Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   New Time poll shows that Republicans are more unpopular in America than anyone else... except, of course, for Democrats   (time.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

12919 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Mar 2007 at 12:16 PM (9 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



276 Comments   (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-03-29 12:42:18 PM  
Mugato

It is amazing though that as unpopular as the Republicans are and as easy this next election should be for the Democrats, the best people they can come up with are Hillary Clinton, whose claim to fame is having sex with the President...badly and a guy whose name is like a Mad Libs of terrorists names. It's like a joke.


Although I don't like Hillary and she definitely rode Bills coat-tails she was elected as senator for NY twice now so she has more on her resume than blowing bubba. And what did W have on his resume before the Supreme Court gave him the prez. job. He was a drunk into his 40's, a failed businessman and then gov. for Texas only because of who his daddy was...
 
2007-03-29 12:42:31 PM  
Yawn, wake me when there are nominees.

This is the same TIME magazine that features commentary by William Kristol BTW. There wouldn't be a RW slant or anything...
 
2007-03-29 12:43:20 PM  
lhclubs: That sounds about right. After 9/11, Bush's approval rating hit 90%, which makes me think that about 10% of the population is hard-left partisans. Today, Bush's rating is about 30%, which makes me think that about 30% of the population is hard-right partisans. Which means, in any national election, the right-winger will have a built-in advantage.

I don't agree. I think there is a large percentage of the population that will always support the president because "he's our president". I also think the 90% was over inflated because the poll for a lot of people was more of "do you support the presidency" as much as a supporting Bush himself.

If America is attacked we have a tendency like all cultures to rally around our leaders. I think the 90% approval rating didn't mean the Democrats suddenly approved of Bush, but was a sign of support for our way of life in general.
 
2007-03-29 12:44:23 PM  
LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD...SHHH

I think you're missing my point: He's gained in popularity since the announcement, like somehow having a loved one with cancer makes you a better choice. I just don't get that.
 
2007-03-29 12:44:26 PM  
I am an independent and I "normally" vote Democratic, but I don't want to give them the opportunity to be as drunk with power as the Repubs have been for 8 years... So there is a high likelihood I'll vote for a Republican president... The stalemate is a good thing. It breeds discussion BEFORE action.
 
2007-03-29 12:44:40 PM  
lhclubs: That sounds about right. After 9/11, Bush's approval rating hit 90%, which makes me think that about 10% of the population is hard-left partisans. Today, Bush's rating is about 30%, which makes me think that about 30% of the population is hard-right partisans. Which means, in any national election, the right-winger will have a built-in advantage.

Nah. There's roughly 10% of the population that will support the President, whomever that is, no matter what, and another 10% that will support a President in a time of war, no matter what.
 
2007-03-29 12:45:05 PM  
Saiga410: Thompson/Newt 08

That prospect is so horrible, so terrifying, that from now on... every time I see that picture, I will respond in kind with a horrifying picture of my own:

farm1.static.flickr.com

Legal notice: Poster is not affiliated in any way with the campaign of Bill Richardson. Poster is not responsible for any epileptic seizures brought about by the image. If you don't like it, or you're offended by it, or you get a seizure from it, don't look at it.
 
2007-03-29 12:45:26 PM  
I'd vote for Richardson, but not Hillary. Funny to say that Richardson doesn't have charisma, when you consider that Hillary is full of anti-charisma. If Hillary's on the ticket, I'll vote Republican. If it's Richardson, I'll vote Democrat. He's the only not-annoying Democrat in the field (at least so far).
 
2007-03-29 12:46:20 PM  
elchip: 1) F*ck.
2) They may not yet be aware of Richardson, or he might not be in the poll.
3) Hey, it indicates that Richardson won on his merits and not because he's Hispanic.


Don't give up your dreams. I dream of a Ron Paul vs. Bill Richardson election.

Take solace in this straw poll (pops).
 
2007-03-29 12:46:23 PM  
America wants neither of the two parties?
Libertarians ... assemble!
 
2007-03-29 12:46:25 PM  
scratched

If it actually ends up being Hillary and Rudy, I will definitely be "throwing away" my vote on a third party again. Still a long ways to go, though. Hopefully something unexpected happens.

"The only way to throw your vote away is to vote" - Penn Jillette [paraphrased]

Abstain.
 
2007-03-29 12:46:45 PM  
Maybe it's because they haven't gotten anything to Bush so he could sign/veto it yet.

/got nuthin
 
2007-03-29 12:46:49 PM  
Screw you all: George Carlin in '08.
 
2007-03-29 12:46:51 PM  
I wonder if anyone Time polled was under 65?

Thomson / Newt 08 -SCARY!
 
2007-03-29 12:47:16 PM  
It's hard to know exactly why respondents who are generally unhappy towards --and in many cases fed up with -- the GOP might still prefer a Republican for president over a Democrat

Because they are biased idiots who prefer having their team win rather than doing the right thing.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: 0 > -1
With all the steps backward and straight-up fark ups that attest to the incompetence and corruption of the rebublicans in office the righties will still choose that over the dems for merely not seeming to have slam dunk ideas. But in reality, even if the dems were exactly as the repubs portray them and just sat there twiddling their thumbs while in office (which they wouldn't)they still would be less detrimental than this administration has proven to be.
 
2007-03-29 12:47:49 PM  
MrToast: If it's Richardson, I'll vote Democrat. He's the only not-annoying Democrat in the field (at least so far).

What about, uhh, Mike Gravel? Not that he has a chance.

/I would have also said "What about Obama" as of not a long time ago, but I'm actually getting a little sick of Obamamania.
 
2007-03-29 12:48:01 PM  
Experienced or not, Hillary's Christian Conservative-like "censor everything to protect the innocent public from sin" stance pisses me off. She'd definitely drive me to vote for a third party, and I suspect a lot of other voting Democrats would do the same.
 
2007-03-29 12:48:52 PM  
for a lot of people was more of "do you support the presidency" as much as a supporting Bush himself."

I don't think any of them are "do you support the president" but more of a "do you approve what he's doing at the moment we take the poll".

Emotions were high after 9/11 and what he did in response was commendable and I think most people approved of it.

/Not disagreeing with your thesis, adding my addendum.
 
2007-03-29 12:49:44 PM  
Hillary just has a really loud fan base. I really don't think she'd ever have a large enough support to win the election. If dems are smart, they won't go with their fanboys choices, but actually someone who could get the moderate vote. As for repubs, as much as some might hate it, they have to play to their Christian base because that's where they are going to win/lose the election. I seriously think that if it was Edwards vs like Guiliani, a good bit of Christians might go for Edwards.
 
2007-03-29 12:50:40 PM  
>>What about, uhh, Mike Gravel? Not that he has a chance.

I see that as too unlikely to think about. Richardson is a Western governor with a little bit of attention. He's ALMOST on the map. He needs a second-place finish in an early primary to get into the race.

If it comes down to Hillary versus Obama, I'll be sorely disappointed.(Obama's fawning admirers make me puke.)
 
2007-03-29 12:50:56 PM  
Sportsmanship, Books!
 
2007-03-29 12:51:15 PM  
Joe Lieberman is the only Democrat I would ever consider voting for in a presidential campaign.
 
2007-03-29 12:51:24 PM  
>>If dems are smart,

uh oh
 
2007-03-29 12:51:24 PM  
The only sure way to guarantee a republican victory is to nominate Hillary. Please Nominate her.
 
2007-03-29 12:51:50 PM  
RocketRod: "Skleenar: I don't think the Democrats are worried quite yet."

I heard them saying the same thing in 1999 and 2003.


As a Democrat, I can say that I honestly wouldn't mind in the least if Giuliani or McCain won, assuming that we keep Congress and fundamentalists are marginalized as a force in the Republican party. Hell, at the moment I'm pretty sure I'd vote for Rudy over the Democratic frontrunners.
 
2007-03-29 12:53:28 PM  
When the dumbasses of America wake up (will never happen), they'll realize both the democrats & republicans do NOT care about America, can't lead America & have no business attempting to lead America. Both parties are abject failures, full of $$ in the pocket morons, who, while not being able to function in the private sector, have become just smart enough to screw the American public.
 
2007-03-29 12:53:39 PM  
Fine. You abstain. I'll go vote. And in the end, my voice will be louder than yours.
 
2007-03-29 12:54:40 PM  
Eidolon: As a Democrat, I can say that I honestly wouldn't mind in the least if Giuliani or McCain won, assuming that we keep Congress and fundamentalists are marginalized as a force in the Republican party. Hell, at the moment I'm pretty sure I'd vote for Rudy over the Democratic frontrunners.

Rudy is way too much of an angry power-hungry authoritarian for my likings.
 
2007-03-29 12:54:50 PM  
Over_Zealously_Apathetic

I think you're missing my point: He's gained in popularity since the announcement, like somehow having a loved one with cancer makes you a better choice. I just don't get that.

The elderly demographic in this country is huge and many of them have been personally effected by cancer. Their healthcare/medicine/social security are the only real issues they take into account when voting. Beyond that they vote on feelings and empathy ranks right at the top of that list.
 
2007-03-29 12:55:35 PM  
Giuliani seems to be the only candidate on either side that passes the criticial "sure, I'd share a beer with that guy/girl" test.

/not pro-Guiliani...just sayin'
 
2007-03-29 12:55:35 PM  
Here's a picture of Hillary's most important supporters:

www.vcpoker.com

Result: Hillary will win the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination.
 
2007-03-29 12:55:35 PM  
It's a shame they pulled the plug on Terri Schiavo, she's just who we need.
 
2007-03-29 12:55:45 PM  
I can't remember which comedian said it but "Electing a president is like prison sex....you got to go with the least painfull prick"
 
2007-03-29 12:55:59 PM  
parkthebus
Joe Lieberman is the only Democrat I would ever consider voting for in a presidential campaign.

Lieberman isn't a democrat. Or repulican. Joe is an Israeli. Wish people would figure that out. I don't care what your politics are, at least get a guy who puts your country first.
 
2007-03-29 12:56:11 PM  
parkthebus

Joe Lieberman is the only Democrat I would ever consider voting for in a presidential campaign.


Lieberman is not a democrat he is the anti-democrat turn coat as is Zell... Lieberman is true to Israel before our country as evident by his stand on Iraq!
 
2007-03-29 12:56:38 PM  
Those 37% who believe "the new Iraqi government will be able to build a stable and reasonably Democratic society"

must be by weight.
 
2007-03-29 12:56:53 PM  
McCain's pandering is laughable, and Rudi's decision to put the WTC command center in the WTC towers 'after' the '93 bombing points his excellent credentials.
 
2007-03-29 12:58:21 PM  
Being a Republican is one thing, but being Ann Coulter....
Aside from that 'quaint' personality. Just fathom waking up every morning knowing that you have a perfect build of a transexual.


Just imagine the self loathing.
 
2007-03-29 12:58:24 PM  
elchip, my dog looked at your gif and now she's having a seizure and barking in tongues. i'm going to have to shoot her. you owe me a new dog.

sure, bill richardson and hillary clinton both rate an "earnest borgnine" on the charisma meter. but hillary has more dollars than god, a will to power that can bend steel, more native political instincts than anyone, and lots and lots of favors owed to her by the people in power in the party--many of whom worked for her or bill.

just as kerry was the pick of the DNC for 2004 who was never going to be derailed by Dean whatever happened, so, i think, is hillary locked into 2008
 
2007-03-29 12:59:31 PM  
albo: just as kerry was the pick of the DNC for 2004 who was never going to be derailed by Dean whatever happened

Few people thought Kerry would be the nominee until after the Iowa caucus...
 
2007-03-29 12:59:40 PM  
Lieberman is true to Israel before our country as evident by his stand on Iraq!

what the hell?
it's a Joo conspiracy!!!
 
2007-03-29 12:59:55 PM  
Still Itchy Giuliani seems to be the only candidate on either side that passes the criticial "sure, I'd share a beer with that guy/girl" test.

/not pro-Guiliani...just sayin'



I never vote for a political candidate whose last name ends with a vowel.

/ Helps to filter out the Italians and Hispanics.
 
2007-03-29 01:00:19 PM  
Those 37% who believe "the new Iraqi government will be able to build a stable and reasonably Democratic society"

And what percent of this group watch Fox News?
 
2007-03-29 01:00:37 PM  
It's just too bad that people are utterly convinced that we need these two criminal organizations running the country.

You get the government you deserve, though, and if people are so stupid as to continue to vote for only two parties, it's their own damn fault when shiat like Bush happens.

Even you Democrats who voted for Gore and Kerry, it's your fault, too, for continuing to support a party proven to be interested in nothing more than power and the money and status it brings.

Of course, you'll come up with platitudes about how no politician is pure, but that's only because the system has been designed to weed out anyone who thinks outside the party, and anyone who dares challenge the two party(and these two parties in particular) system.

We all know the score, I'm not saying anything you people don't know in your hearts.

It would be SO EASY to change things, the House is elected every two years, you vote against every Republican and Democrat in those races and you've got 1/3rd of the job done. President every four years, it only takes one election to effectively KILL both parties. 2/3rds of the federal government could be out of the hands of the Republicans and Democrats in A SINGLE ELECTION. 1/3rd of the Senate could be ditched as well.

C'mon. Throw the bums out. Do it for your children, do it for your nieces and nephews, if things are this farked up NOW because of these two parties, what will things be like in 20 years.

Simple thing, man, just DO NOT VOTE DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN. Vote GREEN, VOTE LIBERTARIAN I DO NOT GIVE A shiat.

Just do not vote for a Republican or a Democrat ever again, and this country could at least have a new set of faces to hate.

That alone would be enough of a change for me.

Won't happen, I know, people are too farking stupid.
 
2007-03-29 01:00:42 PM  
Question for Mr. Graph Man: If Democrats outnumber Republicans by 15 percentage points, isn't it pretty pathetic that they only control 54% of the House?

One word answer here.

Incumbency.

Holding onto a seat is a lot easier than taking a seat away.

The Democratic gains in the Senate were absolutely phenomenal given the field and the seats that were being under contention in 2006.
 
2007-03-29 01:01:51 PM  
Let me think...should I vote for this bunch of corrupt, venal, power-hungry scum-bags, or the other bunch of corrupt, venal, power-hungry scum-bags?

Decisions, decisions.
 
2007-03-29 01:02:33 PM  
Is it just me, or are we in the perfect political climate for a well-situated, charismatic demagogue to lead us into a one-party country on the basis that it's better than either of our current parties?
 
2007-03-29 01:02:42 PM  
elchip, I actually tried to create an animated gif with Thompsons head like your Richardson gif. It is disturbing, I replaced the red and yellow with a rainbow of color. It is just too large to post.
 
2007-03-29 01:02:42 PM  
Ladies and gentlemen, the 44th President of the United States!

www.sustainability.com

/43rd too
 
2007-03-29 01:03:18 PM  
I love when they poll people. People are idiots.
 
Displayed 50 of 276 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report