Reflections from the Grounded Center

1.30.2006

Moving Right Along...


Key finding from the new ABC News/Washington Post poll: Americans — by a 16-point margin, 51 to 35 percent — now say the country should go in the direction in which the Democrats want to lead, rather than follow Bush. That's a 10-point drop for the president from a year ago, and the Democrats' first head-to-head majority of his presidency.

In addition, Democrats lead Republicans by 14 points, 51 to 37 percent, "in trust to handle the nation's main problems," the first Democratic majority on this question since 1992. And the Democrats hold a 16-point lead in 2006 congressional election preferences, 54 to 38 percent among registered voters, their best since 1984.

COMMENTARY

While this is encouraging for those of us so inclined, it is far from a certainty. It would be a coup if the Democrats could pull off a major victory, but my faith in their ability to do so is understandably shaken. Then again, no more so than my faith in the current administration's ability to lead. Only the next several months will tell...especially after his Majesty releases the information on his political enemies that he gathered during a three-year long orgy of illegal, unfettered wiretapping.

14 Comments:

Anonymous gerd said...

Well these are definitely good numbers, but who really knows where everyone stands?

I mean by the exit polls in the 2004 election the democrats should have won.

If it is true that the country is finally waking up to the corruption, abuse, and scandal of our current administration it doesn't matter because it is far too late. The damage that the Bush administration has done will take years if not decades to undo.

The supreme court is now very conservative and will most definitely "legislate from the bench" for conservative agendas. That is what the republicans wanted. Say goodbye to women's rights, gay rights, and proper education.

Hope is lost.

I've started my count down for when I'll be hunted by Evangelical Christians wielding torches and pitch-forks to be burnt at the stake for being a witch, er, I mean scientist.

14:45

 
Blogger KOB said...

...kill da wabbit, kill da wabbit!

10:00

 
Blogger A. K. Brown said...

That's nice - if they kill that rabbitt I am sure my ass is not far behind. Guess I know I am not escaping to Ohio.

12:48

 
Anonymous gerd said...

At least for us, the democrats and moderate republicans, there seems to be dissent in the republican party.

Check this out by Pat Buchanan

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=12168

And even more encouraging is the growing movement of republicans to take back their party and oust the radical right and special interest groups.

http://www.mypartytoo.com/

Republican's who believe that less government control means exactly that! That the government has less control over the individual. They are the true republicans whose goals are about government, and not a moral, religious, or purely corporate ideology. They are against the Neo-cons.

They are pro-choice, pro-environment, and pro-gay rights!

If they can reform the republican party, hope may yet be restored!

14:57

 
Blogger KOB said...

So you would support Arnold or Rudy?

11:10

 
Blogger KOB said...

Just to be clear, you are saying that Pat Buchanan is a beacon of hope?

Pat Buchanan opposes Neo-cons because he is a Paleo-con, the branch of conservatives who supported Nixon. In fact, Pat was an advisor to the Nixon administration. Here is a good summary of Paleoconsevative core beliefs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservative

"Many paleoconservatives also identify themselves as "classical conservatives" and trace their philosophy to the Old Right Republicans of the interwar period who successfully kept America out of the League of Nations, cut down on immigration in 1924 and opposed Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal and the Immigration and Civil Rights laws of the 1960's.

Paleoconservatives are most easily distinguishable from other conservatives in their emphatic opposition to open immigration, their strong opposition to affirmative action, and their general disapproval of U.S. intervention overseas. They are not closely tied to the business community but often are to the Religious Right. Neoconservatives, by contrast, are more consensus-oriented, pragmatic and lend their support to a more activist internationalist foreign policy.

Most paleos are concerned with the culture-eroding effects of popular culture. Economic issues are not high on their agenda, and they are divided."

Here is some classic Pat Buchanan. You may want to reconsider cheering him on.

- In a 1983 syndicated column, Buchanan wrote that women are "simply not endowed by nature with the same measures of single-minded ambition and the will to succeed in the fiercely competitive world of Western capitalism.

- As a member of the Nixon administration, Buchanan urged Nixon not to visit Coretta Scott King, widow of civil rights leader Martin Luther King. He said that "...Dr. King was a fraud and a demagogue and perhaps worse.... One of the most divisive men in contemporary history."

- Buchanan believes that the American Civil War was not fought over slavery, and has ridiculed opponents of the display of flags of the Confederate States of America in state capitals.

- Buchanan also defended Apartheid South Africa, saying that Americans are "Collaborating in a United Nations conspiracy to ruin her [South Africa] with sanctions."


Further, the IMP-PAC website that you posted is founded by Christine Todd Whitman, former governor of NJ and Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under Bush. I'll let you look her up yourself and make your own decisions.

12:59

 
Anonymous gerd said...

I here your points on Buchanan and Witman.

Mine was only that there are other Radicals in the republican party that aren't controlled exclusively by the religious right.

They both are awful in their own right, especially Buchanan.

Witman is at least anti-evangelical control of the party, which is the part of her I like.

22:12

 
Anonymous gerd said...

"So you would support Arnold or Rudy?"

Are you kidding? I vote democratic with socialist leanings...oh why can't we be more like Canada and Sweden?

So you've completely missed the point of my entire post.

I am not "cheering" on Buchanan and Witman because I think they're great people, I'm cheering them on because they are causing dissent in the Republican party and hopefully will cause in fighting and possible reform of that party.

If the party is fighting amongst itself then it is possible that Democrats will win more often in elections or that the party will ditch its neo-con attitude after such reflections.

No way would I ever vote for such people, though at least as I said before Witman is pro-gay and pro-choice.

You don't have to tell me that Pat Buchanan is an awful person, that's preaching to the choir. Though one thing in his defense, if you think the Civil War was ALL about slavery, you better go to the library and start re-reading american history.

12:43

 
Blogger A. K. Brown said...

Thank God we are not like Canada and Sweden!

12:56

 
Blogger KOB said...

What did Pat say? Really?

Uhhh...yeah I knew that - he's a bad person - that's what I meant when I said "If they can reform the republican party, hope may yet be restored!"

Nice try Gerd - HOMEWORK

17:02

 
Blogger KOB said...

"Thank God we are not like Canada and Sweden!"

Although it should be pointed out, Canada is but a short move for those in NYC who might prefer their society.

Oh wait, they just elected a conservative - my bad!

17:04

 
Anonymous gerd said...

"If they can reform the republican party, hope may yet be restored!"

"Nice try Gerd - HOMEWORK"

But you still haven't done yours on the american civil war yet.

KOB-HOMEWORK

Huh, I don't ever remember saying hope in what.

oh right,

KOB-HOMEWORK again!

You're gonna get an F for lateness mister!

By the way...dissent was for Pat Buchanan

and THEY and REFORM was for mypartytoo.com

That's basic understanding of pronouns and antecedents!

oh my KOB, you're failing english too!

KOB-HOMEWORK

00:09

 
Blogger KOB said...

What are you talking about? Civil war? I was talking about Pat's views not mine, but maybe you missed the whole subject part of that sentence, english whiz.

...and what's with the whole lateless crap? Are you drunk?

21:22

 
Blogger KOB said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

21:22

 

Post a Comment

<< Home