compare both approval ratings as if they were exactly the same therefore is void.

 

[BVS]

Ahhh, when cooler heads prevail

 

[deep]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Whenever I bring up the Democratic Congress, most people here blame the Republicans for the failure to get anything done. Clearly, the Democrats are doing a superb job. It's just those pesky minority Republicans.

This may be a simplistic explanation

But I believe it is basically correct


For this premise
one must accept these rough numbers

40 % of the country is Democrat or Democrat leaning

40 % are Republican or Republican leaning

20 % are true independents (go both ways)


W's support is in the 30s
All of it is from hard core Republican or Republican leaning,
he has lost 1/4 of that group, 10% the total population.


The Democratic congress support in the 20s.
Who is in this group?

None is from Republican or Republican leaning group.

Some is from Democrat or Democrat leaning,
It takes 60 votes in the Senate to move things, not a simple majority of just 51.
Many expected the Dems to be able to control the agenda.
51 votes will not do that and there are not enough GOP that will vote with them to make the 60 votes.

Many of the true independents are disappointed because they voted for change, too.

Congress approval is in the 20s.

The public wants less of the Republican and W agenda, not more.

 

[Strongbow]

This was an issue in the late innings of a close Florida race. The state was must-win and I think it was unfortunate that McCain threw this accusation out. Would you have been comfortable with Romney as commander-in-chief?

SIMI VALLEY, Calif. - Republican Mitt Romney accused John McCain of using dirty tricks by suggesting the former Massachusetts governor wanted a deadline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, in a spirited debate Wednesday night that underscored the intensity of their presidential rivalry.

"I have never, ever supported a specific timetable" for withdrawing troops, Romney said. McCain's accusation on the eve of Tuesday's primary, he said, "sort of falls into the dirty tricks that I think Ronald Reagan would have found reprehensible."

McCain stuck to his guns, saying, "of course he said he wanted a timetable" for a withdrawal. McCain had made the allegation in Florida as he tried to shift the debate from the ailing economy, a stronger issue for Romney, a former venture capitalist and businessman.

Last April, Romney said U.S. and Iraqi leaders "have to have a series of timetables and milestones that they speak about" in private.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-republicans-debate,1,3508375.story

So what exactly did Romney mean by a "timetable"? It is very suggestive of the Democrats general strategy in Iraq and the word timetable had never been used to refer to anything other than troop withdrawals or unrealistic progress for the Iraqi government, economy, and military. Rebuilding a country the size of Iraq and defeating an insurgency requires years if not decades and will involve plenty of setbacks.

Romney has flipped flopped on issues like Abortion so I'm not sure if this was an attempt by Romney to cater to independents or some Democrats for the general election in the fall. Its certainly no worse than the thousands of attack adds that Romney launched against McCain and refering to John McCain as a "liberal"? Romney used over 5,000 adds against McCain in Florida while McCain was only able to put up 470. I'd say the little arguement about this had nothing to do with the results of the election was was pretty much sealed when McCain got his endorsements. If anything, what McCain said might have backfired a little bit if the charge was seen as being unfair.

I'd vote for Romney over any of the Democrats as well as Ron Paul and few of the other Republican 2008 candidates who dropped out and maybe Huckabee as well.

 

[Strongbow]

Yes, I don't know. Only because Bush's approval rating is slghtly above Truman's that now means Bush is loved by the majority? How does that work?
Approval ratings between 20 and 30% mean that 70 to 80% are against you. No matter what, the majority doesn't approve of you.
But maybe someone falls for that cheap trick.

Bush's approval rating is not just slightly higher than Turmans, it is 50% higher! Truman had an approval rating of 22% in 1952, Bush in January had an approval rating of 34%. Bush's disapproval rating is NOT 70% to 80% it is 60%.

More importantly, when it comes to elections, even someone who does not approve of the job you have done may vote for you when the see the other candidate. So how Bush would do in a General election in 2008 is much better than simply his approval rating.

 

[Strongbow]

Romney is making a stunning comback in California if the new Zogby poll is correct. It shows him ahead of McCain by 3 points. Romney has also pulled to within 2 points of McCain in Georgia where he had been behind by 11. If Romney were to win California and Georgia, the race would definitely continue.

McCain has a clear lock at this point on 10 of the 21 states. There are 7 that I have not seen any polls for, and 2 where it is now almost a tie and 2 where Romney has a clear lock. In the national polls for the Republican primary McCain is ahead of Romney by an average of 20 points.

 

[deep]

Romney is making a stunning comback in California if the new Zogby poll is correct.

CA is a closed primary state.

The GOP primary voters do always lean and favor the more conservative candidate.
Moderates sneak by if more than one conservative splits the vote for one moderate.

The voters passed an initiative to allow open primaries.

Both parties fought it in court and won.

This happened just before the 2000 election.
I believe it was the GOP party insiders putting up a fire wall to stop McCain in 2000 in favor of Bush.

Wisely, the Democrat party chose to allow both Democrats, and decline to state (no party affiliation) to vote in their primaries.

With that many independents are focusing on that race and may stay with the Dems in Nov.


McCain would never have gotten this far in a two person race.

 

[deep]

 

[deep]

another endorsement for McCain

LA OPINIÓN
Republican Party: John McCain

Senator John McCain has an independent character free from ideological constraints, which will improve the divisive national political climate. Over the course of his career he has demonstrated a deep understanding of the immigration issue and a desire to provide comprehensive immigration reform. We are not in agreement with many of his positions, such as on Irak, but his inclusive spirit and his pragmatism make him the best candidate among his Republican rivals.

 

[Irvine511]

Still, Bush is very popular among Registered Republicans. All of the candidates have gone out of their way at every debate to state how they support several of Bush's policies. In fact, they fiercely debate who is more supportive of his policies. So obviously this idea that not a single candidate wants to be associated with George Bush is wishfull thinking.

of course, some people are so obsessed with demonizing and reducing the stature of someone that they might miss that.

this is so blatantly wrong, it's funny. it's just wrong. are you watching the debates? do you pay any attention to the careful use of language used by these candidates?

no.

and Bush has lost GOP moderates, and has the highest "strongly diasapprove" ratings in history.

but i know that doesn't mean a thing to you. so carry on.

 

[Irvine511]

Bush's approval rating is not just slightly higher than Turmans, it is 50% higher! Truman had an approval rating of 22% in 1952, Bush in January had an approval rating of 34%. Bush's disapproval rating is NOT 70% to 80% it is 60%.

More importantly, when it comes to elections, even someone who does not approve of the job you have done may vote for you when the see the other candidate. So how Bush would do in a General election in 2008 is much better than simply his approval rating.

it's true. 8 is 100% higher than 4. it doesn't change the fact that both are less than 10, but yes, it is 100% higher!

and when you add an exclamation point (!!!) you just might be able to convince the easily fooled that you've said something of any sort of worth when you haven't.

the 50% "strongly" disapproval rating is staggering. it is the highest in the history in the Gallup Poll, even surpassing Richard Nixon's disapproval ratings at the peak of the greatest government scandal of the latter half of the 20th century, Watergate. his "strongly disapprove" rating was a mere 48%.

 

[anitram]

I strongly believe that if there were a few more days until Super Tuesday, Obama would mount an unprecedented victory. The tracking numbers are quite astonishing.

It will be fun in 48 hrs!

Oh and I laughed and laughed at Maria Shriver sticking it to Ahnold and McCain. Hilarious.

 

[deep]

I strongly believe that if there were a few more days until Super Tuesday, Obama would mount an unprecedented victory. The tracking numbers are quite astonishing.

I agree
everything I am reading supports your statements

it the trend remains as constant
Obama could win many if not most of the remaining primaries.

 

[Jeannieco]

Oh and I laughed and laughed at Maria Shriver sticking it to Ahnold and McCain. Hilarious.

Me too! That was great!!!
I just watched the whole thing on c-span, I sensed that she was going to come out since she is so close to them!

What a great group of women, all outstanding speakers supporting Barack!
I love Michelle Obama, what a classy person and a great first lady she would make!

I thought it was amazing that Stevie Wonder broke ranks with the Clinton's since he has been a long time supporter, wow!

I can feel the momentum!

 

[Vincent Vega]

Bush's approval rating is not just slightly higher than Turmans, it is 50% higher! Truman had an approval rating of 22% in 1952, Bush in January had an approval rating of 34%. Bush's disapproval rating is NOT 70% to 80% it is 60%.

It simply doesn't matter the least bit how Truman's approval rating was fifty years ago, that's utterly irrelevant.
Bush screwed up, but look, this guy was even worse.... Wow.

34% approval means a solid 2/3 disapproves of you.

It's nice that he might do better in a general election, but still he obviously failed to serve the public interest.

 

[Irvine511]

Bush has also been in the low 30's since 2005.

 

[Strongbow]

It simply doesn't matter the least bit how Truman's approval rating was fifty years ago, that's utterly irrelevant.
Bush screwed up, but look, this guy was even worse.... Wow.

34% approval means a solid 2/3 disapproves of you.

It's nice that he might do better in a general election, but still he obviously failed to serve the public interest.

There is a small percentage in the poll who neither approve or disapprove. 34% approve, 60% disapprove and 6 % were unsure.

Talk all you want about opinion polls, but the greatest test of approval or disaproval for a President is whether or not he wins re-election from the voters. Bush won re-election and that is a larger indicator of how the public viewed Bush than any single opinion poll.

Truman's approval rating does matter considering how the country now views Trumans Presidency. Most regard Truman as one of the greatest Presidents in US history. But the strain of the Korean War lowered his approval ratings at the time to the lowest in history. Sometimes Presidents do things at the time which become very unpopular but benefit the country enormously in the long run.

Hell, in 1864, Abraham Lincoln was even less liked than Truman when you look at the entire United States. Half of the country was still trying to leave the Union, and in the other half, Lincoln barely had support of 50% of the population. In fact, before Sherman took Atlanta in the Civil War, Lincoln was headed towards defeat in the election. Lincolns defeat would have resulted in the election of McClellen and the adoption of the Democratic party platform which called for peace and allowing the Confederate States to leave the Union, effectively ending the United States of America.

 

[Strongbow]

this is so blatantly wrong, it's funny. it's just wrong. are you watching the debates? do you pay any attention to the careful use of language used by these candidates?

no.

and Bush has lost GOP moderates, and has the highest "strongly diasapprove" ratings in history.

but i know that doesn't mean a thing to you. so carry on.

No, your response is funny. According to Gallup, between 70% and 80% of registered Republicans approve of George Bush's job as President. You don't run against someone who is that popular in your party. You would not get elected. McCain has his differences and criticisms as do the other candidates, but on the major issues, he and all the other Republican candidates except for Ron Paul are right in line with Bush.

 

[anitram]

McCain has his differences and criticisms as do the other candidates, but on the major issues, he and all the other Republican candidates except for Ron Paul are right in line with Bush.

I agree with you.

Obama or Hillary should put that into every single ad in the general election.

 

[BVS]

 

[maycocksean]

Truman's approval rating does matter considering how the country now views Trumans Presidency. Most regard Truman as one of the greatest Presidents in US history. But the strain of the Korean War lowered his approval ratings at the time to the lowest in history. Sometimes Presidents do things at the time which become very unpopular but benefit the country enormously in the long run.

So the argument is that any president that is grossly unpopular in his own time must necessarily turn out to be among our nation's best presidents by simple virtue of their unpopularity. That's the argument you're making right? If he's unpopular he must be a great president?

 

[Irvine511]

Truman's approval rating does matter considering how the country now views Trumans Presidency. Most regard Truman as one of the greatest Presidents in US history. But the strain of the Korean War lowered his approval ratings at the time to the lowest in history. Sometimes Presidents do things at the time which become very unpopular but benefit the country enormously in the long run.

it's funny when you think that things are the same. that Iraq and Afghanistan are the same country. and GWB is Harry Truman.

it's the most simplistic, unsophisticated analysis of all.

 

[Irvine511]

So the argument is that any president that is grossly unpopular in his own time must necessarily turn out to be among our nation's best presidents by simple virtue of their unpopularity. That's the argument you're making right? If he's unpopular he must be a great president?

and how would you grade such a paper with such a thesis? or a paper that made the claim that not only is this true, but that Bush is a whopping 50% higher than Truman! Truman was once at 22%, and GWB has been at about 33% or lower give or take a few percentage points for the majority of his 2nd term. does that 50% higher (!!!) have any sort of factual resonance whatsoever?

 

[verte76]

I'm still trying to find the place where I vote.

 

[verte76]

Bush is unpopular. People are sick of him.