Despite
having said (in a rather grandiose fashion, I must add)
“I refuse to put more American lives on the line in Baghdad” on the floor of the United States Senate just earlier this year, Norm Coleman has voted today against a bill that would begin an organized withdrawal from Iraq.
The bill not only has the goal of redeploying almost all the troops by this time next year, the $124 billion package would also provide billions in funding for equipment and health care for the troops. But, despite all the Democrats are doing to help our brave men and women in the field, Norm Coleman has decided once again to throw a wrench in the works.
I really don’t understand where Norm Coleman stands. First he’s for the surge, then against it, then for it (except in Baghdad); he says that he doesn’t want to put any more American lives on the line, but then refuses to talk about changing course; he trumpets support for the troops and then refuses to vote for provisions to increase their health-care funding… I mean, is there any underlying philosophy or reason to his votes? Oh yeah, I forgot, getting elected while still pandering to the Bushies… somehow I think that’ll be a difficult trick this cycle Norm.
And Reid’s position is consistent? First he votes to authorize the war in 2002, then he states he’s for the surge in 2006, now he declares the war is “lost” and wants to ensure our military’s defeat and victory for terrorists and insurgents by withdrawing the troops.
Last time I checked, Reid wasn’t running for the Senate in Minnesota.
Bush’s poll numbers are in the very low thirties right now. He’s lost 10 points in the last year alone. Coleman, will be tied, and accurately, to Bush and his failed policies. The DFL nominee, unless he or she runs a completely incompetant campaign, will almost certainly win the seat. Coleman might as well start cleaning his desk out right now.
Uh, the last time I checked Bush isn’t running for President again.
You all recognize wtm, don’t you? He’s the one who does the frequent posts on MDE saying “come on, now, we all know some Republicans have done the same thing.”
Um,, last time I checked, Norm had an “R” by his name. He was hand picked by this administration to run for this seat and he has been a part of all the failures of this administration. These “coattails” will not be forgotten. Norm has got Bush’s stain all over his blue suit and voters will not buy his new found independence.
Go ahead, I encourage you to continue to believe the same political climate that existed last year will exist next year, because it doesn’t and it won’t — Norm’s favorability rating is increasing, the Democratic Congress’ approval rating is lower than the President’s, and the GOP Presidential contenders best the Democrat Presidential contenders in trial polls.
If Bush and the Republicans suck so badly in the polls, why is it that none of the leading Democratic presidential contenders are leading any of the leading Republican presidential contenders? If the country has turned completely against Bush and the war, the Democrats should be leading by double digits.
I smell another 1972 McGovern romping around the corner.
Latest poll information indicate only 22% of the American people believe the country is on the right track. Only 31% of Americans approve of the job this administration has done. Congress’s numbers are at about 36%. More importantly, if you look at the trend lines, since the election, Congress’s numbers have been increasing at a very steep rate. This administrations numbers have been trending downward in the same time period. It’s still much too early to focus on any individual candidate. When asked, “In the next election, are you more likely to vote for a Democratic or Republican candidate?” people say Democratic, by double digits.
Richard,
I’m not going to get into a spitting contest with you over polls some 18 months before the next election. The generic polls are never reliable. Compare the generics to a Rudy vs. Hillary or a McCain vs. Hillary or a Rudy vs. Obama or a McCain vs. Obama match and you will find the Republican candidates have been leading in all the polls. This is true even though both McCain and Rudy support the war in Iraq.
Also, a Harris poll taken last week showed Vice President Cheney had a higher approval rate than Harry Reid (25% to 22%). While Reid’s comments about losing the war go over well with far left groups, it appears the rest of the country is quite offended at the rhetoric. Again, it’s more than 18 months from the next election and a lot of things can happen. But I smell another Eugene McGovern trouncing around the corner.
Chris — As you say, polls eighteen months before the election are not worth a lot. I suspect the numbers will not be the same once candidates are picked, once positions get more publicity, and (importantly for the media) once they have more chance to screw up in public.
Cheney’s “higher” approval rate looks like it might be within the statistical error range that a reliable poll figures in, so I don’t know if that number has any particular significance. I also wonder if the people who don’t know who Harry Reid is (at any given time, how many people could identify the Senate majority leader) were knocked out of the approval rating question.
Eugene McGovern truly was a disaster. He was so bad, no one ever heard of him.
Randy,
I agree with you 100%. My only point is that it’s fun watching the Democrats over extend themselves on Iraq - saying we’ve lost the war and calling for immediate withdrawl, etc. As I said, if the country was truly behind the Democrats, as Reid, Schumer and Pelosi have said, why is Rudy and McCain leading the Democrat pack in the polls? It should be Hillary or Obama over any Republican by double digits and it isn’t.
Latest Zogby poll,, Obama 49%, McCain 36%,, but you’re right polls 18 months away from the election don’t mean a lot. Trends on the other hand do. 73% of Democratic party members are happy with the current field of eight while only 13% are dissatisfied. GOPers are less then enthused about their field. Only 52% are satisfied and 36% would like to see other candidates. There is a fundemental unhappiness with the GOP party because they’ve been lied to and they are just now coming to that realization.
1. Come out with a weak argument claiming poll numbers favor Republicans when they actually don’t.
2. Change the subject and claim polls don’t matter 18 months ahead of the election when confronted about it.
Bait and switch… a favorite tactic of brainless Republicants.
I know. Sometimes it’s just too easy. Guiliani is the GOP front runner right now and he’s the only one that does well in a head to head poll against Clinton. McCain doesn’t do so well against Clinton or Obama but does okay against Edwards. Romney does terrible across the board. That begs the question, “Will the GOP nomination go to Guiliani and if so, which Guiliani?” As far as Coleman’s go, let’s wait and see the reaction of his latest vote. How many points will he lose? There are going to be some very significant votes for him to cast in the next 12 months. Will Norm start moving to the left or will he remain loyal to the far right? Either way, his every move will be scrutinized and analyzed. I don’t believe his current numbers can be maintained under that level of examination.
Bryan,
The USA Today/Gallup poll taken April 13-15 has Giuliani up over Hillary 51%-46%. The LA Times/Bloomberg poll taken April 5-9 has Giuliani up over Hillary 48%-42%. The Time magazine poll taken April 5-9 has Giuliani over Hillary 48%-43%. The same Time magazine poll has McCain over Hillary 46%-42% and the Fox News Survey USA poll taken March 27-28 has McCain over Hillary 47%-43%.
As for Giuliani and Obama, the major polls (Time, Rasmussen and Fox News)have them tied or Giuliani slightly ahead. However, the LA Times poll has Obama up by 4%.
The point that I am making to you is that your candidates should be leading by double digits or greater if the country agrees with you so much about how we are losing the war in Iraq. My point about polls not counting eighteen months out remains the same. However, I would be concerned that your candidates aren’t doing very well given the current political climate.
P.S. Repeating MoveOn.org talking points is Brian’s favorite tactic. It’s called thinking Brian. Maybe you should give it a try.
Oh and Bryan,
Here are a few more polls that should interest you. Congressional job approval ratings:
Fox News poll taken 04/17-04/18: 35% approval, 49% disapproval
ABC News poll taken 04/12-04/15: 44% approval, 54% disapproval
CBS News poll taken 04/9-04/12: 34% approval, 54% disapproval
LA Times/Bloomberg poll taken 04/5-04/9: 34% approval, 58% disapproval
Richard,
If the country has moved so far to the left and so much against the war, why aren’t all your candidates leading by double digits? And why does Congress have such high disapproval ratings?
And the trend lines for Congress show what? Where was that number back in December? Which Guiliani are voters polling for? Just a couple of months ago Guiliani was arguably the most liberal of the candidates. Where are his numbers going to go when he goes beyond the “Mayor of America, 9/11” image and has to start stating his positions? McCain might stand a chance if he starts displaying some of his, what must be considerable, courage. Maybe that dressing down he got from John Stewart will bring it back.
It has become apparent that this thread is about Norm Coleman and his changing with the wind on issues and votes; not who is leading who in the polls as far as the Administration and Presidential Candidates are concerned.
Norm continues to show his inconsistency. What has he gotten done in the time he has been in office? Why hasn’t his Sub Committee investigated the disappearance of many Billions of Dollars earmarked for Iraqi reconstruction that has gone missing? Norm Coleman has been basically a useless Senator who is now showing some party disloyalty because he wants to be re-elected? The moniker given him here does indeed fit.
Uh, I thought inconsistency in the liberal world was known as “evolution” and “nuance.”
Anyway, Richard, go look at the latest poll by USA Today — most Americans believe nothing has changed between the last Congress, which was controlled by Republicans, and this Congress, which is controlled by Democrats. It underscores Chris’s main point, which is if the country is tracking in the direction of the Democrats, as you suggest, then the poll numbers should reflect that, both in the Presidential race trial heats and in how Congress is perceived. But, the poll numbers don’t reflect that in either instance. So, the idea that the country has bought into the bail-on-Iraq, hunker-down-at-home, and return-to-the-pre-9/11 mentality being peddled by the Democratic Party is misfounded.
This Congress has been in place for less then 5 months. The Republicans had been running Congress for 10 years. Congress’s approval numbers were at a low in December of ‘06 since then, there’s been a 10 point gain. How does that jibe with your contention that there’s been no change? You’re right, it doesn’t. I can understand how difficult it must be to have been so wrong about so many things, but honestly, you have to finally admit this president has been an absolute disaster for the nation and his party. Coleman will be just another victim of the consequences of the neo-cons fascism. Within the year, there will be a blizzard of indictments blowing in on the Republicans. Bush may even outstrip Reagan for reigning over the most corrupt administration in the nations history.
Kathy, the national mood will weigh very heavily on Coleman. The trend in the state matches the national trend very closely. Norm is very vulnerable and will be under a microscope virtually every minute. There’s no way he’ll be able to maintain poll numbers with that kind of scrutiny.
Richard,
You keep throwing words around like facism and it’s very offensive. Both of my grandfathers fought against real fascists. One of my grandpa’s brothers fought in the battle of the bulge.
You know nothing about history. Those who know nothing about history are bound to repeat it. In fact, the real fascists today are the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 and hit us many times before that — and more importantly, will hit us again if we go on the defensive. Unfortunately, the majority of the Democrat party wants to go back on the defensive preferring to fund the clean up instead of preventing the attack.
P.S. You say the Congress has been in place for only five months. What have they accomplished? Nothing. They can’t even get their minimum wage bill through to the President’s desk. Talk about incompetence.
1.) Powerful and Continuing Nationalism: Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2.) Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights: Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
There’s lots more but all of this doesn’t pertain to this post so we can wait but, a prescient point is, Coleman is part of this. He can’t claim otherwise and subsequently will be judged by voters on that basis. That’s what makes him extremely vulnerable. He’s got Bush’s coattails tied around his neck and that ship is going down fast.
The term Islamofascist makes no sense. Islamic extremists want to set up 12th century theocracys ruled over by dictitorial mullahs all based on Islamic law. That has next to nothing to do with fascism. The term was invented by Neocons who were getting just a touch nervous about people tagging them with the moniker, fascist. Which in fact they were. They invent the term and now how can they be fascist when the enemy is fascist? Beautiful,, very artful Orwellian, war is peace, defeat is victory, poverty is wealth. These guys ain’t no slouches. Thankfully the jig is finally up and the US people have proven again there’s only so much bullshit they’ll put up with. Our experiment with Reaganistic fascism is finally over and that national nightmare has come to a close. When you get to eighth grade Chris, you will take a US history class. Ask your teacher to define differant kinds of government systems. It’s very interesting.
According to Richard, Betsy Ross (who designed the first American flag) and Francis Scott Key (who wrote our National Anthem) are fascists. Will Richard call Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson fascists too? They worked together along with Charles Thomson, the Secretary of the Continental Congress, to design the Great Seal of the United States. I wonder if he thinks composers like Irving Berlin (“God Bless America”), John Philip Sousa (“Stars and Stripes Forever”) or Katharine Lee Bates (“America the Beautiful”) are fascists too? Great job, Richard!
P.S. Richard,
Next time you want to talk about Human Rights, maybe you should think about the family of Nicholas Berg (who was beheaded by al Qaeda), the women and children raped and murdered in cold blood by Saddam’s sons, or the families of those who died on September 11, 2001.
It’s like arguing with a 12 year-old who just discovered history books…
Chris, you may want to stop because you’re truly embarrassing yourself. I’m not trying to be pejorative; I’m being honest with you. It’s gotten to the point that I don’t know if you’re a liberal doing your best impression of the stereotypical neocon who’s playing a prank on everyone here, or if you’re really that blind to the facts and adherent to ambiguous arguments. You appear to have no ability to see the irony in your own statements. Is it deliberate?
Congress has indeewd done a lot in less than 5 months enacting legislation that is challanging the Presiedent to do the right thing. Should Bush veto every Bill put on his desk like the Minimum Wage Bill, EFCA, Reduction of Federal College Loans, Veterans needs, and other Bills, it will show Bush as the one who is out of touch with the needs of the American people. He and the GOP will have to suffer the wrath of the people come November of 2008.
Norm Coleman is in a very tough spot. He is vulnerable and he knows it. One more wrong move on his part will seal his fate for sure.
Coleman could rally if, and this is a big if, he suddenly “grew a set” and became a new kind of political beast. A progressive republican. Fiscally responsible and socially responsible. Here’s the dirty little secret. Social repsonsiblity, which involves good enviromental behavior is awfully good business. If Norm came out tomorrow and renounced the Bushites and all of their ilk and said, “I don’t care anymore about party politics. I just want to do what’s best.” He would get an interesting reaction from the voters. Normie could go down in history as the leader of a Republican revolution.
Richard!!! Don’t be giving Norm any idea now….;)
Richard,
You are so beyond the pale with your comparison of our country to fascist regimes (I suggest you read Ernst Nolte’s “Three Faces of Fascism” to become more acquainted with what the term means) that you give public schools an even worse name. I find it interesting that you confound patriotism with nationalism — it tells me a lot about the way you view this country.
Kathy,
What exactly has Congress done in five months? A minimum wage increase, which the President has said he would sign, is a pretty simple bill. In five months, they haven’t even gotten it to his desk. I can’t believe anyone thinks they have done anything yet - other than declare how we have lost the war.
Nicho,
What is embarassing is Richard calling anyone who disagrees with him a fascist. I am only pointing out to Richard, using his own definition, who Richard defines as a fascist. If that is embarassing you, because you believe the people who disagree with you are fascists, then I cannot help you either.
“I find it interesting that you confound patriotism with nationalism”
The fact you find this confounding tells me a lot about your wardrobe. Brownshirts and jackboots are going out of fashion so you might want to hit Targets.
“calling anyone who disagrees with him a fascist”
Not anyone, only the fascists who disagree with me. Admitting to yourself is the first step toward recovery.
What the Neo-cons, and that includes Coleman, have done to the Republican is nothing short of disasterous.
3.) Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying nationalistic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
4.) Supremacy of the Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
Coleman has bought, whole cloth, into this administration and as this is elucidated, his poll numbers will drop. Coleman will be a victim of the wave of progressive thought that is coming.
There’s a couple more characteristics of fascist regimes
Richard,
Once again your talking points miss the mark. You say that we spend a disproportionate amount of money on defense spending while ignoring “more important” domestic priorities. The President’s proposed 2008 budget provides for $481.4 billion in defense spending. The total proposed 2008 budget is $2.902 trillion. The percentage of the budget spent on defense is 16.58%.
As for the rest of your argument, you are proving yourself to be another anti-military kook. I’m sorry Richard, but the people who have fought for and died for our country deserve our gratitude and they are heroes. And sixteen percent of our budget isn’t too much to ask for to protect the freedoms you are so calvalier about.
Finally, your comments about scapegoating, etc. remind me of the people who denied that the Holocaust was happening during the lead up to WWII. You are just as ignorant as those people were and your ignorance is just as dangerous as the ignorance of Naziism was during the lead up to WWII.
16.58%? Perhaps of the total budget, including mandatory expenditures (which is grossly misleading) that would be true. But of discretionary spending, as in the money that congress has control of, military spending takes more than half of the budget.
Numbers are a funny thing — especially when talking about something as unbelievably complex as the federal budget of the United States. You can skew them and leave out important side notes and people can’t really tell because the numbers are so extraordinary for people to comprehend. Simply taking a number like $481.4 billion (which was wrong to begin with - it’s actually more like $583 billion in the official estimate) and pitting it against the entire federal budget is obfuscating the actual fact. Using your math, the United States is only spending 1.48% of their budget on Homeland Security.
Again, Chris, you’re proving only one thing here: the depth of your own ignorance.
Nicho,
Congress has authority to tax and spend. It’s in Article I of the Constitution. (You know, that thing you and Richard believe has been trashed by the Bush administration.) Thus, no amount of federal spending, no matter how you characterize it, is within the control of Congress, i.e. it’s not mandatory.
As for you, Richard, I’ll visit Target right after you visit your local Fleet Farm to purchase a hammer and sickle.
wtm — I’m guessing that you may know this, but “mandatory” federal spending is spending that is not authorized by an appropriations bill, but that comes from sone other law. It includes veteran’s benefits, many (but not all) farm programs, and, of increasing importance under this administration, interest on the national debt. Yes, Congress could change any one of these laws, (except, perhaps, the one requiring payment of interest on the national debt). Feel free to suggest where cuts should be made.
Randy,
It also includes Social Security and Medicare as well. Don’t fool yourself into thinking that interest on the national debt is eating up the budget.
Chris, I did know that, and if I were aiming for completeness, I would have included those two items. I was merely trying to illustrate what “mandatory” spending is. To be strictly accurate, of course, Social Security is not a part of the general fund for the federal budget, since it has its own funding source.
I don’t know what your definition of “eating up the budget” is, but interest on the national debt was a little over 8% (just under $406 billion) of the FY 2006 federal budget. That may not sound like a lot, but it is significant.
406 billion just to service the debt. That’s kind of a lot. But were I to complain about the deficit, would that make me unpatriotic or would I seem unsupportive of our beloved leader. I would hate to appear not in total agreement with our beloved leaders policies and goals. Because that’s what patriotism is, blind obedience. Dissention is not in the national interest.
5.) Rampant Sexism: The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
6.) Controlled Mass Media: Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Oh yeah, here’s a couple more characteristics of a fascist regime
Randy,
Interesting points. What’s really funny is that we spend almost as much to service the national debt as we do on defense. Although Social Security has its own revenue stream, it is still part of the U.S. Budget.
It is funny. Wouldn’t it be great if we had a budget surplus that could have been used to pay down some (not all, I know that couldn’t be done) of that debt?
Alan Greenspan warned Clinton about problems that might arise if the national debt were paid off too soon. Wow, good thing we dodged that bullet.