• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

More Poll Woes for Bush and the GOP

GarzaUK

British, Irish and everything in-between.
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
3,688
Reaction score
631
Location
Carrickfergus, Northern Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060310/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_ap_poll

WASHINGTON - More and more people, particularly Republicans, disapprove of President Bush's performance, question his character and no longer consider him a strong leader against terrorism, according to an AP-Ipsos poll documenting one of the bleakest points of his presidency.

Nearly four out of five Americans, including 70 percent of Republicans, believe civil war will break out in Iraq — the bloody hot spot upon which Bush has staked his presidency. Nearly 70 percent of people say the U.S. is on the wrong track, a 6-point jump since February.

Explains why the GOP are trying to distance themselves from Bush policies like port control, phone tapping etc. Politicans eh? Not a loyal bone in their body.

By a 47-36 margin, people favor Democrats over Republicans when they are asked who should control Congress.

I find this interesting, but is it enough to secure both houses for the Donkey Party - probably not.
 
GarzaUK said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060310/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_ap_poll



Explains why the GOP are trying to distance themselves from Bush policies like port control, phone tapping etc. Politicans eh? Not a loyal bone in their body.



I find this interesting, but is it enough to secure both houses for the Donkey Party - probably not.

I just want us to secure one of the houses and have both Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum lose their elections.
 
aps said:
I just want us to secure one of the houses and have both Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum lose their elections.


Not out of the realm of possibility. :smile:
 
BWG said:
Not out of the realm of possibility. :smile:

I know. :lol:

If I get what I want, can we hold hands and dance in a circle? ;)
 
Crap. At this rate, Bush doesn't have a chance at reelection.
 
KCConservative said:
Crap. At this rate, Bush doesn't have a chance at reelection.


Hhahahahahaha!!!

That was a good one.:rofl

Mr. Bush can now say "Screw America" and there's nothing we can do about it. Isn't that special?

I see a new awakening. Better late than never.
 
Captain America said:
Hhahahahahaha!!!

That was a good one.:rofl

Mr. Bush can now say "Screw America" and there's nothing we can do about it. Isn't that special?

I see a new awakening. Better late than never.

More like "Screw the critics, I have a job to do."
 
What Bush needs is another bin laden speech. Every time that creepy pops his head up Bush's popularity spikes. lol
 
KCC:
Once again, another post by you that shows that you are responding without fully reading the post you are responding to and taking it out of context.
The poster said nothing about GWB being re-elected. The post was about how the GOP is distancing themselves from Bush in their quest to hold onto house/senate seats.
Pleace read the post in context before responding. Its really getting old.
 
KCConservative said:
More like "Screw the critics, I have a job to do."

Well he certainly is not doing it. Perhaps, if he is he is doing a pathetic job. His critics are numerous, so I guess that means screw almost everybody. Of course, I don't think he cared to begin with, afterall he is King Bush.
 
disneydude said:
KCC:
Once again, another post by you that shows that you are responding without fully reading the post you are responding to and taking it out of context.
The poster said nothing about GWB being re-elected. The post was about how the GOP is distancing themselves from Bush in their quest to hold onto house/senate seats.
Pleace read the post in context before responding. Its really getting old.
You know what else is getting old? Your inability to reconize sarcasm. I am fully aware the poster didn't mention reelection, disney, thank you. :roll:
 
GarzaUK said:
What Bush needs is another bin laden speech. Every time that creepy pops his head up Bush's popularity spikes. lol

Isn't it a little late for a Bin Laden speech? Those speeches should have been done 4 years ago, but he was too wrapped up in Hussein. Meanwhile, the root of the problem is still on the loose.
 
alphieb said:
Isn't it a little late for a Bin Laden speech? Those speeches should have been done 4 years ago, but he was too wrapped up in Hussein. Meanwhile, the root of the problem is still on the loose.
And while on the loose, look how many attacks we have suffered here at home? Ooops, nevermind.
 
KCConservative said:
And while on the loose, look how many attacks we have suffered here at home? Ooops, nevermind.

Wow 5 years without a terrorist attack on American soil, that hasn't been achieved since...... oh yeah Clinton. :roll: This is a stupid argument KCC.
 
KCConservative said:
And while on the loose, look how many attacks we have suffered here at home? Ooops, nevermind.

Personally, I believe we have not been attacked because the terrorists have chosen not to attack us since 9-11.

Regardless, what's rather sad is our response to Katrina indicates that if we got attacked, our response would just plain suck. We are totally unprepared for any kind of attack, whether it be by terrorists or by nature.
 
How often were we attacked before 9/11? (A little on point sarcasm)
 
What Mr. Bush needs now is another Michael Jackson scandal. Hey Rove! Get to work!
 
disneydude said:
How often were we attacked before 9/11? (A little on point sarcasm)

WTC '93
African Embassies
USS Cole

You want more?
 
GarzaUK said:
Wow 5 years without a terrorist attack on American soil, that hasn't been achieved since...... oh yeah Clinton. :roll: This is a stupid argument KCC.
You can disagree if you like, but as a mod, I would consider the forum rules before using the word stupid. Thanks.
 
KCConservative said:
And while on the loose, look how many attacks we have suffered here at home? Ooops, nevermind.

We also went years prior to 9/11 without attacks. Those attacks occur like a thief in the night.
 
KCConservative said:
Crap. At this rate, Bush doesn't have a chance at reelection.

That just gets funnier and funnier each time I read it...:2wave:
 
I think Bush's approval rating has fallen becaue of the port deal. And quite honestly when I first heard about the port deal I flipped my lid! But then again I was quite ignorant about any and everything having to do with how ports are and aren't run. I was also quite ignorant about the UAE in general. After researching and learning alot more I'm less upset. Now I'm still unsure of whether I support this port deal or not but I realize my initial feelings were a knee jerk response.

I will say that the Bush administration has not done a good job at addressing the port deal and so many many Americans are going with that initial gut wrenching knee jerk reaction.....and many are still ignorant about our relationship with the UAE and how ports operate currently here and around the world. That is the administrations fault and the fact that they aren't trying to educate people more is very arrogant. But also journalists should be doing more informative indepth reporting on this issue vs just taking polls on whether Americans are pleased or displeased with Bush over the deal.

Plus, like I said, even with all my research I now only agree that I don't know enough to make a decision one way or another in regards to the whole port fiasco.
 
Unlike the previous president Bush does not make decisions based on the polls...........That is one of the things I like about him...........
 
Myself, I believe that someone cried, "Look! The Emperor has no clothes!"
And as the masses cowered and ran for cover from the fall-out, they noticed there was no mushroom cloud at at.

Then another one tried. Then another.

Now, all the little peasants have come from out from under their toadstools and are merrily dancing to the rhapsody of free speech.

In fact, last night when watching Joe Scarborough, (Scarbourough Country,) a noted rightwing Bush butt-buddy, I noticed he sounded more like Michael Moore than he did Joe Scarborough. He was really ripping a Mr. Bush and the GOP a new one. That took guts.

Still, look to the sky now and again. The Emperor's fallout may have yet to have settled. Or maybe, he could just care less now, if we know he's not wearing any clothes or not. He's never worn any clothes. I'm glad to see Americans finally getting the courage to realize that.
 
Navy Pride said:
Unlike the previous president Bush does not make decisions based on the polls...........That is one of the things I like about him...........


And that my friend is President Bush's downfall.

He should listen to the people.

A President should always keep in touch with the people's feelings. President Clinton did and he was wildly popular!
 
Back
Top Bottom