Please tell gabbneb.
The Nation:
A Washington Post/ABC News poll published in early June proved it on Iraq: It heralded the emergence of what might be called "antiwar independents," who'd like nothing more than to find a party determined to end the war but don't see enough difference between Congressional Republicans and Democrats for the latter to earn their loyalty. Fueled, the Post suspects, by the failure of Congress to change course in Iraq, independents gave Congressional Democrats a 49 percent approval rating in April but only 37 percent in June.
― Dr Morbius, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 18:14 (eighteen years ago)
There's also this.
It's about fucking time. Too bad we had to get this close to brink for it to happen.
― Bill in Chicago, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 18:17 (eighteen years ago)
Yeah, but these new young libbers think success in Iraq is inevitable.
What the fuck does that even mean? The word "success" is beginning to make my skin scrawl. Of course they think in terms of "success" -- most of them become business majors!
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 18:18 (eighteen years ago)
thanx, Doc, I read polls too, and know the difference between adults and registered voters, as well as the fact that lots of conservatives want to end the war
― gabbneb, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 18:18 (eighteen years ago)
In one potential sign of shifting attitudes, respondents, by overwhelming margins, said they believed that the nation was prepared to elect as president a woman, a black person or someone who admitted to having used marijuana. But they said that they did not believe Americans would elect someone who had used cocaine or someone who was a Mormon.
Young people in being as clueless as ever shockar.
― rogermexico., Wednesday, 27 June 2007 18:34 (eighteen years ago)
But they said that they did not believe Americans would elect someone who had used cocaine
how many of those young people voted for Dubya?
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 18:47 (eighteen years ago)
too many, unfortunately! the reality is that demographic could have swung the election the other way but they did not.
― Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 18:48 (eighteen years ago)
dude, young people don't vote. they didn't vote for dubya. they didn't vote for anyone.
― jessie monster, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 19:03 (eighteen years ago)
xpost Actually, 18-29's went 54-44 for Kerry, the only age demo that went Dem.
― Martin Van Burne, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 19:07 (eighteen years ago)
Also, lol at a story based entirely on stats from a Pew report that ends by challenging Dems not to look at polls.
― Martin Van Burne, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 19:09 (eighteen years ago)
I think the meaning is not to monitor them hour by hour.
― Dr Morbius, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 19:14 (eighteen years ago)
Still, his argument comes down to "my numbers beat your numbers," which is fine as far as it goes, but hardly squares with his anecdote about Reagan bypassing pollsters to gauge true public sentiment.
― Martin Van Burne, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 19:19 (eighteen years ago)