Cheney more popular that Pelosi

[joeglow3]

Just when I start to think the US public has pulled their heads out of their collective asses, I see something like this.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/120761/Cheney-Pelosi-Poor-Ratings-Common.aspx

"PRINCETON, NJ -- Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former Vice President Dick Cheney have little in common politically, but they receive almost identical image ratings from the American public. According to a May 29-31 Gallup Poll, 37% of Americans have a favorable view of Cheney and 34% have a favorable view of Pelosi. Both Cheney and Pelosi are viewed unfavorably by at least half of Americans."

[Botany]

1. Gallop still over sampling republicans again?

"The Dick's #s" are between 17 -21%

[joeglow3]

4. THAT makes more sense. nt.

[ananda]

2. thoughts

First, I have a hard time believing this poll.
It's so absurd.

Secondly.. However, I have noticed that the
media has given Cheney and his daughter a LOT
of time .. and that a nonstop attack was
mounted against Pelosi.

Still.. I find that poll hard to believe.

I dread what's coming from freepers who will
be gloating over this and mounting their hate
campaign against Pelosi.

And it's not that I like Pelosi either. I don't.

But Cheney.. he's such a psychopathic, sneering
asshole.. a LOT worse than Pelosi could ever
dream of being.

[leftynyc]

56. Fuck the freepers

Gloating over a poll that had it gone the other way they'd be calling it a left wing conspiracy. The whole site doesn't have 2 brain cells to rub together. It's going to be a long 8 years for those losers. One day they'll realize history has passed them by - until then, I suggest ignoring them.

[ananda]

3. thoughts

First, I have a hard time believing this poll.
It's so absurd.

Secondly.. However, I have noticed that the
media has given Cheney and his daughter a LOT
of time .. and that a nonstop attack was
mounted against Pelosi.

Still.. I find that poll hard to believe.

I dread what's coming from freepers who will
be gloating over this and mounting their hate
campaign against Pelosi.

And it's not that I like Pelosi either. I don't.

But Cheney.. he's such a psychopathic, sneering
asshole.. a LOT worse than Pelosi could ever
dream of being.

[John Q. Citizen]

5. People dislike Cheney's crimes, and Pelosi refuses to hold him accountable

When you lie down with dogs...

[kegler14]

6. I give both of them negatives. Can't we get somebody better than Pelosi?

[TaxCollector]

29. Get Someone Else

It's too bad that Rep. David Bonior(D) Michigan, quit several years ago. He was the House minority whip and might have become Speaker if he had stayed on. He was very pro-labor, was not a DLC type, and was a lot smarter and a better public speaker than Pelosi.

[Enrique]

7. apples and oranges

Congress always gets lower numbers.

[TaxCollector]

59. Family History of Corruption

Her family appears to have a history of political corruption. See the story in Time magazine.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,860626,00.html

[onehandle]

8. I think this has more to do with recognition, than popularity.

Far more Americans know who Cheney is, than know who Pelosi is.

[Occam Bandage]

27. Not so sure. The GOP has mounted a full-on hate campaign against Pelosi,

and as this thread demonstrates, plenty of Democrats irrationally hate her as well.

[BlooInBloo]

9. I think Pelosi is establishment-useless, but I certainly wouldn't go that far.

[bdamomma]

10. so they choose a criminal/murderer Cheney over Pelosi???

what the hell are wrong with people???

[peace13]

12. Not ot pick a fight but Pelosi was party to the 'lying us into war'.

'Impeachment off the table' gave your criminal/murderer a two year head start on walking away from his crimes.

[Enrique]

13. then Obama is party to it too

and Bernie Sanders, and Russ Feingold, and many others.

[peace13]

22. Did they get the briefings that Pelosi did? n/t

[Enrique]

25. what briefings? n/t

[Occam Bandage]

57. Her approval rating rose during that time, actually. It's only ever dropped when

the Republicans have launched widespread attacks on her: right before the '06 elections, and now that they're trying to blame her for the fact that they tortured people.

[spanone]

11. the media along with the thugs have trashed pelosi non-stop

[asjr]

19. Indeed, they have. I would like to think

there is a movement afoot that will bring BushCo. to heel by little by little allowing the world court to intervene. If they were tried at the Hague it would carry more weight. Oh, well maybe I am just dreaming.

[Arkana]

14. Cheney's no longer an elected official, so his approval ratings

are largely irrelevant.

[bdamomma]

18. he is irrelevant too.

this man needs to be in jail.

[Occam Bandage]

15. Given DU's bizarre level of hatred for her, is it that shocking?

[jgraz]

21. Yes, it's "bizarre" that we "hate" her for failing to do her job

Holding politicians accountable: it's such a ridiculous notion, isn't it?

:eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

26. The mood on DU goes far beyond "holding politicians accountable."

During the '07 and '09 sessions, she's done her job admirably. She's kept the House Democratic Caucus, Blue Dogs and all, reasonably unified, to the point where the House has not been a stumbling block in the slightest for the Democratic agenda. In the '09 session, the House has consistently not only passed exactly the bills the President has requested, but has passed them in a much more liberal form than the Senate or even the President has wanted. In the '07 session, she set a modern (post-1950) record for proportion of House votes that went against the wishes of the sitting President. The prime obstacle to progress in the past two sessions has not been the Pelosi-led House, which in fact has been the driving force for both defeating Bush's agenda and promoting a progressive agenda (to a greater extent than even the Democratic President). Rather, that obstacle has been the conservative-infested, filibuster-prone, and Reid-"led" Senate.

Yet DU insists she is an abject failure, despite being the most effective speaker in decades. Why? Because DU fixates on the fact that she decided to spend her time in '07 passing legislation instead of impeaching Bush--which would have resulted in nothing more and nothing less than his acquittal by a wide margin in the Senate.

If DU was truly "holding her accountable," they would be come to the conclusion that she was and is the Democratic MVP: that is the only fair accounting of her record as Speaker. Instead DUers prefer to either fixate on that time she didn't launch a quixotic impeachment attempt without so much as a Senate majority (surely you wouldn't count Lieberman), and on the times that legislation has been betrayed or outright defeated by Reid's Senate.

[jgraz]

28. And your mood goes far beyond ordinary hero-worship

"most effective speaker in decades"??? "was and is the Democratic MVP"???? Seriously, you need to get a grip. Name one piece of progressive legislation that she got through in the 07 session.

Oh right... she was waiting for that veto-proof majority. :eyes:

It wasn't just about her failure to impeach. it was about her threatening anyone who tried it. It was about her support for illegal wiretaps and telco immunity. It was about her support for still more war funding.

Congrats, Nancy. Instead of "wasting time" impeaching a war criminal, you wasted time preventing the impeachment of a war criminal. And supporting him at every turn.

[Enrique]

30. Employee Free Choice Act

one of the first things Pelosi got passed in the House with the new dem majority.

[jgraz]

32. Which is still not enacted

Balance that with the odious "Protect America Act", further support for Bush's illegal war, the indefensible FISA Amendment and, of course, her complete opposition to any real investigations of Bush's criminality.

Can you really say that this was "most effective speaker in decades"?

[Occam Bandage]

33. And how is Senate and Presidential opposition to the bills she passes her fault?

She's Speaker of the House, not Speaker of the Entire Government.

[jgraz]

38. Allowing Repuke legislation to come to a vote is her fault

Tell me, how many Democrat-backed bills came to the floor under the Denny Hastert?

[Occam Bandage]

41. If we're changing the subject to the Protect America Act,

then I agree that was a complete and cynical failure of leadership.

[jgraz]

43. Pelosi's favorite change of subject was the "veto-proof majority"

Hence the :eyes:

I think the difference in our evaluation is a matter of emphasis. From a progressive perspective, her "victories" were barely adequate, while her failures were huge. We were hoping for a Democratic version of the Contract with America. Instead, we got Pelosi's go-along-get-along approach.

[Enrique]

34. where has EFCA advanced further than it has in the House of Representatives?

Where has Bush's illegal war met with more resistance than the House of Representatives, which voted in 2007 to require troops out by March 2008?

[jgraz]

37. Ah, the soft bigotry of low expectations

Yes, she was better than a Repuke speaker, just as Obama is better than Bush. She was also better than Hitler, Pol Pot and Stalin.

Is that the level of performance you expect from a Democratic Congress? Cuz it's not nearly enough for me.

[Occam Bandage]

31. "Name one piece of progressive legislation that she got through in the '07 session."

I like how you start out by rolling your eyes at the concept that the President's veto of bills and the Senate filibustering of bills would have anything to do with what bills get enacted into law. But regardless. In the '07 session, the following bills passed the House and not the Senate, or passed both and were vetoed (meaning Pelosi did her job entirely):

1. Employee Free Choice Act.
2. Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
3. SCHIP.
4. Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.
5. America's Climate Security Act of 2007.
6. Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act of 2007.
7. Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007.
8. The Matthew Shepard Act.
9. Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2007 (which Harry Reid dropped over Republican complaints, despite passing cloture with 69 votes)
10. The District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007
11. Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007

And here's a list of progressive legislation that passed despite a generally hostile Senate and President:

1. Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007.
2. 21st Century G.I. Bill of Rights.
3. The Paul and Shelia Wellstone Mental Health Parity Act.
4. Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act.
5. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
6. Water Resources Development Act of 2007.
7. Honest Leadership and Open Government Act
8. Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008
9. 2008 Farm Bill (containing billions for conservation, renewable energy, and food assistance programs)

Like I said: she's easily the Democratic MVP. Her House of Representatives has been the most reliable proponent of the progressive agenda. And all you've got to counter that is, "but...but...she didn't impeach Bush for the Senate to acquit!"

(And if you think Harry Reid could have gotten 67 votes to convict out of 51 Democratic Senators including Lieberman...heh.)

[jgraz]

36. Compare that to the Repuke agenda of 94.

These idiots managed to effectively shut down a Democratic administration, pass and ENACT regressive legislation *and* impeach a president for no good reason.

How was Pelosi and her pack of barely centrist legislation more effective than that?

[Occam Bandage]

40. The Repukes of 94 weren't saddled with Harry Reid,

and were up against an opposition party that was afraid to filibuster. You can't credit them for having an opposition party afraid to oppose, just as you can't blame Pelosi for having an opposition party obsessed with the filibuster.

The legislation I listed isn't "barely centrist." It was progressive at the time and it is progressive now. I think the degree to which something should be considered progressive should be the degree to which it differs from what the prior situation was, and not the degree to which something matches up with your own beliefs. Defining hate crimes against gays as hate crimes, forcing insurance companies to cover mental health, and limiting carbon emissions (to pick three) are all things that obviously ought be done, but they are all things that were not done and things that Republicans fought to prevent being done--successfully, in some cases.

Saying, 'well, sure, all that legislation was progressive, but I think that instead of being complacent they should build on those successes, and go back and pass even better legislation' is a fair and appropriate means of "holding them accountable." Saying 'that wasn't progressive' is spin.

[jgraz]

45. Harry Reid is the best Majority Leader in decades

Had you going for a second, didn't I? :P

Saying that the legislation wasn't progressive is much more than spin. We need to be clear that the previous Congress was dominated by far-right extremism. If you oppose that with minimally centrist policies, you end up with a center-right agenda.

I measure my political compass against the beliefs of the people, not against our bought-and-paid-for legislators. By that metric, a $15/hour minimum wage, single-payer healthcare, an immediate end to the war and impeachment for Bush and Cheney are centrist. Hell, nationalizing the banks and oil companies are barely center-left.

[Enrique]

48. if that's your standard then why single out Pelosi?

by that standard, not even Bernie Sanders is progressive enough for you.

[jgraz]

50. Note subject of thread

And yes, I love Bernie but he's to the right of me (a bit).

[Enrique]

51. yes, and you're to the right of other people

I'm sure that there are people that think the minimum wage should be $17/hr and could call you a corporate sellout for settling for $15.

And while you folks are positioning yourselves, other folks are passing actual legislation and achieving actual reforms. Those reforms will never be enough, there will always be more to be done.

[jgraz]

52. You brought up position, if you recall

And what is this "actual" reform you refer to? Was it Clinton's welfare "reform" or his financial regulation "reform"? Or perhaps you're referring to Geithner's banking "reform" or Baucus' profit-driven heathcare "reform".

If you constantly settle for less, that's what you end up with. Less.

[Enrique]

53. actual reforms like the Lily Ledbetter act

which affects actual workers who have suffered discrimination.

[jgraz]

54. Yes, they haven't been completely ineffectual

/golfclap

[Enrique]

39. Boring!

who cares about all that Act of 2007 this Act of 2008 that, we want our Congress to be doing juicy stuff like frogmarching the bad guys!

[peace13]

42. If the * Administration walks away from lying the country into war.

torturing prisoners in our name, shitting on the Constitution and bombing the Middle Class back to the dark ages then what is the point. Without a rule of law there is no America. Keep your eyes open as the man who gunned a doctor down in cold bloods walks. Applaud as the corps bankrupt Americans. Smug comments are cute but they don't address the problem.

[Occam Bandage]

44. "then what is the point?"

Many Presidents have committed crimes. I'd go so far as to guess that most Presidents have committed crimes. And yes, Presidents have committed crimes as grave as Bush's. Polk and McKinley launched bogus wars based on lies against Mexico and Spain. The Founding Fathers (especially Adams) were fond of sedition laws. So was Woodrow Wilson; Bush at least did not jail people simply for saying they thought the war was a bad idea. Jackson invented modern cronyism, and once dared the Supreme Court to try to enforce one of its decisions. Grant's corruption was legendary, and mimicked by quite a few late-19th-century Presidents. Johnson was impeached (and acquitted) for outright violating the law regarding cabinet appointments. Both FDR and Lincoln ignored the Constitution when it suited them. The Cold War Presidents all used the CIA like a child playing Risk. Nixon's and Reagan's crimes need no explanation. Clinton's sanctions on Iraq killed more Iraqis than American forces have under Bush. Many Presidents launched aggressive wars of genocide against the Native Americans. Heck, Jackson and W.H. Harrison were elected for having done such a good job at committing genocide.

And yet not one President has ever been held accountable for his crimes in any form. And yet America endures.

You give Bush far too much credit.

[peace13]

47. I don't understand people like you.

Sorry.

[Occam Bandage]

49. What's to not understand?

You've made a claim: if an American President commits crimes and goes free, then there is no America. This is demonstrably false; Bush is simply a particularly egregious but otherwise unexceptional part of a long line of Presidents who have committed crimes and gone free, and yet there is still an America--and an America that you believe is worth protecting. Whatever it is about America that you find worthwhile enough to preserve has proven itself resilient enough to survive over two hundred years of Presidents committing flagrant and grievous crimes. If America can survive that, and can survive Bush's crimes, then I think it can survive Bush joining the pantheon of unpunished criminal Presidents.

[mkultra]

16. i hate cheney and i dont really like pelosi very much

Every time i hear her speak it makes me cringe. But, she did vote against IWR, so its not all bad.

[zulchzulu]

17. I'd like to hear specific reasons why they don't like Pelosi...

There are 6,000+ reasons why someone would dislike Cheney... and even more people would dislike him if they knew all about the asshat.

But the reasons why people don't like Pelosi can probably be derived from a small portion of people thinking she should have had Bush/Cheney impeached (even though that's not her job) or that she's a "bitch", i.e. a successful woman.

[jgraz]

24. Um, it's not a "small portion" of Democrats who wanted BushCo impeached

Not everyone who disagrees with a woman thinks she's a "bitch".

[CTD]

20. I STRONGLY DISAPPROVE of both of them, granted it's for different reasons.

Personally, I think APPROVING of Pelosi is more of an indicator of having one's head up one's ass.

There is little about Pelosi to approve of. She has been complicit in the Bush administration's crimes and continues to obstruct accountability.

IMO, she is as guilty of war crimes as Cheney is.

[peace13]

23. Ouch that hurts!

Agree.

[jgraz]

55. +1

[DrToast]

35. It's common for politicians to see their approval rating go up after office

Pelosi has a disadvantage here.

That said, it's still pretty embarrassing she can't beat Cheney.

[Beacool]

46. Don't like either one.

Nonetheless, it's amusing to see that Cheney's ratings are higher than Pelosi's.

:7

On the other hand, it's pretty scary too.

:-(

[emulatorloo]

58. My guess is most people don't know who Pelosi is. So that would effect the polling EOM