54 percent:
By on May 8th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
54 percent:
Number of Americans who disapprove of President Bush’s decision to veto the Iraq funding bill that called for U.S. troops to leave Iraq by 2008, according to a new CNN poll. Additionally, “57 percent of Americans said they want Congress to send another spending bill with a timetable for withdrawal back to the White House.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Since when does a majority matter in a democratic society? Pfft.
May 8th, 2007 at 5:48 pmThat’s an awful lot of traitors who just want the terrorists to win. I doubt that Guantanamo will hold us all.
May 8th, 2007 at 5:50 pmJohn Edwards said publically what many have said here – that Congress should resend the same bill.
I agree, but with a lesser $ amount each time it goes back to him.
May 8th, 2007 at 5:51 pmBut what do major oil companies think?
May 8th, 2007 at 5:52 pmClinton did it, too! So did Pelosi!
May 8th, 2007 at 5:52 pmHow many progressives watch CNN or participate in their polls? As this was from CNN viewers, Bush supporters, then maybe it is more like 54% of the 28% Bush supporters.
May 8th, 2007 at 5:55 pm“but 61 percent would support a new bill that dropped the timetables in favor of benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet to maintain American support.”
May 8th, 2007 at 5:55 pmWhy do 57% of Americans have these crazy fringe extremist views? Someone needs to get them to the right.
May 8th, 2007 at 5:56 pmExley’s got a point. The American people still want to win this war even though the dems don’t.
May 8th, 2007 at 5:59 pmOh the becon of democracy where majority rules and everyone has equal opportunity.
May 8th, 2007 at 5:59 pmOK, a solid majority want a timetable for withdrawing the troops. What GOP guy takes from this: “The American people still want to win this war even though the dems don’t.”
I’m reminded of the Princeton study which showed that schizophrenics were much more likely to vote for Bush than Kerry in the last election.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:02 pmThere is no winning this “war”, idiots.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:04 pmWhy are 28% of Americans stupid enough to support a chimpanzee for the White House?
May 8th, 2007 at 6:04 pm#11: Did you read what Exley posted? The 61% majority of Americans want a clean bill devoid of any deadlines. They still want to win the war.
#12: Thank you for making my case. Defeatist and democrat are synonymous.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:06 pmGOPcurious, what Exley posted does not equal what you think it does. Read the actual article. It does not say 61% want us to “win the war.” You made that up.
And, while we’re on the subject, could you describe what “winning the war” would look like? And, is there any expert you can site who would agree that this is a possible scenario? You’re the one calling people “defeatocrats” or whatever, so maybe you could step up to the plate and provide some useful info for us. Help us out here.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:11 pm#14…and thank you for making mine. Delusional and republican are synonymous.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:11 pmComment by GOPcurious — May 8, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
Actually, Bush has said he will veto any bill that includes benchmarks for the Iraqi government.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:11 pmThe 61% majority of Americans want a clean bill devoid of any deadlines.
There’s a difference between “wanting” something and “supporting” something. 61% would “support” a bill *with benchmarks* tied to American support (which is not a “clean” bill, you dope).
It’s called settling for what you can get. It’s clear that the President will not sign a bill with timetables. But a bill with benchamarks might get through, or at least have enough support to be veto-proof.
You can support both a timetable and benchmarks because they lead to the same ultimate goal – getting us out of there. They are not mutually exclusive, and you are engaging in a baseless smear by essentially saying they are.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:16 pm#15: Simple. Winning means a stable Iraq with all the islamic elements crushed – that’s good for business and the security of the region.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:17 pmYo GOPCurious. If the war in Iraqnam is such a great thing, a “noble cause” as the chimp called it why aren’t you on a C5 transport plane headed to the Green Zone right now?
May 8th, 2007 at 6:17 pmWhere is the question about dealing with the consequences of surrender?
Without it the poll is meaningless.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:19 pmWhat is “winning?”
Is it a violence-free Iraq? Most experts agree that this is just not possible with the current government for a wide variety of reasons, both secular and religious.
Is it the destruction of al Qaeda? Most experts agree that al Qaeda is a world-wide organization and has a small contingent in Iraq.
Is it a safer world? Most experts including those at our own State Dept. and CIA have stated that the occupation has made the world less safe.
Is it a secure supply of oil from the world’s #2 reserve? Could be, but most experts believe these fields will never be secure.
Is it a western-style democracy flourishing in Iraq? Three words: not gonna happen.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:19 pm#20: Oh, so I can’t talk Iraq politics if I’m not going to gear up myself?
Why aren’t you on a plane to Baghdad if you’re so concerned about the troops?
May 8th, 2007 at 6:22 pmAmen to the 57% and kudos to John Edwards for suggesting that Congress make the point of the people and push Bush’s face into it. Send timelines back to the Idiot King – let him veto it again….and again…..and again until it becomes a huge embarrassment to him.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:23 pm#16 As for the many descriptive adjectives and monikers this GOP justly deserves, please add: COMPLICIT, AMORAL, AND DISHONEST.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:24 pmGop guy: “Simple. Winning means a stable Iraq with all the islamic elements crushed – that’s good for business and the security of the region.”
Thanks for your simple answer to the first part of the basic question. The second part, if you’ll recall, is whether or not there is any expert who believes this is a possible scenario. For example, your simple solution includes “islamic elements crushed.” A thoughtful person might wonder how you crush islamic elements in a nation of 20 million Islamic people.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:25 pm“Where is the question about dealing with the consequences of surrender? ”
What are you talking about? We already won. Remember that ginormous banner on the aircraft carrier saying so? You can’t surrender after you’ve already won.
But we can say that we made a mistake getting involved in their civil war, and we’re going to butt out now. Non-delusional people would see that as a vistory of different sorts.
“Without it the poll is meaningless.
Comment by Patrick1 — May 8, 2007 @ 6:19 pm”
That’s as absurd as saying “without asking them if blue is their favorite color, then the poll is meaningless”.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:25 pmEveryone knows there’s no Plan B just like Boehner said; the fact is that there never was a “plan” at all – just some twisted, fascist neonazi plot to create a new empire. Since they also realize that there’s no “winning” short of bombing the entire country and annhialating everyone there, there can be no logical definition of “winning”. Placing ourselves in the middle of a Civil War like “monkey in the middle” certainly does not set us up to win even the survival of our military. What a bunch of idiot buffoons!
May 8th, 2007 at 6:27 pm“Is it a western-style democracy flourishing in Iraq? Three words: not gonna happen.
Comment by Bluedog49 — May 8, 2007 @ 6:19 pm”
Excellent post Bluedog!
These Nintendo warriors don’t understand that the Middle East has been violent for 5,000 years because a very large group of people is competing for a very limited number of resources, to the point that they can not both share and survive – so that they you must take (violently) from others to survive. Not the ideal incubator for Democracy…
May 8th, 2007 at 6:29 pm” #15: Simple. Winning means a stable Iraq with all the islamic elements crushed ”
May 8th, 2007 at 6:29 pmAre you suggesting the elimination of everything Islamic?
Are you daft?
It is MESOPOTAMIA
Excuse me, unbelievable, but we may have a problem. Yesterday, you said you never begin posting until 6:30. But, you just posted at 6:25. Trolls will seize upon this as evidence that liberals have no solutions or ideas. What have you done???!!!
May 8th, 2007 at 6:30 pm#21
Who are we surrendering too? The Shiites, Sunnis, or the Kurds? This is a civil war you know.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:30 pm“Why aren’t you on a plane to Baghdad if you’re so concerned about the troops?
Comment by GOPcurious — May 8, 2007 @ 6:22 pm”
Not too bright are you?
Because we OPPOSE the war.
You support the war, so go support it in Iraq.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:32 pmWhy are chickenshit chickenhawk armchair heroes on this board instead of being at the recruiter station? Why are they so gung ho and not in the military? Why are they in the 28%tile who still believes the lying cocksuckers in the Bush Crime Family?
They are worthless cowards.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:33 pmComment by Bluedog49 — May 8, 2007 @ 6:30 pm
I thought she said 5:30?
That troll had to be one of the dumbest yet!!
May 8th, 2007 at 6:33 pmkasinca, let’s surrender to the one or two remaining members of the Ba’Hai faith there and call it a day.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:34 pm“What have you done???!!!
Comment by Bluedog49 — May 8, 2007 @ 6:30 pm”
LOL. Apparently posting on Saturdays and Sundays is further proof as well. Not to mention summer break :)
May 8th, 2007 at 6:34 pmExcuse me, my post #30 references post #19,
May 8th, 2007 at 6:35 pmnot #15
As Les McCann sang, “All chicken feathers without one single nut! God dammit!”
May 8th, 2007 at 6:35 pmP.S. The TP time stamp seems to be off by 10 or 15 minutes… at least by all three of my clocks and my watch, set to the school’s bell system…. Hmmm… I’m sure that’s my bad as well :)
May 8th, 2007 at 6:36 pmWhy are 28% of Americans stupid enough to support a chimpanzee for the White House?
Comment by kasinca — May 8, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
Great question. A simple answer would be, because they are chimps also, just lower down the status ladder. This is a concept near and dear to my heart.
When I look around me, especially as I walk to work and nearly get run over, and I ask; why was this or that person so stupid, I just need to remind myself that the VAST majority of humans are just monkeys with pants. My apologies to monkeys of course.
Patrick1? Monkey wearing pants. Jake? Monkey wearing pants. Valianthater? Hateful monkey wearing pants, well in this one’s case tit could be a pig wearing only a shirt. You get the idea though.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-ehrenreich/better-to-be-a-chimpanzee_b_47953.html
May 8th, 2007 at 6:36 pm“That troll had to be one of the dumbest yet!!
Comment by Jules — May 8, 2007 @ 6:33 pm”
He put together a very lengthy list of times I supposedly posted, and not one of them was either a time during a school day before 2:30, or in most cases, during the school year itself… These 28%ers are REALLY stupid.
Haven’t seen you in a while – how are you?
How much longer do you have left in the year? Is your daughter excited about graduation?
May 8th, 2007 at 6:39 pm#19 Winning means a stable Iraq with all the islamic elements crushed – that’s good for business and the security of the region.
Well, you gave yourself away by being concerned about what is good for business. How many American and Iraqi lives are you willing to sacrifice for this lofty goal which most experts say is impossible to accomplish while people are killing each other? Do you have anyone in the game? I would be willing to bet that you don’t. I’d also be willing to bet that you would not sign up to go to Iraq if you are within the age range…for all we know you are and you haven’t.
I for one am not willing to sacrifice another American or Iraqi life in order for this country to steal Iraq’s oil, and that is what this whole thing is and has been about. It has nothing to do with security in the region. It has everything to do with being “good for business”.
All I can say about you is god have mercy on your soul, for you will need it when your time comes.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:48 pmPatrick1 – you are such an idiot. Leaving Iraq will be in no way a surrender. It will be an acknowledgment that we have done all we can and now it is up to the Iraqi’s to work it out for themselves. We invaded their country, destroyed their country and infrastructure all in the name of trying to steal their oil. Well, it’s apparent that we are not going to be allowed to steal their oil so it is time for us to leave. If I had my way, I would like to see us pay reparations for the damage we have done to that country, but since the current Iraqi government is as corrupt as our government is, I would have no faith that the money would go where it would help the Iraqi people.
May 8th, 2007 at 6:51 pm#15: Simple. Winning means a stable Iraq with all the islamic elements crushed – that’s good for business and the security of the region.
Comment by GOPcurious — May 8, 2007 @ 6:17 pm
I just spewed my lunch all over my G4 – Looks like our friendly troll GOPCurious is in favor of taking out all the followers of Islam in Iraq., which would be… all the people? Maybe there are about 10K other beliefs?
May 8th, 2007 at 6:59 pmThat’s not a very nice thing to say. Good for what business? Oil? Who’s going to work the fields? Arms? Well, OK, they would have to buy a LOT of bullets…
What a pig you are, GOPCurious. As usual.
#1
Since when does a majority matter in a democratic society? Pfft.
On all issues except gay marraige and 3rd trimester abortions, I suppose.
May 8th, 2007 at 7:01 pmHow about you m12? Can you explain what “winning” in Iraq would look like. But careful. Your “vision” must be something which is feasibly possible on the planet earth.
May 8th, 2007 at 7:07 pmSimple. Winning means a stable Iraq with all the islamic elements crushed – that’s good for business and the security of the region.
Comment by GOPcurious
Is this troll advocating genocide? Good god.
General William Tecumseh Sherman would be proud…
May 8th, 2007 at 7:32 pmOK, we seem to have stumped m12. Hmmmm. Not surprised.
May 8th, 2007 at 7:44 pmThat percentage could be 98% and Bush still would not budge. Nor would his minions in the White House, and the top Repugs in the congress.
May 8th, 2007 at 7:52 pmGive him another bill that he is bound to veto. Lets see what this so called decider will do. And after his veto, send him another bill. We The People have to take noticeof his disregard. The MSM will have to put it on the “front cover”.
May 8th, 2007 at 8:28 pmWill the Americans awaken?? Oh, lets hope so.
Then there are those of us who feel the veto should stand. DON’T SEND ANOTHER SPENDING BILL!!!
Bush’s was is over. Finished. No more money. He vetoed the money to continue his war. End of Story.
May 8th, 2007 at 8:43 pm#47
I think a unified Iraq will be difficult to accomplish at this time. The President should consider Biden’s plan to split Iraq into 3 pieces.
Then focus on border control for the 3 regions, and keeping the Iranians out. But there is nothing to be gained from sitting in Baghdad.
May 8th, 2007 at 8:49 pmI think the Bushco oil based regime is way ahead of you, m12
May 8th, 2007 at 8:56 pmand Biden………….
Impeach the Bush Crime Family and defund this immoral and illegal war for the profits of the military industrial complex and oil companies. Send the 28%ers to an internment camp in Gitmo.
May 8th, 2007 at 9:02 pm#55
Yup, lets send people to prison for political opposition! There’s the authoritarian left for you.
May 8th, 2007 at 9:13 pmYup, lets send people to prison for political opposition! There’s the authoritarian left for you.
Comment by m12
WE are the opposition party, halfwit.
Authoritarian personalities are almost always conservatives.
You can look it up sometime.
May 8th, 2007 at 9:28 pmOpposition to what exactly? Freedom of political expression?
I thought that Carnegie Mellon professor was a nutcase. Looks like he has company here.
May 8th, 2007 at 9:37 pmOpposition to what exactly? Freedom of political expression?
Yes, they oppose our freedom of expression.
I thought that Carnegie Mellon professor was a nutcase. Looks like he has company here.
Comment by m12
Whatever.
May 8th, 2007 at 9:48 pmzooey, I think m12 is michael. There’s the first initial, and the I.Q…
May 8th, 2007 at 10:03 pmzooey, I think m12 is michael. There’s the first initial, and the I.Q…
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
Heh. But he forgot to mention I’m in 6th grade!
May 8th, 2007 at 10:07 pmI can’t believe the number is that low!
May 9th, 2007 at 9:45 am