Cowardly DLC Dems ALLOW Bush approval rating UP to 38%. The FIX is in...
This ain't rocket science. The FIX IS IN for our DLC Democrat "leadership" to THROW the election of 2006.
(For a perhaps more articulate explanation, see David Sirota's latest, "When Out of Touch Dems Get Desperate"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/when-outoftouch-politic_b_23771.html)
Just as John Kerry THREW the election of 2004 by sitting there like a box of rocks as President Bush sneered in the third debate "My opponent is a FLIP-FLOPPER!" Kerry either too stupid, too corrupted, or too cowed to mention Bush's own 'flip-flop" backtracking on his "Get Osama dead or alive!" pledge, among 1,000 other Bush 'flip-flops' candidate Kerry COULD have highlighted to national media attention if he had run a vaguely competent campaign.
Just as Tom Daschle (then Sen. Majority Leader) and Joe Lieberman (then Sen. Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman, thanks to the courageous 'defection' of Vermont Sen. Jeffords from the Repub. Party) THREW midterm election 2002 to the Republicans by throwing a WET BLANKET on the ENRON investigation in the Senate. The House that year was controlled by Republicans; ONLY the Senate Dems. had the authority outside of Republican circles to SUBPOENA Enron documents, officials, and even Bush government officials. This Daschle and Lieberman REFUSED to do, thereby ROBBING Democrats nationwide of their best midterm election issue: the ability to DEFINE George W. Bush as the "man from Enron." In REFUSING to make this elementary political effort - LINK your opposition to a known scandal! - Lieberman, Daschle, and the Senate Democrats in 2000 SOLD ENRON VICTIMS - employees, investors, pensioners, customers - DOWN THE RIVER.
SELLING AMERICAN CITIZENS DOWN THE RIVER is what our DLC Democratic "leadership" DOES BEST, which, in a nutshell, is why union, "heartland," and senior voters have been wishy-washy supporters of Democratic candidates over the past three elections. (aka "What's the Matter With Kansas: why Heartland voters vote against their own economic self interest. Because Dems MUDDLE the message of steadfast and consistent support to wage- and salary-earning American families, sufficiently for Right-Wing "morality" rhetoric to drown out the appeal or message of Dem candidates.)
And, of course, just as Al Gore and Donna Brazille SOLD TEXAS SCHOOLCHILDREN DOWN THE RIVER to Texas Gov. George W. Bush's education, environment, healthcare, and social programs BUDGET SLASHINGS in Texas leading up to the 2000 presidential election. Both Gore and Brazille CALCULATED that to stand up for Texas schoolchildren tossed off those vital programs was a losing proposition.
One thing you must understand about the Right-Wing - especially the maestro's or right-wing smear, i.e. the Bush campaign teams - is that they well understand the cost-benefit ratio for just about every SELL OUT of one group of people by another, anywhere in the world. Thus if Al Gore REFUSED to DEFEND Texas schoolchildren from the agenda of Bush-Rove Texas budget cuts, you can damn well rest assured that Rove and the Bush team were aware of it.
In short, Al Gore DESERVED more than a little of his 2000 reputation for vacillation, deception, and calculated positions. IF Al Gore had STEADFASTLY and COURAGEOUSLY STOOD UP for poor and minority students in Texas against Bush-Republican budget slashings, MILLIONS of Americans would have noticed - and APPLAUDED the Vice President for taking a stand against the "mainstream media" and GOP talking points. And let's face it: then, as now, Republican pro-corporate BUDGET SLASHINGS were based on the right-wing notion that minority Americans somehow "DEGRADE" our nation - that Black, immigrant, and minority voters are not "real" Americans like the mythical gun-nut Republican voters who listen to Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and FOX news as the Holy Grail of American citizenship. In 2000 Al Gore REFUSED to confront the memes and themes of EXCLUSION and RACISM and corporate-government BULLYING of vulnerable citizens in EVERYONE's America, which is why Gore will forever have the legacy as the candidate who won the presidency, only to lose it to Republican skullduggery.
And this year, the DLC Democrats ARE DETERMINED to REPEAT the pathetic errors of the past 3 elections.
NO effort to CONFRONT the cruel Bush-Republican agenda of TAX CUTS FOR MULTIMILLIONAIRES, budget slashings for education, healthcare, and social services - in time of war while the Republicans call for SACRIFICE!!
NO EFFORT to HOLD Mr. Bush to his 2000 "uniter, not divider... more bipartisan" pledge.
NO EFFORT to CONFRONT Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, or Mr. Rumsfeld ABOUT TORTURE.
NO MENTION of the Republican administrations of the 1980s (Reagan & Bush Sr.) COOPERATION WITH SADDAM HUSSEIN's regime during the Iran-Iraq war - including Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld (as Secretaries of Defense) SUPPLYING Saddam's regime with WMD PRECURSOR technologies. (The fact that "WMD precursor technologies" is NOT on the tip of every American's tongue, is merely a reflection of how awful the Democrat 'inform-explain' campaign media is, See"Spider's Web- The Secret History of How the White House Illegally Armed Iraq" and this Teicher affadavit << During George Bush's reign as President, the U.S. government quietly, covertly armed Iraq with deadly weapons of mass destruction. This story has long been acknowledged, but buried.
For a quick summary of this bizarre affair which made possible the Gulf War, read this article from the Columbia Journalism
http://www.webcom.com/lpease/collections/hidden/teicher.htm >>
NO EFFORT by DLC Dems to DEMAND BETTER for Katrina victims or to expose the gross, criminal negligence of FEMA incompetence and Bush administration neglect of the flooding that occured AFTER Hurricane Katrina had passed.
NO EFFORT by DLC Dems to raise a hue or cry about massive CORRUPTION in Iraq war contracts.
NO EFFORT by DLC Dems to LINK Mr. Bush with his old friends, CONVICTED Enron Chairman Ken Lay and CEO Jeff Skilling - or Jack Abramoff, who was no more and no less than the lobbyist extortion-arm of the Tom DeLay Congress.
Of course, practically no effort made by DLC Dems to demand that President Bush honor his pledge to FIRE anyone in his administration who "outed" an undercover CIA operative.
And most recently, and perhaps the MOST COWARDLY BETRAYAL to date, the Dems. offer up practically NO opposition to the Bush-Cheney jihad against NEWS REPORTING of their massive SPYING on American citizens... from voice data-mining to e-mail data-mining to now, massive bank and financial data-mining of EVERYONE in America.. under the rubric of "WAR ON TERRA!" of course. As our previous post detailed, CNN has gotten 'THE MESSAGE" from their masters in the White House, and titled the transcripts of Howard Kurtz's Sunday media show ("Reliable Sources") "Press, media- Do They AID, ABET the Enemy?"
THANK YOU DEMOCRATS, FOR ALL THOSE SELLOUTS. THANK YOU, for letting the Bush admin. campaign RELENTLESSLY on "War on Terra," even as they do WORSE_THAN_NOTHING to protect America's vulnerable chemical plants, SELL OFF our ports, railways, and even highways to foreign robber barons, encourage massive migration across US borders, and above all, take diabolical delight in ENCOURAGING THE OUTSOURCING of US jobs and even entire industries, including the manufacture of rare-earth magnets vital to US aerospace/defense to companies now based in China.
THANK YOU, Democrats, for letting George Bush, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney send an endless supply of RED MEAT to their "core constituents" WHILE YOU TREAT US LIKE PLANTATION SLAVES, to be sold off or traded at the whim of the master.
------------------------------------------
Bush Approval Rating Eases off the Brink
Improved Views on Iraq Push President's Approval Rating Slightly Higher
Analysis by GARY LANGER
June 26, 2006 —
http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=2120516
- Slightly less negative views on Iraq have eased George W. Bush's job rating off the political brink, while the lack of a better idea of what to do there is helping to complicate the Democrats' opportunities in this fall's midterm election.
Bush is hardly in the clear: Just 38 percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll approve of his work in office, up from 33 percent last month, a gain chiefly among moderate Republicans who'd been inching away. Sixty percent still disapprove of his performance, including just shy of half, a new high, who disapprove "strongly."
Sampling, data collection and tabulation for this poll were done by TNS.
Iraq remains Bush's biggest problem. There's been a slight five-point advance (to an even split) in views that the United States is making progress there, and a five-point gain in approval of how he's handling it. But 58 percent still say the war was not worth fighting, just off its peak, and 64 percent say Bush lacks a clear plan of what to do in Iraq.
However, after a fractured Democratic debate on withdrawal options last week, even more, 71 percent, say the Democrats lack a clear plan as well.
The Democrats maintain a substantial lead in overall voter preferences in November, but their advantages on specific issues have diminished. In trust to handle Iraq, a 14-point Democratic lead in May has slipped to six points now. And their advantage on national security has proved short-lived: A five-point Democratic edge on handling terrorism last month has shifted to a seven-point Republican advantage now. That change has occurred mainly among independents, the quintessential swing voters.
The Democrats also have lost ground in trust to handle immigration, a red-meat issue for core, conservative Republicans, and one on which congressional Republicans rebuked Bush last week by setting aside his two-pronged initiative -- stronger border enforcement coupled with a program leading to residency status for many illegals here now.
Despite that spat, most of Bush's gains in overall job approval have been in his own party: He's improved by 14 points among Republicans in the past month, to 82 percent approval. Seventy-eight percent of moderate Republicans now approve of his performance, up 21 points from a career-low 57 percent in May.
IRAQ -- With the difficulties in Iraq, a withdrawal deadline has gained in appeal: Given pro-and-con views (avoiding further casualties vs. the risk of encouraging the insurgents), Americans split on a withdrawal deadline, with 47 percent in favor, 51 percent opposed. Opposition is down from 60 percent in an ABC/Post poll six months ago.
Another problem in Iraq -- charges that some U.S. military forces have intentionally killed civilians there -- is broadly seen as an aberration, with 78 percent viewing these as "isolated incidents" rather than a more widespread problem. Indeed an overwhelming 86 percent approve of the way U.S. forces are handling their jobs in Iraq; 61 percent approve strongly.
Notably, even among Americans who say the war was not worth fighting, eight in 10 approve overall of the way U.S. forces are doing their jobs.
Still, there is broader recognition of a problem: Half the public is upset or even angry about the charges of civilian killings. And while 58 percent say the United States is doing enough to avoid civilian casualties in Iraq, that's sharply down from 82 percent shortly after the war began in spring 2003. Nearly four in 10 now say the United States "should do more" to avoid such casualties; three years ago just 15 percent said so.
There are substantial divisions on whether the military is doing enough to avoid civilian casualties. Men are 15 points more likely to think so than women (66 to 51 percent), most young Americans think not, and while more than three in four Republicans and seven in 10 conservatives think so, more than half of Democrats and six in 10 liberals differ.
Upset or anger about the civilian killings also peaks in some groups in order, among liberal Democrats, better educated Americans, young adults and women (including equal numbers of Republican and Democratic women alike).
PROGRESS? -- As noted, Americans divide now evenly on whether or not the United States is making significant progress restoring civil order in Iraq. While hardly optimistic, that's better than it was in March, when 56 percent saw no such progress. The killing of al-Zarqawi and the formation of a new government under Nouri al-Maliki may have helped. (Bush got a similar bump in job approval after the capture of Saddam Hussein in December 2004, but it subsided within months.) Interestingly, views of progress have advanced the most among two largely unlike groups -- Republicans and liberals. Sustained rather than episodic progress in Iraq would be the best medicine, and there the public remains skeptical: Just 40 percent express confidence Iraq will have a stable democratic government a year from now, no better than views a year ago.
Some other views on Iraq also remain glum: Fifty-eight percent say the war has not contributed to peace and stability in the Mideast, and three-quarters say it's damaged the United States' image in the rest of the world.
At the same time, despite the violence there, two-thirds still believe that overthrowing Saddam Hussein has helped to improve the lives of the Iraqi people. Americans divide on whether the war has encouraged democracy in other Arab nations.
The public continues also to divide on whether the war has improved long-term U.S. security, its chief rationale. However most, 56 percent, continue to see the war in Iraq as part of the war on terrorism; 57 percent think the war on terrorism more broadly is going well (down, however, from 65 percent in late 2003 and a high of 88 percent in January 2002); and nearly six in 10 say the country is safer now than it was before 9/11, the basic evaluation that got Bush re-elected in 2004.
Having the war in Iraq perceived as part of the war on terrorism is crucial for Bush. Holding that view significantly predicts support for the war, belief that it's contributed to U.S. security and belief that the United States is making progress there, even when political affiliation and ideology are held constant.
METHODOLOGY -- This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by telephone June 22-25, 2006, among a random national sample of 1,000 adults. The results have a three-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, Pa.
(For a perhaps more articulate explanation, see David Sirota's latest, "When Out of Touch Dems Get Desperate"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/when-outoftouch-politic_b_23771.html)
Just as John Kerry THREW the election of 2004 by sitting there like a box of rocks as President Bush sneered in the third debate "My opponent is a FLIP-FLOPPER!" Kerry either too stupid, too corrupted, or too cowed to mention Bush's own 'flip-flop" backtracking on his "Get Osama dead or alive!" pledge, among 1,000 other Bush 'flip-flops' candidate Kerry COULD have highlighted to national media attention if he had run a vaguely competent campaign.
Just as Tom Daschle (then Sen. Majority Leader) and Joe Lieberman (then Sen. Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman, thanks to the courageous 'defection' of Vermont Sen. Jeffords from the Repub. Party) THREW midterm election 2002 to the Republicans by throwing a WET BLANKET on the ENRON investigation in the Senate. The House that year was controlled by Republicans; ONLY the Senate Dems. had the authority outside of Republican circles to SUBPOENA Enron documents, officials, and even Bush government officials. This Daschle and Lieberman REFUSED to do, thereby ROBBING Democrats nationwide of their best midterm election issue: the ability to DEFINE George W. Bush as the "man from Enron." In REFUSING to make this elementary political effort - LINK your opposition to a known scandal! - Lieberman, Daschle, and the Senate Democrats in 2000 SOLD ENRON VICTIMS - employees, investors, pensioners, customers - DOWN THE RIVER.
SELLING AMERICAN CITIZENS DOWN THE RIVER is what our DLC Democratic "leadership" DOES BEST, which, in a nutshell, is why union, "heartland," and senior voters have been wishy-washy supporters of Democratic candidates over the past three elections. (aka "What's the Matter With Kansas: why Heartland voters vote against their own economic self interest. Because Dems MUDDLE the message of steadfast and consistent support to wage- and salary-earning American families, sufficiently for Right-Wing "morality" rhetoric to drown out the appeal or message of Dem candidates.)
And, of course, just as Al Gore and Donna Brazille SOLD TEXAS SCHOOLCHILDREN DOWN THE RIVER to Texas Gov. George W. Bush's education, environment, healthcare, and social programs BUDGET SLASHINGS in Texas leading up to the 2000 presidential election. Both Gore and Brazille CALCULATED that to stand up for Texas schoolchildren tossed off those vital programs was a losing proposition.
One thing you must understand about the Right-Wing - especially the maestro's or right-wing smear, i.e. the Bush campaign teams - is that they well understand the cost-benefit ratio for just about every SELL OUT of one group of people by another, anywhere in the world. Thus if Al Gore REFUSED to DEFEND Texas schoolchildren from the agenda of Bush-Rove Texas budget cuts, you can damn well rest assured that Rove and the Bush team were aware of it.
In short, Al Gore DESERVED more than a little of his 2000 reputation for vacillation, deception, and calculated positions. IF Al Gore had STEADFASTLY and COURAGEOUSLY STOOD UP for poor and minority students in Texas against Bush-Republican budget slashings, MILLIONS of Americans would have noticed - and APPLAUDED the Vice President for taking a stand against the "mainstream media" and GOP talking points. And let's face it: then, as now, Republican pro-corporate BUDGET SLASHINGS were based on the right-wing notion that minority Americans somehow "DEGRADE" our nation - that Black, immigrant, and minority voters are not "real" Americans like the mythical gun-nut Republican voters who listen to Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and FOX news as the Holy Grail of American citizenship. In 2000 Al Gore REFUSED to confront the memes and themes of EXCLUSION and RACISM and corporate-government BULLYING of vulnerable citizens in EVERYONE's America, which is why Gore will forever have the legacy as the candidate who won the presidency, only to lose it to Republican skullduggery.
And this year, the DLC Democrats ARE DETERMINED to REPEAT the pathetic errors of the past 3 elections.
NO effort to CONFRONT the cruel Bush-Republican agenda of TAX CUTS FOR MULTIMILLIONAIRES, budget slashings for education, healthcare, and social services - in time of war while the Republicans call for SACRIFICE!!
NO EFFORT to HOLD Mr. Bush to his 2000 "uniter, not divider... more bipartisan" pledge.
NO EFFORT to CONFRONT Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, or Mr. Rumsfeld ABOUT TORTURE.
NO MENTION of the Republican administrations of the 1980s (Reagan & Bush Sr.) COOPERATION WITH SADDAM HUSSEIN's regime during the Iran-Iraq war - including Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld (as Secretaries of Defense) SUPPLYING Saddam's regime with WMD PRECURSOR technologies. (The fact that "WMD precursor technologies" is NOT on the tip of every American's tongue, is merely a reflection of how awful the Democrat 'inform-explain' campaign media is, See"Spider's Web- The Secret History of How the White House Illegally Armed Iraq" and this Teicher affadavit << During George Bush's reign as President, the U.S. government quietly, covertly armed Iraq with deadly weapons of mass destruction. This story has long been acknowledged, but buried.
For a quick summary of this bizarre affair which made possible the Gulf War, read this article from the Columbia Journalism
http://www.webcom.com/lpease/collections/hidden/teicher.htm >>
NO EFFORT by DLC Dems to DEMAND BETTER for Katrina victims or to expose the gross, criminal negligence of FEMA incompetence and Bush administration neglect of the flooding that occured AFTER Hurricane Katrina had passed.
NO EFFORT by DLC Dems to raise a hue or cry about massive CORRUPTION in Iraq war contracts.
NO EFFORT by DLC Dems to LINK Mr. Bush with his old friends, CONVICTED Enron Chairman Ken Lay and CEO Jeff Skilling - or Jack Abramoff, who was no more and no less than the lobbyist extortion-arm of the Tom DeLay Congress.
Of course, practically no effort made by DLC Dems to demand that President Bush honor his pledge to FIRE anyone in his administration who "outed" an undercover CIA operative.
And most recently, and perhaps the MOST COWARDLY BETRAYAL to date, the Dems. offer up practically NO opposition to the Bush-Cheney jihad against NEWS REPORTING of their massive SPYING on American citizens... from voice data-mining to e-mail data-mining to now, massive bank and financial data-mining of EVERYONE in America.. under the rubric of "WAR ON TERRA!" of course. As our previous post detailed, CNN has gotten 'THE MESSAGE" from their masters in the White House, and titled the transcripts of Howard Kurtz's Sunday media show ("Reliable Sources") "Press, media- Do They AID, ABET the Enemy?"
THANK YOU DEMOCRATS, FOR ALL THOSE SELLOUTS. THANK YOU, for letting the Bush admin. campaign RELENTLESSLY on "War on Terra," even as they do WORSE_THAN_NOTHING to protect America's vulnerable chemical plants, SELL OFF our ports, railways, and even highways to foreign robber barons, encourage massive migration across US borders, and above all, take diabolical delight in ENCOURAGING THE OUTSOURCING of US jobs and even entire industries, including the manufacture of rare-earth magnets vital to US aerospace/defense to companies now based in China.
THANK YOU, Democrats, for letting George Bush, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney send an endless supply of RED MEAT to their "core constituents" WHILE YOU TREAT US LIKE PLANTATION SLAVES, to be sold off or traded at the whim of the master.
------------------------------------------
Bush Approval Rating Eases off the Brink
Improved Views on Iraq Push President's Approval Rating Slightly Higher
Analysis by GARY LANGER
June 26, 2006 —
http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=2120516
- Slightly less negative views on Iraq have eased George W. Bush's job rating off the political brink, while the lack of a better idea of what to do there is helping to complicate the Democrats' opportunities in this fall's midterm election.
Bush is hardly in the clear: Just 38 percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll approve of his work in office, up from 33 percent last month, a gain chiefly among moderate Republicans who'd been inching away. Sixty percent still disapprove of his performance, including just shy of half, a new high, who disapprove "strongly."
Sampling, data collection and tabulation for this poll were done by TNS.
Iraq remains Bush's biggest problem. There's been a slight five-point advance (to an even split) in views that the United States is making progress there, and a five-point gain in approval of how he's handling it. But 58 percent still say the war was not worth fighting, just off its peak, and 64 percent say Bush lacks a clear plan of what to do in Iraq.
However, after a fractured Democratic debate on withdrawal options last week, even more, 71 percent, say the Democrats lack a clear plan as well.
The Democrats maintain a substantial lead in overall voter preferences in November, but their advantages on specific issues have diminished. In trust to handle Iraq, a 14-point Democratic lead in May has slipped to six points now. And their advantage on national security has proved short-lived: A five-point Democratic edge on handling terrorism last month has shifted to a seven-point Republican advantage now. That change has occurred mainly among independents, the quintessential swing voters.
The Democrats also have lost ground in trust to handle immigration, a red-meat issue for core, conservative Republicans, and one on which congressional Republicans rebuked Bush last week by setting aside his two-pronged initiative -- stronger border enforcement coupled with a program leading to residency status for many illegals here now.
Despite that spat, most of Bush's gains in overall job approval have been in his own party: He's improved by 14 points among Republicans in the past month, to 82 percent approval. Seventy-eight percent of moderate Republicans now approve of his performance, up 21 points from a career-low 57 percent in May.
IRAQ -- With the difficulties in Iraq, a withdrawal deadline has gained in appeal: Given pro-and-con views (avoiding further casualties vs. the risk of encouraging the insurgents), Americans split on a withdrawal deadline, with 47 percent in favor, 51 percent opposed. Opposition is down from 60 percent in an ABC/Post poll six months ago.
Another problem in Iraq -- charges that some U.S. military forces have intentionally killed civilians there -- is broadly seen as an aberration, with 78 percent viewing these as "isolated incidents" rather than a more widespread problem. Indeed an overwhelming 86 percent approve of the way U.S. forces are handling their jobs in Iraq; 61 percent approve strongly.
Notably, even among Americans who say the war was not worth fighting, eight in 10 approve overall of the way U.S. forces are doing their jobs.
Still, there is broader recognition of a problem: Half the public is upset or even angry about the charges of civilian killings. And while 58 percent say the United States is doing enough to avoid civilian casualties in Iraq, that's sharply down from 82 percent shortly after the war began in spring 2003. Nearly four in 10 now say the United States "should do more" to avoid such casualties; three years ago just 15 percent said so.
There are substantial divisions on whether the military is doing enough to avoid civilian casualties. Men are 15 points more likely to think so than women (66 to 51 percent), most young Americans think not, and while more than three in four Republicans and seven in 10 conservatives think so, more than half of Democrats and six in 10 liberals differ.
Upset or anger about the civilian killings also peaks in some groups in order, among liberal Democrats, better educated Americans, young adults and women (including equal numbers of Republican and Democratic women alike).
PROGRESS? -- As noted, Americans divide now evenly on whether or not the United States is making significant progress restoring civil order in Iraq. While hardly optimistic, that's better than it was in March, when 56 percent saw no such progress. The killing of al-Zarqawi and the formation of a new government under Nouri al-Maliki may have helped. (Bush got a similar bump in job approval after the capture of Saddam Hussein in December 2004, but it subsided within months.) Interestingly, views of progress have advanced the most among two largely unlike groups -- Republicans and liberals. Sustained rather than episodic progress in Iraq would be the best medicine, and there the public remains skeptical: Just 40 percent express confidence Iraq will have a stable democratic government a year from now, no better than views a year ago.
Some other views on Iraq also remain glum: Fifty-eight percent say the war has not contributed to peace and stability in the Mideast, and three-quarters say it's damaged the United States' image in the rest of the world.
At the same time, despite the violence there, two-thirds still believe that overthrowing Saddam Hussein has helped to improve the lives of the Iraqi people. Americans divide on whether the war has encouraged democracy in other Arab nations.
The public continues also to divide on whether the war has improved long-term U.S. security, its chief rationale. However most, 56 percent, continue to see the war in Iraq as part of the war on terrorism; 57 percent think the war on terrorism more broadly is going well (down, however, from 65 percent in late 2003 and a high of 88 percent in January 2002); and nearly six in 10 say the country is safer now than it was before 9/11, the basic evaluation that got Bush re-elected in 2004.
Having the war in Iraq perceived as part of the war on terrorism is crucial for Bush. Holding that view significantly predicts support for the war, belief that it's contributed to U.S. security and belief that the United States is making progress there, even when political affiliation and ideology are held constant.
METHODOLOGY -- This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by telephone June 22-25, 2006, among a random national sample of 1,000 adults. The results have a three-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, Pa.
posted by verifi at 11:31 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home