Date: 2009-10-07 09:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
Actually, Obama's poll numbers have been up lately.

As for the other two, those are Bush's fault (Bush card or no Bush card, that's just the facts).

Date: 2009-10-07 09:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
Many Presidents make promises in the campaign that they later find out are harder to keep than first imagined (Read my lips for instance). It's hard to know just how dire a situation is when you don't know all the classified facts on the ground. Even if he were running at full speed to get us out, there would still be costs. You can't just withdraw an Army at the drop of a hat.

Date: 2009-10-07 09:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
Rasmussen is a Republican polling operation, their numbers always favor Republicans far more than the average. I can't imagine you didn't know that before you cherry picked this poll.

Date: 2009-10-07 09:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
I wasn't even talking about MoveOn so bringing them up is a bit bizarre. To the best of my knowledge, MoveOn always contracts with reputable polling organizations to run its polls much like Kos does. Rasmussen is the polling company itself and any bias will filter into its results. Rasmussen's founder worked for Dubya in his 2004 campaign.

That Gallup poll is going from a high of 70+% approval, nobody expected that to last forever. Bush would have killed for numbers like this during his second term.
Edited Date: 2009-10-07 09:30 pm (UTC)

Date: 2009-10-07 09:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
He's standing behind the two on the left patting himself on the back and saying "heckuva job Bushy".

Look, like I said, I doubt it's a coincidence you posted this cartoon or responded with that Rasmussen poll without knowing the biases of those sources. As I said, Bush would have killed for those kind of approval ratings in his last term or indeed at any point in his first term before 9/11. Obama's high approval ratings during the first couple months were because some of the McCain voters were at least willing to humor the idea that Obama wasn't a bad guy but everyone knew that eventually they'd fall into their old partisan ways and change their minds, most likely regardless of what Obama did.

If you look at the numbers, they hew very closely to the election results. The same people registering disapproval now are by and large the people who wish McCain was President right now. They've also been listening non-stop to the Fox News talking heads who have been telling them all kinds of scary lies about Obama. It's no wonder they don't approve since they have no idea what Obama's actually done or plans to do.

The only reason Bush's approval ratings were as high as they were at this point in his first term was because he had screwed up 9/11 and somehow got a bump off of that. Dems, who are willing to abandon partisanship for the good of the nation, were willing to give him a shot. If Al Gore had been President, even if he did everything exactly in the same way Bush did, would not have had nearly as high an approval rating after 9/11 because Republicans are ruled by partisanship. The media would have spent the ensuing months hammering Gore on his constant vacations during the run up to 9/11. There would have likely been impeachment hearings over the ignoring of the PDB report "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in America".

These approval/disapproval numbers say more about the attitude of Republicans in this country then they do about Obama. And when you're looking at the Congressional numbers, don't forget that there are plenty of Republicans in Congress (and their Blue Lapdogs) and those numbers reflect them too.

Date: 2009-10-07 09:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
It's not a bad thing when you actually can legitimately trace many of the problems we're facing today right to the doorstep of the previous occupant of the White House. Are we supposed to completely ignore the lasting damage done by Bush and his Administration just because he's finally out of office. Your buddies in the Republican Party/conservative media are STILL blaming things on Clinton and bringing up the suicide of Vince Foster and Whitewater, etc...

Forget old fatass Limbaugh when Clinton left office, let's talk about Rush "Oxy makes me feel all tingly" Limbaugh now. He still tries to claim that Clinton had Vince Foster killed. Fox News still has toe sucker Dick Morris on to talk about the Clintons (And never forget that his sole claim to fame is being bitter over getting fired by Clinton for being caught sucking some hooker's toes).

Date: 2009-10-07 10:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
They're Obama's problems because he took over from the irresponsible Bush Administration, that doesn't mean that Bush is absolved of all blame.

Date: 2009-10-07 10:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
No I don't, there are plenty of people on the left who are kind enough to do that for me and report it online.

You can't criticize Dems for their very real concerns over the actions of the Bush Administration without also pointing out the completely insane "concerns" expressed by right-wing media to this very day regarding Clinton.

Date: 2009-10-07 11:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com
Noticed how Obama's worst poll numbers are at least 25 points above George Bush when HE left ofice, but ya know Obama is such a failure!

Date: 2009-10-07 09:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] xforge.livejournal.com
But Bush was going to bring dignity and respectability to the White House.

grin

Date: 2009-10-07 09:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pacotelic.livejournal.com
Twice:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/bush_2004_campaign_pledges_to

Date: 2009-10-07 09:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] soliloquy76.livejournal.com
The Iraq war, sure. He always said we were going to focus on Afghanistan (and hinted at Pakistan).

Date: 2009-10-07 09:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com
no. Obama is going to get us out of Iraq. He always said Afghanistan should be the primary theatre, and he wanted to consider bombing Pakistan.

Obama is not a pacifist.

The cartoon is (finally) not terrible. These are big issues, and Obama has looked pretty small.

But let's remember -- in the book, the lead character ends up finding what he needs.

Date: 2009-10-07 09:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
Ultimately, the question isn't one of pacifism, but of pragmatism.

Date: 2009-10-07 09:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com
that's fine, but clearly, Obama wasn't going to get out of Afghanistan just because.

Date: 2009-10-08 11:30 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
Obama should get the US out of Afghanistan because if he doesn't, Afghanistan will break the US, just like it broke the USSR.

prognosis = -

Date: 2009-10-07 09:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pacotelic.livejournal.com
Unfortunately, We are still treating the Afghani conflict as a military operation, and it is very much about culture and family values. Moreso than in Iraq, think "Red Dawn".

Date: 2009-10-07 10:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] capthek.livejournal.com
You either know this is a lie or you know nothing about what he ran on. He always talked about focusing on Afghanistan. So either you are a complete liar or completely uninformed, neither really makes you much of a representative of your political affiliation does it?

Date: 2009-10-07 10:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lafinjack.livejournal.com
So either you are a complete liar or completely uninformed...

Why choose?

Date: 2009-10-07 11:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com
I just rather leave it at Torri is a douchebag.

Date: 2009-10-08 12:17 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mcpreacher.livejournal.com
i'm fairly certain at this point that political cartoons were never good

Date: 2009-10-08 01:32 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] blueduck37.livejournal.com
The latest poll (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091006/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_ap_poll) has Obama moving up.

As for Afghanistan and war costs... as has been said, Bush created these problems (is that in dispute). Yes, they are absolutely Obama's job to clean up. That is also not in dispute. Of course, in order to do that, he needs to end the war in Afghanistan ASAP. But is that really what Republicans are advocating? Nope. They're telling Obama to escalate the war (which would also escalate the costs). Polls show, again, that the public disagrees with the GOP on that. I hope Obama listens to the polls.

Date: 2009-10-08 04:40 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] xxrancid-punkxx.livejournal.com
Conservatives must be even more anti-reading than I thought. How many times will Where The Wild Things Are be raped to get bullshit "points" across?

Date: 2009-10-08 11:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
God wants you to be happy. Here, have a pamphlet.

Profile

Political Cartoons

March 2023

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
121314151617 18
19202122232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 27th, 2025 02:29 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios