As George W. Bush gives his state of the union tomorrow, Bush stands alone.
When President Bush delivers his next-to-last State of the Union address Tuesday night, he will confront this reality, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll: Nearly two-thirds of Americans appear to have given up on success in Iraq and also on his presidency.
In addition, the poll finds that nearly another two-thirds believe he shouldn’t move ahead with his troop increase to Iraq, if Congress passes a non-binding resolution opposing it. And it shows that just two in 10 want Bush taking the lead role in setting policy for the country.
There are some presidencies that are consequential and inconsequential. The Bush years were of major consequence, just for all the wrong reasons.
UPDATE: CBS shows Bush at 28%. Twenty-eight. When Sen. Clinton campaigns alongside her husband, who’s approval never got close to those depths, it’ll be a hell of an asset to her (despite the MSM convincing itself that people hate President Clinton).
He’s still about 27 points above where he ought to be.
“Regardless of what action Congress takes concerning Bush’s troop increase, the poll shows that most Americans believe the outcome in Iraq has already been decided. Sixty-five percent say the United States will have to withdraw and leave Iraq without a stable democratic government there. By comparison, only 27 percent say the U.S. will prevail and leave Iraq with a stable government.”
Why on earth?
Our military has won every direct confrontation with Al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorists or militias, and we have fought in Afghanistan and Iraq with no discernable economic drain on the US (you haven’t seen ration stamps lately have you?) Our losses have been surprisingly low, and so have Iraqi civilian losses, considering that 58,000 Americans and somewhere between 2.5 and 5 million Southeast Asians lost their lives during the Vietnam war.
If we quit Iraq, it will be because we chose to surrender, not because we “lost.” I can’t imagine why a majority of Americans think that surrendering to Al Qaeda and Muqtada Al Sadr would be a good idea.
Then again, I’m not a Democrat.
have fought in Afghanistan and Iraq with no discernable economic drain on the US (you haven’t seen ration stamps lately have you?)
Well of course not. We just borrowed a trillion dollars from China.
We’ve already lost. When the greatest superpower showed that it could not contain looting in a moderate sized city, couldn’t constrain itself from torture, and let a bunch of insurgents terrorize the citizens because the powers that be decided to do it on the cheap, we lost. You’re aware that we won the bulk of firefights with the Vietcong too, right? But like then our leaders had no clue what they were doing and felt the best course of action was to just pile more on it. Also, if you look at the results of that poll it isn’t just Democrats who know Iraq is lost – it’s everyone but the last few kool-aid drinkers like yourself. To my fellow Democrat’s credit, we were way ahead of the curve.
You’re aware that we won the bulk of firefights with the Vietcong too, right?
Wrong.
We never failed to take an objective. Two different things, but how would you know?
That idea that the Dems plan to march us out of Iraq, exactly as they did in Vietnam, means not a damn thing to you twits.
Ideas have consequences.
Mike is one of the pathetic backwash. Enlist chickenhawk, show us pussies what a man can do.
“To my fellow Democrat’s credit, we were way ahead of the curve.”
That can happen when you get thrown under the bus.