Apr 07 2007

Americans Not Happy With Dems On Iraq

Published by at 11:14 am under All General Discussions

Democrats keep claiming they have the mandate and represent the will of the people on Iraq. Howard Dean just claimed America wants to leave Iraq at all costs.

“It is time for the President and Republicans in Congress to stop trying to bully their way through this and work with Democrats to end the war. It’s time for the President to show respect to the American people, who voted overwhelmingly to leave Iraq,” Mr Dean said.

First off, the Dems do not have ‘overwhelming’ majorities – they have razor thin ones. So one needs to ask why Dean cannot respect Americans’ intelligence, at a minimum. But whar is really too bad for Dean and the Dems is the fact ‘the people’ don’t agree with them:

Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs. April 2-4, 2007. N=1,000 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1. RV

“Overall, do you approve, disapprove or have mixed feelings about the way the Democrats in Congress are handling the situation in Iraq?”

40% – Approve
57% – Disapprove
2% – Mixed

If you want to beat liberals, just let them talk.

18 responses so far

18 Responses to “Americans Not Happy With Dems On Iraq”

  1. Carol_Herman says:

    A lesson from Lincoln’s playbook.

    Back to 1858; when parties “selected” senators. And, Lincoln was aiming to get into the senate. He was BEHIND. But he was known as an entertaining debater. People, by the thousands, would come out to the camp grounds, to hear him speak. And, entertain. They carried boxes of food. And, debated their roles in American politics. Heck, they did this just by standing around, and listening!

    The telegraph had been born. Some qualities about electricity were known. And, done as parlor tricks. Like rubbing a balloon and watching a woman’s skirt go up in the air, to attach itself to the surface of the balloon. Lots of ha, ha, ha’s.

    Then Morse figured out you could send “packets” dashes, and dots, over wires strung above rail lines. And, rail lines, being the technology of “that” time, was not subject to government interferences.

    Well, neither was the birth of our computer industry. Which started with Watson, at IBM, laughing at the thought his company’s typewriters would lose out to computers. Ha. Ha. Ha.

    Now, back to our story.

    In order to grow nice-sized audiences, Lincoln started following the demcrat, Stephen Douglas, around. As he campaigned. (Douglas would be the first campaigner, later, in 1860. To TOUR the nation. Campaigning for votes. While Lincoln SAT IT OUT. And, let the debates, I’m talking about now, BE his stand-in. As well as the folks who lined up to work for his presidencial election. (Keep in mind you always give jobs, later, following your win.) It’s another aspect of politics very few people can grasp. That winning takes work. And, work takes teams. It’s not really just one man.

    But it starts with one man!

    And, by following Douglas around. Spot to spot. And, as I said, attracting bigger crowds for Douglas; Lincoln GAINED national prominence. Because? Men, who were reporting from the scene, wrote fast. And, the telegraph sent the speeches across the nation. To appear in every newspaper daily from big cities. To the boonies. In those days? People were reading all about politics. If they couldn’t be on the spot to hear the men who wanted your votes, debating each other.

    Douglas, saw the crowds. And, unlike George Allen, did NOT go MACACA. Instead, he “accepted” Lincoln’s offer for “official debates.” Lincoln asked for 100. Douglas offered 7. Those debates?

    Well, because they were reprinted in newspapers; Lincoln got his hands on a wide variety of them. From both camps. Those that catered to WHIGS (since the GOP, in 1858, was not a contendah. And, those of the democrats.) Which meant Lincoln SIFTED everything!

    He put the package together, later. AFTER HE LOST TO DOUGLAS. And, in 1858, Douglas was seated in the senate. Because the democrats got the votes to send “their man.” (The senate was still a mess, remember. Pork tied to the railroad magnets. And, the south, trying to push slavery across the board.)

    Lincoln took his “package” … which fairly represented the debates as they were heard, to Douglas. Douglas was given the right to change anything. But he didn’t. Lincoln was smart enough to REPORT FAIRLY.

    When 1860 rolled around, the WHIGS were dead meat. But the GOP was holding its convention in Chicago. The building was called the “teepee.” And, entering the nomination process Lincoln was in 4th place.

    Well, a horse can win a horse race, if the one you put your money on,comes out of the gate in 4th place. The trick is in overtaking the horses running faster. Some do. Some don’t. It’s an interesting process to watch. Trickier, though, if you flopped good money on the outcome.

    Still, back inside the “teepee” the three-front-runners did not get along.

    So there ya go.

    Lincoln’s trick was never to say a bad word (MACACA) against any of his opponents. He had fans, though!

    And, the first upset, came on the first night, when “his royalty,” the guy going in who thought he was the winnah (Seward? Stanton? I forget.) Took his best shot.

    Inside the “teepee” it was decided the nominee would be picked by popular vote. No 2/3’rds needed. Advantage: Front Runner.

    Mishap? No ballots. The printer was slow. And, hadn’t completed the printing run. So, everybody had to go home.

    In politics? That means the leg work, and the mouth work, began behind the scenes.

    And, what became apparent? Well, they could run horse #1, horse #2, or horse #3. Each horse came from a “favorite state.” Alas, each horse was HATED elsewhere. Such a MACACA moment. You have no idea!

    Lincoln, and his supporters went from group to group late at night; and spoke of WINNING. Showing supporters of 1,2,3, that without a candidate that could win a national election, they’d be going nowhere.

    Took a total of 3 ballots. You know about the first one, where there was not place to make the votes official for #1. Because the printer was “late.” Or, the printer was on-time. Without #1’s team considering “fall-off.” Or what happens, when you’re #1, and buyer’s remorse begins to set in.

    In the second ballot, the next day, with plenty of paper ballots now on hand, since 10:AM. Choice #1 faltered. Less votes. And, #2, Chase, and #3 Bates, had no teams in place to pick up the fallen chips. Each one had his own enemies. MACACA.

    To stay out of trouble? You don’t attack your opponents!

    If Lincoln had started out on the ATTACK, he’d never have gotten further than being Douglas’ MACACA.

    All of the great candidates know how to stay seated, as they drive through “hot spots,” and different terrains.

    If you don’t think compromise is needed, then you’re lost in the woods.

    And, if you think at this late date, conservatives are gonna pick another bastard, after Jimmy Carter and both Bush’s won nominations playing primary tricks …

    That you haven’t figured out the landscape, either.

    Every single candidate that wants to win will keep his MACACA comments to himself.

    And, the one that comes out ahead can sell himself well to the mainstream. Without look phony. That’s just the way it was. If you care to consider history. Those who don’t? I’m sure don’t read long pieces.

  2. BarbaraS says:

    Dean has to keep up the rhetoric. After all he has a treaty with Al Quaeda that when the dims come into power wthe US will leave Iraq. He hasn’t come through for them and their demands are escalating. Both the dims and Al Quaeda see our victory in sight and are in despair. The dims want us to lose just as much as Al Quaeda does.

  3. crosspatch says:

    The Democratic majority is very slim indeed and many of the House Democrats that were elected are “Blue Dog” conservative Democrats. Many of those seats were won by very slim margins. The Democrats are attempting to create a “Bandwagon” effect making their win seem bigger than it is hoping more sheep will follow that lead.

    They really do have a low opinion of the people of this country and actually it is no wonder, most people have no clue what is going on.

  4. kathie says:

    I e mailed my representatives and told them that they may want to pretend that this is George Bush’s war, but in fact it is not. That it is high time that they take responsibility for their votes to send this Country to war, and that they confirmed General Patraus knowing what the new plan was. There is no compromise between victory and defeat. This is not a political issue of winners and losers, our Nation is at risk, you don’t vote to move forward as a Nation and then change your mind, like a discarded marriage or an aborted baby.

  5. Terrye says:

    I wrote my representatives and let them know how disgusted I am. That included the blue dog who won in my district. And contrary to what Dean is saying, he did not tell us all he was going to turn into Nancy’s lap dog as soon as he got to DC.

  6. Soothsayer says:

    Has it occurred to you folks that many of the 57% disapproving of how the Democrats have handled Iraq are upset because the Dems have not done ENOUGH to get the troops home?

    Does the Ipsos Poll address this? No.

    I personally disapprove of the Dems because they haven’t filed impeachment papers on the lying geek in the White House. And speaking of Iraq, Reuters reports:

    Iraqi army soldiers swept into the city of Diwaniya early this morning to disrupt militia activity and . . . discovered a factory that produced “explosively formed penetrators” (EFPs), a particularly deadly type of explosive that can destroy a main battle tank and several weapons caches.

    Strataspheristas have been blaming Iran for manufacture of EFP – supposedly beyond the ability of in-house Iraqi insurgents – but it appear3s they’re making them domestically.

  7. ivehadit says:

    Has it occured to the Leftists that those numbers are composite? Let’s see the numbers broken down by professed party lines…

  8. kathie says:

    If those are the numbers then why did the Dems have to buy $20b votes? We are not all stupid!

  9. crosspatch says:

    “Has it occurred to you folks that many of the 57% disapproving of how the Democrats have handled Iraq are upset because the Dems have not done ENOUGH to get the troops home?”

    No it hasn’t because there isn’t much more they could do beyond threatening to completely defund it as Happy Harry did last week. That is pretty much the ultimate step they can take and it is pretty clear that the voters aren’t buying it.

    The Democrats should be the ones offering the most support for eliminating the islamo-fascists because the Democrats are going to be the first ones they hang when they get the chance.

  10. crosspatch says:

    In other words, Soothsayer, the ones who called for woman’s rights, gay rights, legalized abortion, increased voting rights … are going to be the first ones to be beheaded. They must think we are a very odd lot indeed when the very people they want most to get rid of are the ones helping them right now. I believe it is basically because Democrats are stupid.

  11. crosspatch says:

    This is a Democrat’s point of view:

    In my view, the longer Nancy Pelosi remains our party’s leading spokesperson the more her penchant for political warfare and non-compliance with Jefferson’s “Manual” will enhance the chances of Republican control of Congress and/or the White House in 2008.

    She will serve our party and the nation best by resigning.

    Jerry Zeifman served as Democratic Counsel of the House Judiciary for 17 years. He has recently published “Hillary’s Pursuit of Power.” For his other books and articles go to his Web site, Jzeifman.com.

  12. crosspatch says:

    Soothsayer, a couple of other questions in that AP poll tell me that your idea is more of a rectal extraction than based in reality:

    “All in all, thinking about how things have gone in Iraq since the United States went to war there in March 2003, do you think the United States made the right decision in going to war in Iraq or made a mistake in going to war in Iraq?”

    4/2-4/07 39 59 2
    2/12-15/07 37 61 2

    Those are “right decision, mistake, dont know” notice which way the number went. The number who thought it was a mistake went down two points from February to April.

    Even more telling is this one:

    4/2-4/07 42 50
    2/12-15/07 39 56

    The first col is the percentage who think the mission in Iraq is a “worthy” cause. The second is the percentage that think it is a “hopeless” cause. Notice the change from February to April.

    So the notion that people are dissatisfied that congress hasn’t done enough to sabotage the mission in Iraq is the reason for the increase in disapproval is a load of hooey. The numbers show that a growing number of Americans are coming to support the mission and I have a feeling that as things settle down in Anbar and Baghdad, those numbers are going to swing even more rapidly.

  13. crosspatch says:

    And I might also note that AP tends to oversample liberals so those numbers are probably “worst case”.

  14. Terrye says:


    Gawd….Or how about this? A lot of people just want to win the war, or get Iraq to the point where it is stable enough that we can leave without it turning into Afghanistan 2.

    I also think that looking at the numbers of was it worth or not are not really that meaningful. If you had asked the people of the United States in the summer of 45 if it was worth it to have fought that war I am not sure what they would have said.

    But if you ask them ten years later, they would have said yes. If you asked people today was it worth it to fight in Korea and not let the communists take it all, I think most people would say yes, but they would not have in 1953.

    The simple truth is we do not know what the world would be like if we had not gone into Iraq in 2003. It is easy to assume there would be no war, but it might have been that there would have been another invasion, later and it would have been more costly.

    One thing we do know, kicking that can down the road is tempting, but it does not solve the problem…in fact if anything it makes it worse in the long run.

    Saddam was not going to turn into a nice man. He had made that plain in the long years we had dealt with him. The idea that somehow he was just going to quietly off into the sunset is not realistic.

  15. Dc says:

    Soothsayer posted:

    Has it occurred to you folks that many of the 57% disapproving of how the Democrats have handled Iraq are upset because the Dems have not done ENOUGH to get the troops home? Does the Ipsos Poll address this? No.

    Hahaha. Just “which” Iraq policy of the DNC would we be talking about? There are only about as many as there are members of the DNC! As far as I know..they’ve never actually agreed on one (an Iraq policy for the DNC). The “surrender at all cost” wing..is a very small wing of even the DNC itself. To say..withdrawing from Iraq is a strategy..is ridiculous. I mean..one day..we “will” leave Iraq…one way or another. That’s not a strategy or a policy or even a plan. It’s just running away from whatever is there…without regard for consequences. I that we can agree that we’ll all be glad the day the mission in Iraq has ended and our troops can come home. But that’s not an answer to anything, and it’s not going to help the democrats either. That’s why they didn’t use this in election ’06.

    If the DNC backs Pelosi, Murtha, etc…then let them stand and say so..and defund the war. They control both houses for cripes sake!
    And what do we get..after all their indignant whining and bluster and threats? A backdoor bill, attached to funding the troops, filled with pork..shoved under somebodies door before they go on vacation? Give me a break. They don’t have the votes, or support to do it. They know it.

    They know it..sure as rain . BTW..hows that global warming coming? Sort of hard to talk about it..while there’s snow falling outside —sort of puts a dampner on the whole thing..don’t you think? Has a chilling effect…no?

  16. Possibly a good sign……

    AJ Strata notes that the Democratic Congress has a 57% disapproval rating on Iraq.  It looks liek a good sign, but there is something it would be prudent to keep in mind:
    How much of that disapproval is from people who don’t think Pelosi and Ree…

  17. Right Voices says:

    Americans Not Happy With Dems On Iraq…

    That’s what the POLLS say…. So how come  Howard Dean just claimed America wants to leave Iraq at all costs?