U.S. Political Polls 2009

[jdobbin]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29493021/

WASHINGTON - After Barack Obama's first six weeks as president, the American public's attitudes about the two political parties couldn't be more different, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds.

Despite the country's struggling economy and vocal opposition to some of his policies, President Obama's favorability rating is at an all-time high. Two-thirds feel hopeful about his leadership and six in 10 approve of the job he's doing in the White House.

The poll also showed that the Republican party is struggling. Probably because they are seen as so partisan.

Edited March 4, 2009 by jdobbin

[scorpio]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29493021/

The poll also showed that the Republican party is struggling. Probably because they are seen as so partisan.

Well, when you have Rush Bimbo as your leader...

[Sulaco]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29493021/

The poll also showed that the Republican party is struggling. Probably because they are seen as so partisan.

The partisanship will pay off if Obama drops in popularity. He seen favorably right now so the standard public respons is to want everyone kowtowing to him. A normal pattern. In Latin America this pattern has usually led to dictatorship or coup - with el Presidente declaring that the fractious infighting between the various parties has forced him to suspend legislative processes while he rulkes by decree. In the US this is more likely to resolve itself when Obam's popularity starts sinking.

"Bi-partisanship as a goal" is a ridiculous concept. An anti-democratic one at that.

[jdobbin]

The partisanship will pay off if Obama drops in popularity.

At the moment, too many people still blame the past administration and the Republican party for the present situation. Some Republicans are trying to solely lay the blame on Democrats but that is just not finding resonance.

As far as bipartisanship goes, it is often the one way to try and get deals through Congress when you don't have a majority of Senate seats.

[GostHacked]

"Bi-partisanship as a goal" is a ridiculous concept. An anti-democratic one at that.

Why would bi-partisanship be anti-democratic??? I fail to understand this.

[Sulaco]

Why would bi-partisanship be anti-democratic??? I fail to understand this.

"Bi-partisanship as goal" as differentiated from bi-partisanship on specific legislation.

This is not a strawman - it is amazing how often the latter is pushed. It is pushed now. It was pushed in reagrd to the shtimulush bill.

Multiple studies show that people, per se, don't like partisanship - there is always this anti-democratic streak in the population that has to be contended with. In less stable democracies it has led to tyrannies.

[stevoh]

"Bi-partisanship as goal" as differentiated from bi-partisanship on specific legislation.

This is not a strawman - it is amazing how often the latter is pushed. It is pushed now. It was pushed in reagrd to the shtimulush bill.

Multiple studies show that people, per se, don't like partisanship - there is always this anti-democratic streak in the population that has to be contended with. In less stable democracies it has led to tyrannies.

If people don't like partisanship, then they must like bi-partisanship. So they voted for a president who holds bipartisanship as a cornerstone of his policy. How is this undemocratic again?

[Oleg Bach]

If people don't like partisanship, then they must like bi-partisanship. So they voted for a president who holds bipartisanship as a cornerstone of his policy. How is this undemocratic again?

Democacy is not always dependent on an advesarial system...like our courts....or is it - You can't play a game unless there is an US and THEM....if it turns into strickly an US situation..it can be but two things - a tyranical dictatorship or a benevolent one...benevolent I can handle - first let me see the evidence of good will.