Congressional D's vs. R's

[red states rule]

no....this thread is about CONGRESSIONAL CAUCUS approval ratings. Mention Cheney's approval rating in a thread about that subject. mention congressional public opinion going south in a thread about that subject. This thread is about those polls that ask the public to differentiate. I would never suggest you stop posting anything, RSR...I only ask that you try to stay on topic.. talk about the polls that are the subject of htis thread ON this thread. Quit running away from the subject of this one!

MM version of the Fairness Doctrine - free speech as long as it is the speech he approves of - all hype and no facts

 

[RetiredGySgt]

MM version of the Fairness Doctrine - free speech as long as it is the speech he approves of - all hype and no facts

Your a broken record. I am so tired of the two of you posting pages of childish garbage. " No I didn't, Yes you did" is beyond old.

 

[red states rule]

Your a broken record. I am so tired of the two of you posting pages of childish garbage. " No I didn't, Yes you did" is beyond old.

You seem to say the same thing several times a day, sir

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Make your point and move on. It is simple, YOU have your polls and he has his. Neither of you are going to agree with each other and so the rest of us are treated to page after page of meaningless drival. AND in my opinion YOU instigate it.

You make a good point and respond well and then its off to ignorant land. Maineman is like a deer caught in the head lights, he knows he shouldn't respond, but he keeps thinking maybe you will actually answer him.

 

[red states rule]

Make your point and move on. It is simple, YOU have your polls and he has his. Neither of you are going to agree with each other and so the rest of us are treated to page after page of meaningless drival. AND in my opinion YOU instigate it.

You make a good point and respond well and then its off to ignorant land. Maineman is like a deer caught in the head lights, he knows he shouldn't respond, but he keeps thinking maybe you will actually answer him.

If you say so

 

[maineman]

Once again trying to tell others what they can and can not post I see.

not at all.

I ask you, though, RGS...if you posted a thread about, let's say, asking people for their favorite tofu recipes, and I came onto that thread and, rather than post any tofu recipes of any kind, instead, I posted articles about Red Sox baseball 30 times.

Would you consider asking me to either start posting tofu recipes or, alternatively, go to the thread about baseball?

And if you DID ask me to either talk about the subject of the thread or go somewhere more appropriate, would you agree if someone else called that "trying to tell others what the can and can not post?

 

[red states rule]

not at all.

I ask you, though, RGS...if you posted a thread about, let's say, asking people for their favorite tofu recipes, and I came onto that thread and, rather than post any tofu recipes of any kind, instead, I posted articles about Red Sox baseball 30 times.

Would you consider asking me to either start posting tofu recipes or, alternatively, go to the thread about baseball?

And if you DID ask me to either talk about the subject of the thread or go somewhere more appropriate, would you agree if someone else called that "trying to tell others what the can and can not post?

Zzzzzzzz

 

[Superlative]

Zzzzzzzz

Nappy time for RSR?

get comfy in your footy pajamas and have some warm milk.

 

[red states rule]

Nappy time for RSR?

get comfy in your footy pajamas and have some warm milk.

Reading the usual crap libs like you and MM post can cure insomnia

 

[maineman]

Reading the usual crap libs like you and MM post can cure insomnia

Amazing! Nearly half of the posts on this thread are from RSR and he has YET to address the subject of it! That guy can run away from a debate better than anyone!

I guess if I want to catch up with him, I will need to post about fifty red sox press releases on his Bill and Hillary email thread! I'd better get to work!

 

[Edward]

All of Congress is on the voters least liked list - but why are Reid and Pelosi lower then Bush and Cheney?

First, you cannot compare the numbers of Reid and Pelosi against Bush or Cheney as Pelosi and Reid do not represent the same people that Bush and Cheney represent. The American people in general do not have a right to an opinion of Reid or Pelosi nor should Reid's or Pelosi's actions be based on the opinions of the American people at large instead their only concern should be to represent their district and state and by extension of their position of Majority Leader in the Senate and Speaker of the House their respective caucuses. The opinion of Republican Senators doesn't mean anything when it comes down to Harry Reid representing the Democratic Senators. This goes for the Democrats as well. Their opinion of the Minority Leader is not as important as the opinion of the Republican Senators.

Second, the opinion of the American people of Bush and Cheney is valid whereas the opinion of the American people in general of Reid and Pelosi is not. The opinion of the people of Nevada and Pelosi's district in California is valid in respect to them. Pelosi is not President of the United States nor is Reid instead they are respectively the Representative of the 8th District of California and the State of Nevada. You can compare the opinion poll of Bush against Congress, and of Republicans in Congress against Democrats in Congress but you cannot fairly compare the opinion of individual Senators in U.S. polls. Simply stated, the opinion the American people hold of the Senator from Massachusetts and the Senator of Florida is not a fair reflection of their status as the Senator for their state. Why? The opinion of the people of Massachusetts of the Senator from Florida is not relevent and the same is true of the opinion of any resident of any state or district of that of another state or districts representative.

MM is correct in stating that you avoid discussing the issues and choose to misdirect the discussion away from an issue which can be discussed to one that cannot be such as "how does the American people feel about the representative of the 8th district of California as compared to the President of the United States." If you want to be using real numbers you have to compare the constituencies in question. Simply put, you must compare Bush's national rating against Pelosi's district rating. It is only natural that Pelosi's national rating is going to be lower than Bush because she isn't representing the nation as a whole. Yet, I wonder what Bush's rating is in the 8th district of California. Why is it that you don't have a problem comparing Bush's national rating to that of Pelosi's but do not do the same for Bush's rating in the 8th district of California.

 

[Edward]

apples and oranges.

address the subject of the thread or I will start spamming all your threads the same way.

Of course it is like comparing apples and oranges. He compares the national rating of someone who represents a specific congressional district to that of the national rating of the President yet he does not compare the California 8th district rating of Bush against the 8th district rating of Pelosi. Which would be more like comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges. The opinion that the American people in general hold of Bush is relevent because he is the President of the United States while their opinion of Pelosi is not because she is the Representative of the 8th District of California. RSR isn't going to stop spamming this thread because he is by definition a troll. I suggest you do not spam his threads though because they are bad enough as they are and you wouldn't want to make them any worse than they are now with him spamming them. Ironically, he spams his own threads.

 

[Edward]

Yea, people hate Republicans more then Dems

Yet the Republican leaders have higher numbers then the Dem leaders

That is simply not true. The people that Nancy Pelosi represents are the ones who matter. You have no fucking right to an opinion about the representative of another person you stupid jackass. No one gives a shit that you think ill of Nancy Pelosi or that the nation as a whole gives Bush a higher rating when the fact is that Bush has a lower rating than Pelosi does in the 8th district of California. Why didn't you mention that? The fact is that Bush has lower #'s than many of the Democrats in their own constituencies and that is what will generally give you a better idea of where the people stand. That is when you compare the rating of Congress and of the Republicans in Congress against the Democrats in Congress both by district, state and nation the Democrats consistently come out with higher numbers. This is because it is a more accurate reflection of where the numbers actually stand. When Nancy Pelosi becomes President of the United States then you can rightly compare her national numbers to those of Bush but until that happens it is a better reflection to compare the actual numbers of Republicans in Congress against Democrats in Congress. You would then be comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges but right now you are attempting to compare apples to oranges which isn't possible.

 

[Edward]

Translation - stop posting how the leaders of my party are lower the Bush/Cheney - and never mention how the Dems are continuing to slide south

Let me break it down for your retarded ass because MM is being nice to you and I think it is time for someone to tell you how fucking retarded you are. The national numbers of the President and Vice President are not comparable to that of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid or any other member of Congress. That you choose to ignore the fact that Democrats in Congress who Pelosi and Reid represent as Speaker and Majority Leader receive a higher rating than do Republicans (which is a comparable number because the American people have the right to an opinion of Congress and the respective caucuses) in Congress should tell you that you are trying to avoid the real issue. Over and over you choose to compare the numbers of the President against those of the people who are not the President. Fucking turn it around and you might as well say that BUSH/CHENEY'S NUMBERS ARE LOWER THAN THOSE OF REID AND PELOSI BECAUSE HIS RATINGS IN THEIR RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS ARE LOWER. You don't want to address that issue because you do not want to focus on the fact that those numbers are what matters. Let me break it down for you: PELOSI DOES NOT REPRESENT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE INSTEAD SHE REPRESENTS THE 8TH DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA AND WHEN YOU ADD UP ALL THE DISTRICTS AND STATES REPRESENTED IN CONGRESS BY INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS THE REPUBLICANS COME OUT WITH LOWER NUMBERS THAN DO DEMOCRATS AND THAT IS WHAT YOU DO NOT WANT TO MENTION. This is an apples to apples comparison as opposed to an apples to oranges comparison. This is the purpose of this thread and you should focus on it but instead you do not want to because you know that when you compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges that the Democrats consistently fare better than do the Republicans.

 

[Stephanie]

Let me break it down for your retarded ass because MM is being nice to you and I think it is time for someone to tell you how fucking retarded you are. The national numbers of the President and Vice President are not comparable to that of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid or any other member of Congress. That you choose to ignore the fact that Democrats in Congress who Pelosi and Reid represent as Speaker and Majority Leader receive a higher rating than do Republicans (which is a comparable number because the American people have the right to an opinion of Congress and the respective caucuses) in Congress should tell you that you are trying to avoid the real issue. Over and over you choose to compare the numbers of the President against those of the people who are not the President. Fucking turn it around and you might as well say that BUSH/CHENEY'S NUMBERS ARE LOWER THAN THOSE OF REID AND PELOSI BECAUSE HIS RATINGS IN THEIR RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS ARE LOWER. You don't want to address that issue because you do not want to focus on the fact that those numbers are what matters. Let me break it down for you: PELOSI DOES NOT REPRESENT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE INSTEAD SHE REPRESENTS THE 8TH DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA AND WHEN YOU ADD UP ALL THE DISTRICTS AND STATES REPRESENTED IN CONGRESS BY INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS THE REPUBLICANS COME OUT WITH LOWER NUMBERS THAN DO DEMOCRATS AND THAT IS WHAT YOU DO NOT WANT TO MENTION. This is an apples to apples comparison as opposed to an apples to oranges comparison. This is the purpose of this thread and you should focus on it but instead you do not want to because you know that when you compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges that the Democrats consistently fare better than do the Republicans.

I hate fruit..

 

[Stephanie]

Good grief....reading this whole thread..

I feel like someone is acting like....

As for polls....

Right now.........neither party is sitting too well with the American people...And that's the facts..as seen from the poll taker.........Stephanie

 

[red states rule]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19354100/site/newsweek/


The trend continues

 

[Stephanie]

Something I find AMUSING...

The Democrats are tanking after only 6 months, of taking over that HUGH MAJORITY in the 06 election, that was suppose to SHOW US SOMETHING...for why they won...

 

[red states rule]

Something I find AMUSING...

The Democrats are tanking after only 6 months, of taking over that HUGH MAMORITY in the 06 election, that was suppose to SHOW US SOMETHING...for why they won...

Here is one example of why they are tanking


Freshman Dem finds cleaning House messy

By: Chris Frates
Jun 19, 2007 06:30 PM EST

snip
Freshman Democratic Rep. Jerry McNerney won his Northern California district last fall on an anti-corruption platform, so it was a natural last week when he began trying to clean house at a political action committee created to raise campaign cash for his class of congressional newcomers.

McNerney's target was William C. Oldaker, a well-connected lobbyist who helps run Democratic Freshmen PAC. Oldaker's involvement "surely does not meet the standard of rising above any hint of impropriety," McNerney wrote in a letter calling for his ouster. "Though I am in no position to control the Democratic Freshmen PAC's activities, I believe that lobbyists should not be attached to political committees."


McNerney's concerns are not so strong that he plans to turn down the PAC's financial assistance, even if the group does not grant his plea to give Oldaker the boot. "He is in a competitive race," Stone said. "He believes in what he said in the letter, but he's not going to do anything that's going to hurt his ability."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0607/4558.html

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Something I find AMUSING...

The Democrats are tanking after only 6 months, of taking over that HUGH MAMORITY in the 06 election, that was suppose to SHOW US SOMETHING...for why they won...

No NO, haven't you been paying attention? According to Maineman ALL the bad numbers from Congress are because there are still Republicans in Congress.