Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Voters aren't listening to Dem message about GOP and Bush

What if voters are simply not buying the central Dem message that a vote for the GOP is a vote to return to the Bush policies that ran the economy into the ground? What if the GOP has already achieved separation from the former president?

The internals of the two national polls out this morning strongly suggest that this may be the case. And though people are mostly focused on the bad news for Dems in the toplines, the failure of the Dem Bush message to resonate may be among the most ominous findings of all.

Take the new Washington Post/ABC News poll. It finds that a healthy 60 percent blame Bush policies for the current state of the economy, versus only 42 percent who blame Obama. The number who blame Bush has fallen slightly, but it has remained relatively stable.

At the same time, however, the poll also finds, for the first time, that more registered voters trust Republicans on the economy than trust Dems, 43-39. The obvious conclusion: People are simply not linking their conclusion that Bush policies are to blame for our economic mess to their evaluation of how the current GOP would handle it.

What's more, the new NBC/WSJ poll asked the Bush question directly, and found that barely more than a third believe the GOP wants to return to Bush policies:

Do you think if Republicans win control of Congress in November they will return to the economic policies of George W. Bush or do you think they will have different ideas for how to deal with the economy?

Policies of George W. Bush 35

Different ideas 58

A solid majority think Republicans will offer "different ideas" on the economy.

Younger Republican leaders such as Eric Cantor have undertaken a very aggressive effort to rebrand the GOP in order to shake that Bush taint. Cantor's new book, for instance, extensively admits that the previous GOP failed miserably and vows a new direction -- a clear effort to achieve separation from the party that ran the White House and Congress up until two years ago.

There are still more than two months to go until election day. Perhaps voters will grow more receptive to the Dem claim that the GOP wants nothing more than a return to Bush policies once they begin focusing harder on the choice before them. But for now, the data clearly shows the public is not listening to the core Dem message.

UPDATE, 12:04 p.m.: Now White House adviser David Axelrod has basically admitted that voters aren't yet listening to the Dem message about Bush.

UPDATE, 2:32 p.m.: David Plouffe is now starring in a new Web video designed to buck up Dems who are despondent about the fall.

By Greg Sargent  |  September 7, 2010; 10:34 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: Axelrod: Voters aren't (yet) buying our Bush message

Comments

"At the same time, however, the poll also finds, for the first time, that more registered voters trust Republicans on the economy than trust Dems, 43-39."

If in response to that they vote to put Relpublicans in office again they will only have themselves to blame when they later experience the inevitable severe buyers' remorse.

Posted by: akaoddjob | September 7, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

akaoddjob - Do you mean the obvious buyer's remorse that the Obama voters feel? lol

Posted by: TimeforMcCain | September 7, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Maybe people are just desperate to believe that there is a "change" option on the ballot.

Emergency internet-inspired billboards anyone?

http://27.media.tumblr.com/b9vfl4b63e1fa1li6pboeLFco1_500.jpg

Posted by: michael_conrad | September 7, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Kevin from the last thread:

"@qb: "Why is the left so misogynistic?"

I don't think they are, per se. They just believe that only the folks who think like them are entitled to protections against sexism, racism and the like. If you're a conservative, Katie bar the door. :)"

The very point of my rhetorical question, except that I think these are equivalent. Women (or minorities) who fail to conform ideologically are targetted for special contempt and vitriol.

It's actually an interesting streak of neo-Marxist influence within the modern left imo. Interesting but ugly.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 7, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

The GOP paying people to run as Greens story gave me an idea -- the Yacht Party.

Can someone spot me two years so I can challenge Dino Rossi from the right under my conservative alter ego Alexander Q. Nottingshire III?

You can't get buyers remorse with Nottingshire. Because he's rich enough to buy you... or something like that. He owns a freaking fleet of Duke-stirs.

Posted by: michael_conrad | September 7, 2010 11:06 AM | Report abuse

These polls are measuring what substance, exactly?

What are Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor and, um, Boehner offering that makes the GOP more popular in terms of the economy?

Anyone?

This country is about to take a big bite out of a shitsandwich, and it's not going to like it.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 7, 2010 11:11 AM | Report abuse

"But for now, the data clearly shows the public is not listening to the core Dem message."

You know what would make them listen? An unemployment rate of 5%.

"and found that barely more than a third believe the GOP wants to return to Bush policies:"

There's a couple of explanations. A: These are right-of-center folks whose problems with Bush policies are basically that he was too big a spender. So they believe, against historical evidence, that this time Republicans really will cut the budget. B: They just want something different than what we've got. When asked to justify this decision, they do, but it's not based on deep thought. They've already made their decision--want something new and shiny--and are justifying it by saying they've reached the thoughtful conclusion that this current generation of Republicans is superior to the previous generation.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 7, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

@quarterback1

My right-wing friend Alexander Q. Nottingshire III wants to answer the "why is the left so misogynistic?" question.

Here he is.

You see, Miss Gymnastic is probably from Russia... as in that coach guy with the mustache from the Olympics. And the neo-Marxist lefties wish they were from Russia... because of COMMUNISM!!!

Obama deported sexay Ginger Spy (AKA Russian Love Bear of Death) because she got caught. He was very disappointed in her... on behalf of Mother Russia (Kenya is just a cover story for the REAL truth).

This explains why the president has Richard Marxists in the White House, per The Great Blaze himself, Glenn. We must stay vigilant, for whatever you do the Commies will be "right here waiting for you"... in gymnast gear.

Posted by: michael_conrad | September 7, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Apologies for the length of this post, but here is exactly what I'm trying to say above:

"I was out running an errand and saw the first bumpersticker for the Republican running in my Congressional district (NY-29, formerly Eric Massa’s). I have yet to see a yard sign or a TV ad from either candidate. I can count the local media stories about the race on both hands with fingers to spare. So, even though the DC media is helpfully throwing in the towel for every Democrat in Congress, this campaign has just begun. And Democrats have done some popular things that should be part of stump speeches. Here’s a taste:

"When we passed a bill earlier this summer to help states save jobs—the jobs of hundreds of thousands of teachers and nurses and police officers and firefighters that were about to be laid off, they said no. (Applause.) And the Republican who thinks he’s going to take over as Speaker—(boos)—I’m just saying that’s his opinion—(laughter)—he’s entitled to his opinion. But when he was asked about this, he dismissed those jobs as “government jobs” that weren’t worth saving. (Boos.) That’s what he said, I’m quoting—“government jobs.”

Now, think about this. These are the people who teach our children. These are the people who keep our streets safe. These are the people who put their lives on the line, who rush into a burning building. Government jobs? I don’t know about you, but I think those jobs are worth saving. (Applause.) I think those jobs are worth saving. (Applause.)

By the way, this bill that we passed to save all those jobs, we made sure that bill wouldn’t add to the deficit. You know how we paid for it? By closing one of these ridiculous tax loopholes that actually rewarded corporations for shipping jobs and profits overseas. (Applause.)

I mean, this—this was one of those loopholes that allowed companies to write off taxes they pay to foreign governments –- even though they weren’t paying taxes here in the United States. So middle-class families were footing tax breaks for companies creating jobs somewhere else. I mean, even a lot of America’s biggest corporations agreed that this loophole didn’t make sense, agreed that it needed to be closed, agreed that it wasn’t fair -– but the man who thinks he’s going to be Speaker, he wants to reopen this loophole. (Boos.)"

While Democrats could have been doing better during the past few months, the fact remains that John Boehner is not popular, that doing nothing in the middle of an almost-depression is not popular, that sneering at teachers, cops and firemen is not popular, and that tax cuts for those making $250K or more are not popular. There’s a case to be made here, Obama made it, and Democrats will be making it in the next two months. I am not ready to write off the House, because this campaign is just getting started."

First and last paras are mistermix, middle paras are Obama.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/09/07/the-fight-has-just-begun/

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 7, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

You don't suppose the GOP has already done irreparable damage to the American economy?

George W. Bush and the Republican leadership more than doubled the national debt. Deregulated the finance industry to the point that they were no better than a casino parlor industry, controlled by lunatics. Costing millions of people their retirement funds, their homes, their jobs and their savings.

The American voter must never forget that incompetent Republican leadership is responsible for our failing economy, handed over at the end of 2008 at a point of near total collapse. The irresponsible doubling of our national debt and transfer of wealth leading to the destruction of American lives, lost homes, lost jobs, lost retirement funds. Deregulation and tax cuts that are funded on borrowed money in the “trillion” dollar amounts. The Republican leadership would continue another attempt to “privatize” Social Security funds, after the loss of thousands upon thousands of 401k accounts…. Now these mental midgets insist that they will not be happy until they have also ruined the elderly citizen’s existence.
Incompetent and ignorant Republican leadership from 1995 to 2006 will be with us for many years to come, surrounding us with the results of their failed policies.

Posted by: motiv8ed | September 7, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Voters aren't listening to democratic message about Republicans and Bush.


Did you think they would???


OK - well how about this? Have the NCAAP call everyone a bunch of racists.


Did that work?


OK - have the NCAAP say they are now INVESTIGATING everyone so they can find evidence that some nuts somewhere are racists - and then put that on a website

(the website which was supposed to track all the stimulus jobs isn't really being used.)

Will that work ?

OK - that isn't working. How about if we have Obama whine that they are talking about him "like a dog."

Go for the dog-lovers vote.

Maybe - maybe that would work.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 7, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

"severe buyers' remorse" is what the American people are feeling just now ... Obama and the ultra liberal members of Congress shot themselves in the foot when they took the election for a free pass .. the country is a center right country...

Posted by: sally62 | September 7, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

The difference is the Tea Party won't let Republicans go back to business as usual, go-along-get-along policies that torpedoed the party in the first place.

Posted by: drjcarlucci | September 7, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

The Canine Association of America (CAA) has issued the following press release:


The Canine Association of American rejects and denounces the negative sterotyping of dogs which Obama engaged in over the weekend.


It is precisely comments like this which lead to a perpetuation of negative sterotyping.


Obama's remarks were offensive to dogs everywhere.


Obama FAILED TO MENTION that most dogs are in loving households - and most people speak glowingly of their "BEST FRIENDS."


Obama's remarks were a lie - most people speak extremely well of their dogs - and that is justified - there is no reason to speak ill of any dog - and any attempt to characterize most communications about dogs in a negative light are just wrong.


The Canine Associate of America demands an apology - and some more treats.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 7, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

BGinCHI, they just demonize those jobs as being union jobs. It's easy for them to do. The rights propaganda has turned pro-labor into anti-business. Any push from labor has been labeled as bad for the U.S. economy from the right.

We had a huge exodus of great teachers in the early 80's when state budgets deteriorated in the Federal Reserve induced recession. It would have happened again today if not for the recovery act.

It's really a pity those jobs are being demonized by the right wing elites. The balance of power in this country has shifted too much to the upper end of the economy. A very few now have the ability to cut back on spending and investment and influence our economy. Those same people have been overcome with greed. Every tax dollar taken away from them to go to a teacher, police officer, fireman or any other Govn't service, takes away from their struggle to get to the top and have even more influence.

I know the right thinks this is great having guys like Koch and Murdoch be on their side because it means R's will have more power in Congress but I wish they'd take a long, hard and serious look at those elites vision for this country and its workers and see if its really what they want. These elites don't care about worker wages. They are fine with our wages going down and balancing out with global wages. They believe if you have the smarts and the drive, you can get yourself out of those low paying jobs. They don't care if some are born with lesser abilities than the next guy.

Tough luck. Maybe in your next life is how they think.

So what if the standards of the working class are going down the drain. All that matters to them is keep the working class energized and distracted into thinking Govn't is bad, unrestricted global free-market capitalism is the only way for us to thrive when in reality its only for them to thrive even further and leave a trail of dirt and dust behind them.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 7, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Blues Brother Joliet Jake doing his impersonation of he current Democratic Party:

"I ran out of gas! I got a flat tire! I didn't have change for cab fare! I lost my tux at the cleaners! I locked my keys in the car! An old friend came in from out of town! Someone stole my car! There was an earthquake! A terrible flood! Locusts! IT WASN'T MY FAULT, I SWEAR TO GOD!"

Posted by: pilsener | September 7, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

must....force....self...to...ignore....crazy....rants

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 7, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Meet the real Christine O'Donnell.

"She founded and was the president of the Savior's Alliance for Lifting the Truth (SALT) in 1996, which lobbied the U.S. Congress on moral issues, and which focused on advocating chastity and other Christian values in the college-age generation.] She was granted a Lincoln Fellowship from the Claremont Institute in 2002."

"In 2003, O'Donnell moved to Delaware to work for the conservative publisher Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI) in Hockessin, and bought a house in Wilmington. She registered a gender discrimination complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, after which she was terminated by ISI in 2004. She then sued the institute for wrongful termination in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware in 2005; ISI stated in response that she had been conducting a for-profit public-relations business while on their time. O'Donnell dropped the suit in 2008 due to a lack of funds"

Posted by: Liam-still | September 7, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Mike, agree with your post and with your mantra. Teh stoopid is just not worth the time.

The polls measure ideology, not reality. The Dems have to marshall facts and voters have to pay attention.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 7, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Here in California, we see that Obama is thumbing his nose at our state's tsunami of illegal immigrants and the crime and economic collapse they bring. When Obama offers to pick up our annual $10.5 BILLION tab for educating, incarcerating and supporting illegals, then maybe we'll support him. Mr. President, enforce our laws!

Posted by: samwoods77 | September 7, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

"must....force....self...to...ignore....crazy....rants"

Stay strong, Mike!

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 7, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Mike from Arlington


Who is ranting ? No one.


Are you holding yourself back from some more name-calling ?

,.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 7, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

It's funny to read the comments on how George W. Bush doubled the national debt in the eight years of his presidency. Big, fat, hairy deal...Barack Hussain Obama has already far exceeded this in less than two years. George W. Bush DID spend too much money, so the policies of conservatives running in this year's elections are far different in that they want real decreases in government spending. And for all the state and local governments who cry poor mouth about not having enough tax revenues, instead of laying off police, firemen and teachers (big red button issues), fire a bunch of those high priced administrators instead. For each one of those hitting the streets, you can keep two to five cops, teachers or firemen working. Same goes for the unions who whine about jobs going overseas and forgetting their role in running those jobs overseas.

Don't forget that the European countries with the strongest labor unions and the highest fringe benefits (Greece, Spain, etc) are also the ones who are going bankrupt right this moment. America....do you want organized labor extortion and the current 'progressive' leadership in Washington to drag us in the same disasterous direction? I sure don't...

Posted by: honorswar26 | September 7, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

I have little faith in the Republicans coming up with anything dramatically good. However, has anyone research how much the net worths or incomes of the Democratic members of Congress rose during the Bush period of failure? Just curious. Reminds me of the Inspector Renault line from Casablanca. "I'm shocked, shocked to find gambling going on here." The dealer thens hands him money "Your winnings sir."

Posted by: avpcomp2 | September 7, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

When Republicans have driven the Economy into the ditch, and left the working class passenger in a coma, and after Democrats have managed to pull the Economy out of the ditch, and have kept the working class from dying:

Who are you going to call?

HOPE BUSTERS, That's who.

Call in Mitch Kevorkian McConnell, and John Kevorkian Boehner now, to revive the patient they almost Euthanized.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 7, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"A solid majority think Republicans will offer "different ideas" on the economy."

I find no reason why ANYONE would believe that the GOP will offer anything "different" because even the GOP is NOT saying that.

Anybody who thinks the GOP has even one idea, or even a clue, is making it up themselves because the GOP hasn't said anything of the sort.

I've been waiting to hear some ideas, or even a peep from the GOP and nothing at all has come from Republicans on ANYTHING they'd do differently than what's being done EXCEPT for the same old thing they've been saying during the Bush year:

More tax cuts for the Rich.


Posted by: lindalovejones | September 7, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

It's like the trolls are reading straight from the Fox crawl.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 7, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

No wonder the economy is floundering.

Business knows Republicans are about ready to take control of Congress. They are terrified that Republicans complete sell out to a few industries will have long term negative affects on workers in the U.S. that will even further dampen domestic spending. American's will be even more broke due to wages being driven down by unfair global labor laws and they know the Republicans don't give a damn.

Can't say you didn't hear it here first!

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 7, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

pilsener,

Re Joliet Jake, clearly post of the week. lol and so true.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 7, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

There is not that much difference between the Republican and Democrat policies. George Bush's problem centered around the unpopularity of the war in Iraq. George Bush's economic policies did contribute to the severity of the recent financial crisis. But the context that set the real estate bubble in motion was already established by the Clinton administration. Another big contributor to the financial problems has been Federal Reserve policies that fundamentally don't work. In the face of a severe finanical crisis, George Bush had no choice but massive government intervention whether it made Republicans happy or not. Barack Obama had the misfortune to arrive in office just in time to accept the responsibility for coping with the most severe financial crisis in memory. In the event, the acute financial crisis appears to now be in the past. How much difference the President's policies really made is unknowable and a subject for inconclusive endless debates by future historians. But the reality is that even in the wake of the acute crisis, severe long term problems remain in the US economy and the global economy as a whole. No sizable part of the American electorate appears ready to face up to the reality of those problems. Many in the middle without a strong history of ideological committment to the Democratic party find it easy to bounce back toward the hope that different faces in Washington can provide a painless fix to their problems. They are likely to be disappointed. But, it is not clear that the Democrats really have much more to offer and there is little they can do to change the reality of the last two years.

Posted by: dnjake | September 7, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

All, David Axelrod confirms my thesis:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/axelrod_voters_arent_listening.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 7, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

C'mon Greg. Be the first to write a story like this:

Is the economy dragging because of Republicans inevitable takeover of Govn't?

Every right wing pundit had at least 2-3 stories like that prior to Obama's election regarding Democratic control of Govn't. It was an accepted reality for the right wingers.

Why not give em a taste of their own nonsense. See if you can get the Sunday morning milquetoast shows to discuss this interesting phenomenon and throw out ridiculous for and counter arguments to this theory.

:)

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 7, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

They SHOULD be listening!

Republicans introduce “Kill the economy” plan

Congressional Republicans unveiled a plan on Monday that they said would hurt the nation’s economy, benefit the wealthy at the expense of the middle class and add billions to the national debt.

The move is a continuation of Republican policies during the Bush administration and part of a plan they hope will lead to rising voter dissatisfaction and Republican gains at the ballot box.

“Remember how we racked up huge deficits during the Bush years, gave billions to the wealthy and let the middle class fall behind? Well, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet,” House Minority Leader John Boehner (R- Ohio) said. “We’re going to drive those unemployment and deficit numbers up so high that the American people will be voting Republican until they realize we screwed them over once again.” (continued….)

http://www.thechicagodope.com/2010/08/16/republicans-introduce-%e2%80%9ckill-the-economy-plan%e2%80%9d/

Posted by: Mikeystyle | September 7, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

mike,

Rehab appears to be in order for you.

Obamacrats (who were already in control of Congress and had their finger prints all over the financial crash and recession), took an economy in recession, smothered it, bashed its brains out, and are busily pounding the nails into its coffin.

But now, after the whole country witnessed the crime, you want to imagine it is the mere possibility that the GOP will retake control of Congress. Hmmm, so why did it start to appear that the GOP would retake control to begin with???

If the public knows the what you know, how could it happen in the first place?

You are beyond Joliet Jake territory now. Even the crazy excuses have all been used up.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 7, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Peace, Love, Dove.

Posted by: jnrentz@aol.com | September 7, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

qb, it's apparent Business and the spending public is terrified of a Republican take over.

How else can you explain the sudden tanking. As the Generic Ballot expands and control becomes more a reality, people are starting to even further cut back because they know Republicans will take the Hoover approach and cease all spending and cut everything possible and force Americans to cut back also.

They are all anticipating a further shrinking of our economy.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 7, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

The Pelosi-Obama-Reid (POR) economy kicked in during the latter part of 2007, when its architects decided that starving the economy of energy by refusing to allow more offshore drilling in the face of $4 gas prices was a winning political position. Pelosi claimed that because we couldn't totally "drill our way out of this," we shouldn't increase drilling at all. Reid put an exclamation point on Pelosi's stubbornness by insisting that fossil fuels are "making us sick."

What Pelosi, Obama, and Reid should do now is expand tax cuts, ditch all of the alleged "investments" in so-called "green" (read: globaloney boondoggle) technology, open up Alaskan oil and gas exploration, and watch the royalty money pour in. I know— that's way too much to "hope" that Alaskans be allowed to sell our own resources and enrich our country.

This turndown has been much more severe than it should have been because of a serious breakdown in "the rules of the game." Why invest in, start up, or expand any kind of business if there's a realistic possibility that the POR triumverate will aid your direct or indirect competitors, or otherwise radically and whimsically alter the playing field? This uncertainty has also taken its toll on consumers. Despite having billions of extra dollars available thanks to energy price drops and lower interest rates, their spending appears not to be ramping up proportionally.

The solution from Washington? More bailouts, leading to more uncertainty across the board. Yet another big "stimulus" and a less effective one at that. While tax "rebate" checks such as those sent by Bush are not as effective as across-the-board rate cuts, at least they put money into consumers' pockets quickly. But the new "stimulus" package evolving in Washington is dominated by public "investments" that, even if justified, would take much longer to make their way into the economy.

Please learn your history. FDR tried massive public works programs during the Depression. All he did is prolong it for seven years. Japan tried government stimulus for 10 years running in the 1990s. It only resulted in "the lost decade."

But that's the Leftist-fascist answer for everything— punish achievers to fund their distopian Big Gov Marxist pogroms. Only the most devoted Obamateur cultists buy this tired redistributionist nonsense anymore.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 7, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Put back in power the same people and party that supported Bush while he wrecked the economy, doubled the national debt (by almost 6 trillion dollars), and got us involved in two expensive, unwinnable, and futile Middle Eastern wars? Are the American people that ignorant and dumb?

Guess so....

Posted by: Chagasman | September 7, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst, oil is traded globally. Any attempt of U.S. increased production wouldn't do a thing to lower costs. If our production sky rocketed, OPEC would draw back and keep prices about where they are now.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 7, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

I used to do psychometric research as an academic psychologist, designing personality and emotion questionnaires. We used to put in sets of contradictory questions to identify participants who were not being honest or not trying. These questions were similar to the two mentioned above ("do you blame Bush's policies" versus "would republicans be better with economy"). The negative relation between these questions (more blame Bush than Obama, but more trust republicans over democrats) suggests that people responding to them do not know what they are talking about. Although our questions were much cleaner than these, we would have identified these people and thrown them out of the study (and they were under 5% of the sample). Something is seriously wrong with the people being polled.

Posted by: dougd1 | September 7, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

doug, right on the money.

Polling for ideology, not what people know.

Ain't democracy grand?

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 7, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

The question for every American is, "Are you better off then you were two years ago?"

For a majority of Americans, the answer is probably no.

Who's at fault for the recession does not matter now.

The question is if Obama and the Democratic Congress has through their policies made things better or made them worse.

There is no indication that Obamanomics has done anything to turn the economy around. In fact, every indicator shows quite the opposite.

So the Dems have to move on. Blaming Bush was an effective campaign stump speech. But halfway through his Presidency, America is demanding Obama stand on his own.

Posted by: hokie92 | September 7, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

"Do you mean the obvious buyer's remorse that the Obama voters feel?"

No, I mean the buyers' remorse they will fell after belatedly realizing that while the Democrats offered policy ideas that they could not enact due to lack of votes, the Republicans - literally - offer no policies at all.

They have no plan except returning to the policies that caused this enormous economic disaster in the first place.

At this point in time the GOP is not a serious political party; it is a political stunt exploiting an inchoate temper tantrum known as The Tea Party Movement.

That is not a formula that leads to anything useful at all.

Posted by: akaoddjob | September 7, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

"There is no indication that Obamanomics has done anything to turn the economy around. In fact, every indicator shows quite the opposite."

Citations? The info. I'm aware of contradicts you.

Posted by: akaoddjob | September 7, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Bush did alot of things wrong, however, the blame being laid on him for today's economic problems are exagerated to say the least. The democrats held the house and senate for Bush's last two years in office and they should share a large part of the blame for the economy today. Also, whatever you say about Bush, he was a nice person, a gentleman, an honorable man who never laid blame on Clinton for any of the problems he had while in office. Comparing Bush to this sorry excuse for a man currently in office is a no contest

Posted by: lori9 | September 7, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

I think most honest people believe the financial crisis was caused by a housing bubble, and there is culpability all around:

The Fed running a too-easy monetary policy
Consumers overspending to keep up with the Jonses
Fannie and Fred
The Government using F&F as a tool for social policy
Wall Street getting drunk on too much leverage
A deregulatory movement that went too far.

The housing bubble was way, way bigger than GWB, and it really began in the late 90s. That is why the Bush did it argument fails to get much traction outside of the partisan Left.

Voters look at the economy today, and they see liberals bashing business and imposing new regulations based more on emotion than thought. Voters want jobs, and they view liberals as imposing policies that inhibit hiring.

Voters may in fact be voting more for gridlock than Republican policies.

Posted by: sold2u | September 7, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

"..BGinCHI wrote: This country is about to take a big bite out of a shitsandwich, and it's not going to like it..."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just what do you think the country is going to be spitting out come November 3rd and rinsing out on Jan 3rd? Yes, that same sandwich Otrauma's Hopey-Changy sandwich sure turned the stomachs of a lot of people: Independentents especially. But the country will be really liking this event. You sure won't but that was inevitable.


Posted by: MDDem1 | September 7, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Bush did alot of things wrong, however, the blame being laid on him for today's economic problems are exagerated to say the least. The democrats held the house and senate for Bush's last two years in office and they should share a large part of the blame for the economy today. Also, whatever you say about Bush, he was a nice person, a gentleman, an honorable man who never laid blame on Clinton for any of the problems he had while in office. Comparing Bush to this sorry excuse for a man currently in office is a no contest

Posted by: lori9 | September 7, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

President Obama and the Democrats kept us out of a true depression.

I see nothing in the Republicans that indicate they can do anything but dig a deeper hole.

If they win I can see some important parts of my life being taken away: Social Security, Medicare and VA Benefits = all in the name of "improving the country".

Posted by: KHMJr | September 7, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Not a great strategy by the Democrats here, I'm assuming some pollster told them to follow it. But this election isn't about Bush. It's about the fact that the Republicans don't have a coherent, honest plan for addressing the economy and are still interested in more foreign wars despite recent experience. Not to mention their anti-science stance or the dishonest hatred spread nightly on Fox News.

Posted by: Nissl | September 7, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

mike,

I don't know what "sudden tanking" you are talking about. The economy has been down and hasn't gotten better, and Obama has been in long-term decline since he took office. This year, the public has been seing that promises of "Summer of Recovery" and prosperity around the corner could not have been more false.

You clearly don't know many business people. They are terrified not of a rollback but of a continuation and doubling down of Obamanomics. They are terrified of impending tax increases and the full force of Obamacare, cap and tax, card check, the whole radical Dem agenda.

"As the Generic Ballot expands and control becomes more a reality, people are starting to even further cut back because they know Republicans will take the Hoover approach and cease all spending and cut everything possible and force Americans to cut back also.

They are all anticipating a further shrinking of our economy."

You're just transposing cause and effect. That's not my opinion. It's simple logic and empirically borne out in all the polling data out there.

Republican prospects have gone up as the economy has remained stagnant and worsened. If people were terrified of a return of Republicans, then the polling wouldn't show their likely return. End of story.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 7, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Dems call the poll results is inconsistent.
Not true.
Americans blame whoever is in charge.

The bank crisis occurred under Bush. So Bush gets the blame.
The economy isn't moving almost two years later. So, Obama and the Dems get the blame.
Looks fair and consistent to me.

As for policy issues, the American people know:

(1) Republicans never would have wasted over a year on healthcare "reform" while ignoring the economy like Obama and the Dems did.
(2) Obama's stimulus plan didn't work, because it was a boondoggle for favored Dem groups who don't add much to private sector growth, which is what is missing from the current economic "recovery."
(3) Every month Obama and the Dems come up with a new spending plan.
(4) No one explains why, if we pursue these spending plans we won't end up like Japan, which borrowed its way to a debt of more than 200% of its GDP trying to stimulate its economy and just ended up with big debt and low growth.

The bottom line is that:

(1) No one believes Obama and the Dems can be as anti-business as they are and produce high growth in the private sector.
(2) Borrowing to subsidize teachers unions and auto unions isn't stimulus. It's paying off your political cronies.
(3) If you're going to produce low growth anyway, the country is better off having less debt.

Dems are essentially saying that destroying the country's balance sheet will improve the country's operating statement. People aren't buying that.

Adding a little leverage to a balance sheet does sometimes improve a company's operating statement, if the money is used to implement a good business plan.

Too much debt, however, imperils the entire business enterprise. Likewise, spending borrowed money without a good business plan that produces greater revenue is just throwing away the borrowed money.

If Obama and Pelolsi and Reid even knew what a balance sheet and operating statement and a business plan were, they wouldn't have the "cahones" to make that argument in the first place. I take that back, maybe Pelosi would have the "cahones".

Posted by: jfv123 | September 7, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

dougd said:

"The negative relation between these questions (more blame Bush than Obama, but more trust republicans over democrats) suggests that people responding to them do not know what they are talking about. Although our questions were much cleaner than these, we would have identified these people and thrown them out of the study (and they were under 5% of the sample). Something is seriously wrong with the people being polled."

I don't know your background or qualifications, but this is rather shoddy logic, isn't it?

The "negative relation" between those questions is just your own opinion that someone who blames Bush more than Obama logically must also vote for Democrats over Republicans. There isn't a "negative" relation shown by the polling results.

Of course, there are perfectly logical reasons why people could respond to the "Bush/Republican," one of which is given in the same polling data.

To say you would "throw out" people who gave what you consider inconsistent answers to those questions would be to treat the questions as identical (which is ridiculous) and measure no one but the most committed partisans (I blame Bush and and am voting Democrat/I blame Obama and am voting Republican). You would throw out, for example, everyone who blames Bush for behaving more like a liberal than a conservative and plans to vote Republican in hopes they will governing conservatively.

You don't seem to be very familiar with the nuances and vagaries of political polling.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 7, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Americans are so stupid. They believe that the party of no has something to offer. They destroyed the economy, cripled our military, and offered no solutions in lockstep. And now we're going to put them back in office to finish the job?
If you think the deficit is bad now, wait for the tax cuts to the rich that will double it again.

Posted by: COLEBRACKETT | September 7, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely hilarious. My sense was that the Tea Party gained a great deal of momentum as recovering GOPricks from the abandonment, lies, scandals, increased spending and destruction of our economy, provided by the administration they elected TWICE. Now they, along with their masochistic centrist whiners are doing everything to get back, even with the affirmation that these idiots have only a "tan" instead of a "Plan?" Sad…this is the best that taxpayer $$$ can buy. Even Sadder - unfortunately, not for the regular (i.e., middle and/or working class) folks, esp if you’re Muslim, Hispanic, Black, Gay, or if you believe in the Constitution...

Posted by: USA4ALL | September 7, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely hilarious. My sense was that the Tea Party gained a great deal of momentum as recovering GOPricks from the abandonment, lies, scandals, increased spending and destruction of our economy, provided by the administration they elected TWICE. Now they, along with their masochistic centrist whiners are doing everything to get back, even with the affirmation that these idiots have only a "tan" instead of a "Plan?" Sad…this is the best that taxpayer $$$ can buy. Even Sadder - unfortunately, not for the regular (i.e., middle and/or working class) folks, esp if you’re Muslim, Hispanic, Black, Gay, or if you believe in the Constitution...

Posted by: USA4ALL | September 7, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Blaming Bush for the economy, healthcare, 9/11, Katrina, unemployment, banks, poverty, taxes, war, climate, BP, insufficient libido, halitosis and for any and all past, present and future problems is great sport and it is a straight forward political strategy that strongly appeals to the simple, superficial and socialists, making it an obvious object of demagoguery for the Left.

Posted by: droberts57 | September 7, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Bush wasn't anti-business, and he produced no jobs or growth, so there goes that Right Wing Nut Jobs' Strawman.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 7, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Well, perhaps "voters" don't buy the premise that Bush was responsible for wrecking the economy, despite your efforts. Seems to me, the economy was chugging along until Democrats got control of both houses of Congress in 2006, and proceeded to spend us into the ground within two years.

Spare me your garbage. I know who I'm voting against in 2010. I'll never vote for another Democrat, ever, ever. We went through two recessions since 1994 with a Republican Congress and weathered them well. Every situation since Kennedy where we've had a Democrat Congress and a Democrat President has been a disaster.

Posted by: John1960 | September 7, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans promised that the Bush Tax Cuts would;

Create jobs, and increase revenues.

The Tax cuts did the exact opposite of what Republicans promised they would.

How come they keep complaining about how the "stimulus" not having done enough, when it clearly did more, in a much shorter time, that The Bush Tax Cuts Stimulus Bill ever did.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 7, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Republicans brought on the Great Depressions. Democrats always pulled us out of them.

Bush was still in the White House in 2007 and 2008, and he did not sign any major economic change bills, so there goes that Right Wing Nut Jobs', blame the Democrats in Congress, strawman.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 7, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

This article reads like it was written by a Republican. The Republicans know it was Bush who crashed the economy, launched the unpaid medi-care prescription plan, started 2 wars and left the country in ruins. They are the ones that don't want to be reminded and they don't want you reminding Democrats and Independents of all of the Bush Administrations failures.

Posted by: notabeliever | September 7, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Ok.

FIRST of all, the voters AREN'T listening to the Democrats message - because they've been saying for the entire Obama Administration that it was all Bush's fault.

SECOND of all, the voters don't mind going back to the Bush years because while toward the end, there was economic problems (specifically starting 2007 when the Democrats took charge of Congress), at least people had JOBS and the economy wasn't great but wasn't that bad either.

FINALLY, the voters KNEW under the Bush Administration they had a President that said what he meant...maybe not saying it well, but saying what he believed. The current President seems to need a teleprompter every time he's asked a question.

There's your explaination.

Posted by: ChiefPayne | September 7, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

I love watching all of the hand wringing on the left! It's so amazing to see the lame stream media remove any doubt that they are nothing more than the communications arm of the progressive socialist party, formerly known as the democrat party, as they publically and painfully face the fact that their socialist experiment has failed in the eyes of the American people.

Posted by: SayWhat5 | September 7, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Notabeliever,

"The Republicans know it was Bush who crashed the economy, launched the unpaid medi-care prescription plan, started 2 wars and left the country in ruins."

Ok...let's trade Presidential failures:
Cash for Clunkers
Bank Bailouts (Obama DID vote for it)
GM Bailout
Stimulus package
Job Losses
Lousy Economy
More vacations to date than Bush in 2 terms

Should I continue?

Posted by: ChiefPayne | September 7, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Well, I guess the voters in this country have short memories and forgot that Bush got us into the mess we're in. Please tell me how anyone can turn things around in 18 months that Bush spent 8 years running into the ground? I also fail to see where Obama or the Democratic Party are socialists. If that's true, then I would have to say that the Republicans are by definition facists. Why would anyone want to go back to the Bush years anyway? Name me one thing, any thing, that he and his incompetent but greedy administration did that ended up benefiting our country in any way. And where are all those jobs that the Bush tax cuts are supposed to be creating? I only remember Bush losing millions of jobs for us during his Great Recession.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | September 7, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

to lori9: I'm sorry but Bush and his administration did blame Clinton for everything that went wrong right up until they left office.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | September 7, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Bush who? It's been almost two years since Obama converted his blackness into the oval office. On-the-job training has failed and except for his core, the rest of the American public has seen that the emperor has no clothes. The only real surprise is that it took this long for the mainline media to actually read the winds and start reporting anything that even appears honest about Obama. At least Jimmy Carter is happy. He's about to move up the presidential ladder by one notch as Obama, a one-termer, will replace the peanut farmer as the worst president this country has ever had.

Posted by: wantingbalance | September 7, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

"...a clear effort to achieve separation from the party that ran the White House and Congress up until two years ago."

The Republicans did not run both the WH and Congress until two years ago. The Dems have controlled both houses of Congress since January 2007.

Posted by: joelwright1 | September 7, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Well, you see, many of us are still seething that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld,Ashcroft, and on and on--none of these were held to be accountable for their treasonous acts against the American people. They just went their merry way, enjoying their own personal wealth, and the rest of us were left with their mess. You conservatives can talk all you want, brag, swagger--but in the end, you are just like those leaders you followed--you with your hands over your eyes and fingers in your ears so that you would not have to face any, well, unpleasantness. You deserve no respect because you are not respectable in any sense of the word.

Posted by: saf62 | September 7, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Obama and the Democrats showed their hand too soon. Had they waited until after the November elections they could have shoved more then just the health care down the throats of the people. Instead they were too eager like Pelosi said we're waited so long to get what we wanted. Obama and the Democrats jumped the gun. They tried to shove too much socialism down the throats of the American people, businesses, and banks. They thought forcing social justice programs was the way to go because once the American people realize they had no choice they would embrace Obama leftist policies. That was a wrong move because nobody forces anything on the American people. Our fundamentals as Americans are too strong to let someone as radical as Obama force us to do something we don't want to do. Obama thought with all the speeches he made he was going to break the will of the American people and we were going to re-elect the Democrats. Obama thought all he had to do was blame Bush and the Republicans and we would all fall for it. That's how stupid Obama and the Democrats think the American people are.

Posted by: houstonian | September 7, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

To houstonian--you know nothing at all about PRESIDENT Obama, obviously, since you would characterize him as "stupid". Obviously you've never heard him speak, you don't know what it is he stands for, you've never read anything he's written. He is by far the most intelligent, diplomatic, thoughtful human being who has ever graced the presidency of the U.S. There is nothing stupid about him--absolutely nothing at all. He took a job that, for anyone else--ANYONE ELSE--would have been impossible to handle--and he brought us back from the brink carefully and slowly. If America cannot recognize that, it would never be because President Obama is stupid. I think it quite clear that the stupidity abides elsewhere!Pretty obvious where. Let's see.... our "fundamentals"--do those include no health insurance and, therefore, no quality healthcare for the majority? Do our "fundamentals" include rights for ALMOST everyone but not really everyone? Oh, and let's see--Let's say that you go to your local ATM site and put in your bank card--surprise, surprise---No money in your bank--your bank failed! Wow, what do you know about that?? And, if the bail out had not happened? That's exactly what the scenario would have been. President Obama's speeches were not "breaking" speeches--they were just finally intelligent ones, respecting the American people enough to think that they could actually grasp realities that were expressed correctly. Never in my lifetime has a president shown more respect to the public than this one. I'd say that many Americans' "fundamentals" are just screwed up!

Posted by: saf62 | September 7, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

This sort of public attitude shouldn't surprise anyone.

Obama and the Democrats inherited a bad economy and made it a worse economy. Unemployment is up 2 percent, the federal deficit and the national debt are in record red ink, and foreclosures, bankruptcies and housing starts are all worse off.

Meanwhile, instead of listening to what the voters wanted, Obama and Friends rammed through a healthcare bill that most Americans opposed ... not to mention bailouts, takeovers and an $862 stimulus that didn't stimulate.

So why wouldn't the voters give the GOP a second chance? Considering the abject failure of Obamanomics, what do they have to lose?

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | September 7, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

The GOP paying people to run as Greens story gave me an idea -- the Yacht Party.

Can someone spot me two years so I can challenge Dino Rossi from the right under my conservative alter ego Alexander Q. Nottingshire III?

Posted by: michael_conrad
________________________________


*** You're overthinking this. Just get John Kerry to locate on the other coast. Tell him the yacht taxes are cheaper there.

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | September 7, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Hey Michael Conrad, where do I sign up for your yacht party? The 164' megayacht Thea just went on the market for $4.5 million...I want her.

Posted by: landfall23 | September 7, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Focusing on Bush was a poor decision when there are so many pig-like Republicans to choose from who are still active. Bush actually seems like a sympathetic figure these days. The American voters deserve their Newts, their Palins and their Boehners. Good luck with that.

Posted by: jakemehoffer | September 7, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Its very telling that people view the Bush years as "the good times" after 2 years of Obama.

Compare it to Reagan. Nobody was looking to Carter as "the good times" after the shipwreck known as the U.S.S. Jimmy Carter

Let me say for the record, I hate the phrase "Miserable Failure Obama", so I would never even type "Miserable Failure Obama" even as a joke.

Posted by: Skeptic1 | September 7, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

C'mon Greg. Be the first to write a story like this:

Is the economy dragging because of Republicans inevitable takeover of Govn't?

==========================================

Greg can speak for himself of course but I'm guessing he's asking the same question I am: What evidence is there of that?

Posted by: bbface21 | September 7, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

I may not be the brightest bulb but "60% blame Bush and 42% blame Obama". Wouldn't that be 102%???

Can't wait until November 4th. "The chickens will come home to roost."

Posted by: KJMac44 | September 7, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to point out a fallacy in one of your statements Greg about the Republicans running the Congress and White House up until 2 years ago: the Democrats have indeed been in charge of the White House for almost 2 years now but the Democrats won complete control of the Congress in 2006 which puts them in charge of the Congress for almost 4 years. Maybe the reason Democrats haven't been successful with linking Bush to the Republican party during this election is because, even though the voting public can be very gullible (hence Obama in 2008) they do wise up eventually. Obama has been in office for almost 2 years and the Democrats for almost 4 years. The past 2 budgets with their 1.5 trillion dollar budget deficits are all Democrat, the failed trillion dollar stimulus (which wasn't supposed to allow unemployment to go above 8%) is all Democrat and the largest expansion of the federal government ever is all Democrat. People see all this spending and massive hiring binges of new government bureacrats and wonder what the heck is going on with the Democrats what with unemployment officially at almost 10% and in reality closing in on 20%.

By the way I love all the lefties in here hyperventilating about the Republicans taking over the Congress. Makes me think it'll really happen. At last blessed gridlock.

Posted by: RobT1 | September 7, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse


The MSM and Democrats give the misimpression that the Democrats have been in control 20 months.

No. The Democrats have been in control 4 years.

Bush, Republicans and Democrats are to blame for this failed economy. Bush and the Republicans until 2006, but Obama and the Democrats have been in control the past 4 years.

The Republicans in the past 20 months have shown fiscal constraint against Obama and the Democrats' spending spree, paybacks to donors and far-reaching policies.

I think Republicans get the message. If we voters put them in control of Congress, we will hold their feet to the fire. If they revert to the Bush years, we will remember in 2012.

Obama and the Democrats have been abysmal, so I'll give the Republicans a chance to redeem themselves.

And to think in 2006 I was pleased when the Democrats took control of Congress.

As I've quoted Walter's before "be careful you may get what you wish for." I did and I regret.

Posted by: janet8 | September 7, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse


"What if the GOP has already achieved separation from the former president?"

Then the American electorate is stupid and deserves what they get in another 4 years!

Another 8 years of the Bush Administration.


Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | September 7, 2010 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama has only himself to blame. From the moment he came to office, this arrogant whiner treated that half of America, those who did not genuflect, as second class citizens. Even independents like myself, many who went for him in a big way in 2008, were subjected to his snottiness as he quickly moved to the extreme Left.

Good riddance. 2012 cannot come quickly enough! We can only hope that his presidency marks the low point of America, not its end.

Posted by: r_loveland | September 7, 2010 8:23 PM | Report abuse

Well if the question is put: Do you believe the current wannabe Republicans want to follow the Bush economic disaster?

Is it any suprise that most people say NO. Duh...

Posted by: ottowalenski | September 7, 2010 8:44 PM | Report abuse

None of the posted comments offer any real insight into the issues being faced by the US. We need people who can tink through solutions to these issues, not a bunch of mud slingers who offer nothing of value.

Posted by: gone2dabeachgmailcom | September 7, 2010 9:25 PM | Report abuse

None of the posted comments offer any real insight into the issues being faced by the US. We need people who can tink through solutions to these issues, not a bunch of mud slingers who offer nothing of value.

Posted by: gone2dabeachgmailcom | September 7, 2010 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Americans aren't so stupid. They know each party likes to over-read their mandate from the people. Divided gov't mitigates that problem.

Posted by: scott3 | September 7, 2010 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Actually, saying that voting GOP is returning to Bush's failed policies is an understatement. The 'tea party' nuts are well-exposed as advocates of an even deeper plunge into failure.

It isn't that voters disbelieve that. The issue is how much apathy is going to manifest itself in November. The destroyers of our nation are counting on apathy more than the further dumbing down of this culture.

Posted by: revbookburn | September 7, 2010 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Of course the Republicans will pursue the same right-wing policies which Bush used to drive the country into the ground. They have no others and have even announced their intentions.

Posted by: ejs2 | September 7, 2010 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Harry Reid, facing a tough re-election bid in one of the states hardest hit by the recession, said the economic downturn was not his fault.

"I had nothing to do with the massive foreclosures here," Reid said, adding that he also had no part in contributing to the state's dismal unemployment figures at 14.3 percent.

Feb 4, 2010 ... President Obama stuck his foot deeply in his mouth when he criticized Las Vegas for a second time this year, telling people to stay away.

It is time to throw the bums out. Hold your nose if you have to, but throw Harry out.

Posted by: alance | September 7, 2010 10:34 PM | Report abuse

What are those Republican ideas? Anyone?

Posted by: nyrunner101 | September 7, 2010 11:22 PM | Report abuse

The GOP did not control the congress "up until two years ago."

The lost the congress in November, 2006.

The Democrats have been in control of the congress for more than three and a half years.

That is fairly basic. Does anyone proofread these articles?

Posted by: timr1 | September 8, 2010 12:35 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company