Pelosi approval at 34%, Bush at 31%. Dems must DEFINE THE NARRATIVE over next 2 years....

Can They Work Together? Pelosi has 34 percent approval ratings, slightly better than Bush's 31 percent

With Bush's approval ratings plummetting to 31%, Americans are looking for reassurance and direction in confusing and possibly dangerous times. This well written MSNBC/Newsweek article lays out the statistics that a 2/3rds majority of Americans believe that Republicans and the Bush administration LOST the election, more than the Democrats won it. But we here at C-Dems take exception to the last last line of our highlighted paragraph: << Tellingly, just 27 percent said a major reason the Democrats won was because they had better candidates. >>

We feel that the OUTSIDE the BELTWAY Democratic candidates are the STARS AND HEROES of Election 2006, and it is THEY who took the mushy, vacillating, indecisive message of the DLC Democras and REJECTED IT, in favor of more CONFRONTATIONAL LANGUAGE that American voters could respond to without watching the filtered 'news' spin and Sunday morning gab-shows. Even former Republican (!) Secretary of the Navy JAMES WEBB, presumably a former Washington "insider," started his campaign against incumbent VA Senator George Allen with odds of winning that campaign (as reported by a friend) of only 15% ! (Sen. Allen in early 2006 was actually prepping a campaign for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.) When John Tester (TesterForSenate.com) started his campaign 18 months ago against entrenched Right-Wing ideologue, 3-term Republican Senator Conrad Burns, it was an uphill battle from the start. (Burns was an EIGHTEEN YEAR incumbent!) And of course when Ned Lamont took the advice of his public school students to run for office and provide Connecticut votes with SOME alternative to another inevitable term of Republican-in-Democrats clothes Joe Lieberman, no one could have predicted that Lamont's campaign would define the Republican's loss of the House and Senate majorities, even though Lamont would himself lose to a Lieberman who changed his spots back to the Democratic side of the aisle.

So, we disagree with the notion that Democrats did not field BETTER candidates. We believe that the fact that these candidates started against prohibitive odds, many of them with no Washington recognition, that they took on entrenched incumbents, and that they won running against the Republican's inherent fundraising (corporate donations) advantage, AND agains the "major media's" inherent pro-Republican (corporate) bias, demonstratest that they were and are TERRIFIC candidates. Indeed, the Mainstream Media is ALREADY back to its old tricks, trying to SUBORDINATE the WINNING, CONFRONTATIONAL message of these outside-the-beltway Democratic campaigns, to the "INSIDE THE BELTWAY" narrative so favored by the media and their Republican masters. Witness over-paid media bloviator Tim Russert choosing for his first post-election Sunday show Joe Lieberman and John McCain - HARDLY representative of the insurgent, OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY winning candidates this election.

IF Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid want to be on the winning side in 2008, they will heed the OUTSIDE the Beltway message that gave them their majority leader positions, and NOT go back to business as usual and suffer the fate of Tom Daschle and Dick Gepherdt.

________________________________________________________________

<< Just about everyone believes the Republicans lost the 2006 midterms more than the Democrats won it. Presented with a list of factors that may have contributed to the Democrats’ success, 85 percent of Americans said the “major reason” was disapproval of the administration’s handling of the war in Iraq, 71 percent said disapproval of Bush’s overall job performance, 67 percent cited dissatisfaction with how Republicans have handled government spending and the deficit, 63 percent said disapproval of the overall performance of Republicans in Congress, 61 percent said Democrats’ ideas and proposals for changing course in Iraq. Tellingly, just 27 percent said a major reason the Democrats won was because they had better candidates. >>

======================================

Feeling Blue?
After the Democratic sweep of Congress, President Bush's approval reaches a new low. But voters want Democrats to chart a moderate course.
By Marcus Mabry, Newsweek
Nov. 11, 2006
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15667442/site/newsweek/


President George W. Bush’s response was swift and decisive—if a little late. After voters gave Republicans “a thumpin’” at the polls, handing Democrats control of both houses of Congress, Bush banished his contentious defense secretary; invited the presumptive leaders of the new House and Senate to lunch (would-be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had pasta; the president ate crow, a Bush aide joked); and suffered through two pained photo-ops with Pelosi and Harry Reid, the Nevada Senator expected to become Majority Leader. And what did the president get for listening to the voice of the American people? The worst approval rating of his presidency.

President Bush’s job approval rating has fallen to just 31 percent, according to the new NEWSWEEK Poll. Bill Clinton’s lowest rating during his presidency was 36 percent; Bush’s father’s was 29 percent, and Ronald Reagan’s was 35 percent. Jimmy Carter’s and Richard Nixon’s lows were 28 and 23 percent, respectively. (Just 24 approve of outgoing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s job performance; and 31 percent approve of Vice President Dick Cheney’s.)

Worst of all, most Americans are writing off the rest of Bush’s presidency; two-thirds (66 percent) believe he will be unable to get much done, up from 56 percent in a mid-October poll; only 32 percent believe he can be effective. That’s unfortunate since 63 percent of Americans say they’re dissatisfied with the way things are going in the country; just 29 percent are satisfied, reports the poll of 1,006 adults conducted Thursday and Friday nights.

But the new poll carries sobering news for Democrats, too, still on their post-victory high. Just about everyone believes the Republicans lost the 2006 midterms more than the Democrats won it. Presented with a list of factors that may have contributed to the Democrats’ success, 85 percent of Americans said the “major reason” was disapproval of the administration’s handling of the war in Iraq, 71 percent said disapproval of Bush’s overall job performance, 67 percent cited dissatisfaction with how Republicans have handled government spending and the deficit, 63 percent said disapproval of the overall performance of Republicans in Congress, 61 percent said Democrats’ ideas and proposals for changing course in Iraq. Tellingly, just 27 percent said a major reason the Democrats won was because they had better candidates.