AWESOME photos of an awesome PRESIDENT!
MUST READ/VIEW . . .
GREEN BAY, WICONSIN
. . . article and poignant/fun photos
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060810/GPG0101/60810070/1978
. . . summary articles AND videoclips
1.) http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=5265351
2.) http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=5267228
IGNORE ALL POLLING DATA FROM THE MSM (including OpinionDynamics/FoxNews and Rasmussen -- OD oversamples Democrats by 5-8 points and Rasmussen is now oversampling Democrats/Democrat-leaning Independents by 4 1/2 points, UP from EVEN at the beginning of the year).
The following information is all you need to know!
[Thank you Howlin, ohiowfan, et al, for pinging me to a related FR thread!]
BASE MOBILIZATION SURVEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS
. . . Overall support for President Bush and congressional Republicans from the Republican base is very strong.
The generic congressional vote from Republicans is an overwhelming 84% to 6% within sampling error of what we found for the 2004 election. An equally impressive 88% to 11% majority of Republicans approve of the way the president is handling his job!
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060809/RNC_memo.pdf
Grin...Deb, I can't speak for anyone else, but as for myself, I always ignore the polls. No one has ever given me a satisfactory explanation of why I should trust something that cannot be objectively verified as accurate against real-world criteria.
I don't know who came up with the concept of "presidential approval ratings," but do know it isn't found in the Constitution or any of our founding and governmental documents. It's some PR thing invented by some pollster or wag, and there is absolutely NO way to objectively guage its accuracy. Elections are our report cards. Polls that purport to be electoral guages are offensive to me.
I don't know how to post links so that people can click on them, but I thought people might be interested in a commentary from Prof. Tribe on the Harvard Law School website.
The address is www.law.harvard.edu
Tribe is extremely liberal, but even he has to admit that Dubya's critics don't legally have a leg to stand on with respect to challenging the constitutionality of his signing statements. (And don't even get me started on the ABA; an organization of lawyers arguing that they are constitutionally suspect is a disgrace to our profession). It's refreshing that even a flaming Dem has to admit this.
Tribe gets a bit snarky about a few other things like Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, FISA, and the proper balance of power between Congress and the Executive branch, but it was refreshing to see someone in academia finally tell the libs to shut their mouths about the signing statements.