The DNC Has A Plan!

[Annie]

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060616-113827-8214r.htm

Democrats offer a 'new direction'

By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
June 17, 2006

Congressional Democrats announced "a new direction for America" yesterday, outlining a litany of promises to raise the minimum wage and lower gas prices, college tuition and the cost of health care.
"Democrats are united in presenting a new direction for America, one that will make our nation as strong as the American people," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said.
The new Democratic agenda does not contain suggestions, however, for fighting the war against terrorism or dealing with illegal aliens, two issues that are of top concern to many Americans. Instead, it focuses entirely on domestic and economic issues.
If Democrats take control of the House in November, Mrs. Pelosi promised they will on the first day of Congress "give America a raise by increasing the minimum wage."
Republicans were quick to ridicule yesterday's announcement.
"When you're going in circles like the Democrats, it just seems like you're going in a new direction," said Kevin Madden, spokesman for House Majority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican.
Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, issued a press release under the headline, "Everything old is new again."
"So what is their 'new' direction?" asked Mr. Cornyn. "It's hard to tell. For example, the minority leader of the House of Representatives recently said that the economy was headed in the 'wrong direction' -- after 33 months of consecutive job gains. And the Senate minority leader issued a press release saying American efforts in Iraq were headed in the 'wrong direction' -- the day after American forces killed terrorist leader [Abu Musab] al-Zarqawi."
The closest Democratic leaders came to shaping a foreign policy agenda was to raise concerns about the amount of foreign oil consumed by Americans.
"When it comes to energy, we're focused on the fact that we use 21 million barrels of oil every day, and we import 66 percent of those 21 million barrels of oil," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said. "In America, we're in a Stone Age policy by which the rich grow richer, the world becomes warmer and middle class families are being squeezed."
The "New Direction for America" slogan comes after Democrats quit using "America Can Do Better," which was used extensively by Sen. John Kerry during his 2004 presidential campaign and during the past two years. Even many Democrats didn't like that phrase because it sounded like the party was preaching to voters that they were somehow doing something wrong.
Republicans were quick to point out that the "new" slogan isn't entirely new and dug up no fewer than nine instances when Mr. Kerry called for "a new direction for America" during his failed campaign.
During yesterday's press conference, Senate Minority Whip Richard J. Durbin of Illinois used another mantra that Mr. Kerry employed during his campaign.
"Our message to [families] today: Help is on the way!" he said
Mr. Cornyn was not impressed.
"While Democrats continue their search for a slogan and an agenda, Republicans are united behind the effort to lead America, strengthen the economy and enhance our security," he said.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

"When you're going in circles like the Democrats, it just seems like you're going in a new direction," said Kevin Madden, spokesman for House Majority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican.

 

[Rico]

Wow!! The Dems are really trotting out some major new ideas. I've also learned they have this new catchy tune to use along with their new "plan". The name of the tune is "Happy Days are Here Again". This has got to energize the base and bring undecideds streaming to the party!!! Viva las ideas nuevas!!!!

 

[Gunny]

The DNC Has A Plan!

No way!

 

[theHawk]

lol, thier great idea is to bribe America with minimum wage increase. Yup great idea, legalize the millions of illegal immigrants, then give them a pay raise! All at the taxpayers' expense!

 

[red states rule]

How many "new" directions are The Dems going to go in?

How many meetings are the going to have to decide what they "stand" for?

 

[Stephanie]

How many "new" directions are The Dems going to go in?

How many meetings are the going to have to decide what they "stand" for?

I'm so dizzy, my head is spinning.

Like a whirlpool it never ends....

I'M SO DIZZY....




:rotflmao:

 

[red states rule]

Reminds me of the John "I served in Viet Nam" Kerry wind surf ad.

These clowns think they can repackage their liberalism into cute slogans.

 

[Stephanie]

Reminds me of the John "I served in Viet Nam" Kerry wind surf ad.

These clowns think they can repackage their liberalism into cute slogans.

And to think, they wanted the windsurfer, to take care of the 9/11 terrorist..

 

[red states rule]

The guy who said he would fight a "more sensistive waar"

What does that mean? He would actually raise his voice to the terrosists?

What about his "global test" to when America would defend itself?

John "I served in Viet Nam" Kerry is such a freaking loser

I hope it him VS the Red Queen Hillary. It would be funny as hell to watch

 

[Annie]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/16/bush.poll/index.html

Poll: Bush's unpopularity could hurt GOP candidates

Friday, June 16, 2006; Posted: 8:32 p.m. EDT (00:32 GMT)



WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's continued unpopularity could present a challenge for Republican candidates in this fall's mid-term elections, according to a new CNN poll released Friday.

The poll results weren't all bad news for Bush. After his surprise visit to Baghdad, Americans were slightly less critical of his handling of the war in Iraq, but his overall job approval rating hasn't budged, the poll shows.

When registered voters polled were asked if they were more or less likely to vote for a candidate Bush supported, 47 percent said they were less likely, while only 27 percent said they were more likely. Twenty percent said it made no difference. The sampling error for the question was plus or minus 4 percentage points.

However, the poll showed that Democrats have so far not been able to capitalize on Bush's political difficulties.

When voters were asked which party would be their choice for Congress in November, 45 percent said Democrat and 38 percent Republican. Twelve percent were unsure. However, in May, Democrats captured 52 percent in the same generic ballot question, showing their support had dropped 7 points in a month. (View the latest poll results)

The level of Republican support was unchanged, indicating voters had moved from the Democratic column to unsure.

In the poll, conducted on Wednesday and Thursday by Opinion Research Corp., the president's overall job approval rating was at 37 percent. In May, before his trip to Baghdad, it was virtually the same: 36 percent.

However, Bush's approval number has risen since late April, when it was just 32 percent. And there was some post-Baghdad movement when it came to the question of whether Americans approve of how he is handing the situation in Iraq.

In May 34 percent approved and 62 percent disapproved, a gap of 28 percentage points. But in the latest poll, 39 percent approved and 54 percent disapproved, just a 15-point gap. The sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Still, most Americans remain pessimistic about the Iraq war. The poll found 54 percent opposed to the war with only 38 percent in favor, and 55 percent thought things were going badly as opposed to 41 percent who said they thought the situation in Iraq was going well.

Asked if the Iraqi government would be strong enough a year from now to keep order without U.S. troops, 48 percent said it wouldn't be strong enough, while only 30 percent thought it would be and 22 percent were unsure.

However, poll respondents were more optimistic about the long term. Fifty percent said they thought the Iraqi government would be strong enough to keep order a few years from now, while 33 percent said it would not be and 17 percent were unsure. The sampling error was plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

A majority of those polled, 53 percent, said the United States should set a timetable from withdrawing from Iraq; 41 percent were opposed. However, respondents were split down the middle when asked whether a withdrawal should take place within one year, with 47 percent in favor and 47 percent either opposing any timetable at all or opting for a longer time frame.

Two-thirds of those polled were opposed to withdrawing within six months, as some Democrats in Congress have proposed. Only 28 percent wanted to withdraw that quickly. (Full story: House rejects Iraq timeline)

The sampling error on the timetable question was plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Approval of Bush's handling of terrorism and the economy also rose slightly in the past month, while his numbers remained virtually unchanged on immigration. On terrorism, 49 percent approved of his performance; on the economy, the number was 36 percent; on immigration, 33 percent.

The poll also found that a slight majority of those polled, 51 percent, thought economic conditions today are good, while 47 percent thought they are poor, with a sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

 

[red states rule]

Am I wrong, or did the liberal media "report" the same thing in 2002, and 2004?

I do believe Republicans picked up seats in both of those elections