(no subject)

[lather2002.livejournal.com]

Comments

[patriotress.livejournal.com]

Perfect!

[xxrancid-punkxx.livejournal.com]

Oh haha lather!! I thought low poll numbers were a sign of a GOOD LEADER. Whenever Liberals would call out Bush's approval ratings, the stock response was "Bush is a good leader because he makes the right decisions, even if it isn't the popular one". And this was about a war that causes death and destruction.

So my response to you(other than the one conveyed by my userpic!) is "Obama is a good leader b/c his low poll numbers. Health care is the right thing to do. If he's not popular because of it, who cares!"

[xforge.livejournal.com]

His poll numbers are low in part because he HASN'T done anything about health care yet. The rest of the reason is because tightass white rich Conservative cocksuckers like you don't like him and y'know what, I'M FUCKING FINE WITH THAT.

[mylaptopisevil.livejournal.com]

It's funny because the low poll numbers is in regard to the question "Are you glad the President is trying to reasonably deal with these mouthbreathing idiots"

[syndicalist.livejournal.com]

But ... it's not a popularity contest, right?

Message rec'd

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Got it. Obama is a bold and visionary leader not lead around by the whims of popular opinion. I'm glad we agree.

[atreides74.livejournal.com]

Actually, while his poll numbers may be lower than they were in February, they're still relatively high (above 50%) for a president under the current economic conditions our country is facing. So, yeah...... not nearly as low as the conservative hype machine would like the rest of us to believe.

[udoswald.livejournal.com]

His poll numbers are still much higher than those for Bush or the Republicans in Congress.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

haaaaaaahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahaha!

When they get to 27%, let us know. Oh, wait. They won't!