Didn't want to make three separate threads, but these items caught my eye, and RSS reader, this morning: first, via hotair, some perspective on the latest Gallup numbers: [rquoter]In fact, the 9-point drop in the most recent quarter is the largest Gallup has ever measured for an elected president between the second and third quarters of his term, dating back to 1953. One president who was not elected to his first term — Harry Truman — had a 13-point drop between his second and third quarters in office in 1945 and 1946… More generally, Obama’s 9-point slide between quarters ranks as one of the steepest for a president at any point in his first year in office. The highest is Truman’s 19-point drop between his third and fourth quarters, followed by a 15-point drop for Gerald Ford between his first and second quarters. The largest for an elected president in his first year is Bill Clinton’s 11-point slide between his first and second quarters.[/rquoter] next, Jules Crittenden notes Cheney's interview at Fox: [rquoter]Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Wednesday that the Bush administration had developed a new strategy on the war in Afghanistan before leaving office — a strategy that he said “bears a striking resemblance” to the one announced by President Obama in March. In a speech to the Center for Security Policy, Cheney said the Bush administration handed Obama’s transition team a policy review of the Afghan war conducted last fall to meet the new challenges posed by the Taliban. “They asked us not to announce our findings publicly, and we agreed, giving them the benefit of our work and the benefit of the doubt,” Cheney said. Cheney’s comments countered a recent claim by White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel that the Obama administration had to form an Afghan war strategy from scratch because the Bush administration hadn’t asked any key questions about the war and left it “adrift.” … In March, Obama ordered 4,000 more troops into Afghanistan, bringing the total then to 21,000 additional soldiers since he took office. “So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future,” he said at the time. But rapidly deteriorating conditions and a widely disputed and unresolved election in Afghanistan gave the Obama administration pause and led to the current policy review. “Having announced his Afghanistan strategy last March, President Obama now seems afraid to make a decision, and unable to provide his commander on the ground with the troops he needs to complete his mission,” (Cheney) said, calling on Obama to fulfill a promise he made in August to armed forces in a speech at the VFW to give them the support and resources need to get the job done. “It’s time for President Obama to make good on his promise,” he said. “The White House must stop dithering while America’s armed forces are in danger.” “Make no mistake, signals of indecision out of Washington hurt our allies and embolden our adversaries,” he added. “Waffling, while our troops on the ground face an emboldened enemy, endangers them and hurts our cause.”[/rquoter] and lastly, for all of you who think the tea partiers are just another wing of the republican party: <object width="640" height="505"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/H31HMs16FhA&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/H31HMs16FhA&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="505"></embed></object> I report, you deride.
I think Basso should apply for a job at fox news, he could out do Glen Beck and others at fox news. He would even get paid to do what he loves to do for free.
here's a biased perspective on your blog's skewed perspective of the Gallup numbers. Gerald Ford was a reasonably popular president with the the end of his term registering 53% approval, something that held steady throughout much of the rest of his presidency. Truman was pretty damn unpopular at the end of his term. In fact the most unpopular president ever at one point with 23% approval. And Clinton was one of the most popular presidents of all time, with a 66% approval rating at the end of his term, eclipsing JFK and Reagen. Reagen btw, should have been mentioned as a president who had a steep drop; with a dip from something close to 70% after his inauguration to 45% a year later. So, you have a mixed bag here. And what does this confirm? Absolutely nothing. Opinion poll number trends are almost worthless if one is using them to predict or anticipate anything. Though, if I were to make a suggestion, it SEEMS that historically speaking, presidents with the highest fluctuation in approval rating actually tend to end up being the most popular/successful presidents of all-time, at least from the limited sample here. that said, get a blog if you want to copy&paste, it would really free up the thread clutter here.
Since you don't usually add any commentary, which would make starting a blog pointless, can you just give us a link to your Google Reader's Shared Items? I think that will make things easier on everyone. We'll check it every day, we swear.
poor basso -- Today, National Security Network Senior Adviser Gen. Paul Eaton (Ret.), who served more than 30 years in the United States Army and from 2003-2004 oversaw the training of the Iraqi military, responded to Dick Cheney's accusations on Afghanistan from last night: "The record is clear: Dick Cheney and the Bush administration were incompetent war fighters. They ignored Afghanistan for 7 years with a crude approach to counter-insurgency warfare best illustrated by: 1. Deny it. 2. Ignore it. 3. Bomb it. While our intelligence agencies called the region the greatest threat to America, the Bush White House under-resourced our military efforts, shifted attention to Iraq, and failed to bring to justice the masterminds of September 11. "The only time Cheney and his cabal of foreign policy 'experts' have anything to say is when they feel compelled to protect this failed legacy. While President Obama is tasked with cleaning up the considerable mess they left behind, they continue to defend torture or rewrite a legacy of indifference on Afghanistan. Simply put, Mr. Cheney sees history throughout extremely myopic and partisan eyes.
Gibbs today -- "It's a curious comment," Gibbs said. "I think it's pretty safe to say that the vice president was, for seven years, not focused on Afghanistan. Even more curious given that an increase in troops sat on desks in this White House, including the vice president's for more than eight months." "What Vice President Cheney calls dithering, President Obama calls his solemn responsibility to the men and women in uniform and to the American public. I think we've all seen what happens when somebody doesn't take that responsibility seriously. http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmem...ing-obama-calls-his-solemn-responsibility.php
further reinforcing the "not a member of either party meme": [rquoter]The people of the 23rd Congressional District of New York are ready to shake things up, and Doug Hoffman is coming on strong as Election Day approaches! He needs our help now. The votes of every member of Congress affect every American, so it's important for all of us to pay attention to this important Congressional campaign in upstate New York. I am very pleased to announce my support for Doug Hoffman in his fight to be the next Representative from New York's 23rd Congressional district. It's my honor to endorse Doug and to do what I can to help him win, including having my political action committee, SarahPAC, donate to his campaign the maximum contribution allowed by law. Our nation is at a crossroads, and this is once again a "time for choosing." The federal government borrows, spends, and prints too much money, while our national debt hits a record high. Government is growing while the private sector is shrinking, and unemployment is on the rise. Doug Hoffman is committed to ending the reckless spending in Washington, D.C. and the massive increase in the size and scope of the federal government. He is also fully committed to supporting our men and women in uniform as they seek to honorably complete their missions overseas. And best of all, Doug Hoffman has not been anointed by any political machine. Doug Hoffman stands for the principles that all Republicans should share: smaller government, lower taxes, strong national defense, and a commitment to individual liberty. Political parties must stand for something. When Republicans were in the wilderness in the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan knew that the doctrine of "blurring the lines" between parties was not an appropriate way to win elections. Unfortunately, the Republican Party today has decided to choose a candidate who more than blurs the lines, and there is no real difference between the Democrat and the Republican in this race. This is why Doug Hoffman is running on the Conservative Party's ticket. Republicans and conservatives around the country are sending an important message to the Republican establishment in their outstanding grassroots support for Doug Hoffman: no more politics as usual. You can help Doug by visiting his official website below and joining me in supporting his campaign: http://www.doughoffmanforcongress.com/donate3.html.[/rquoter] Spoiler
