by Frank James
A new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll says the Democratic controlled Congress scores lower than the President Bush in voter approval, with Congress coming in at 23 percent approval rating and the president at 29 percent. Download poll
Since the poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent, it's actually possible the gap between the president and Congress;s approvals is wider or non-existent. For instance, Congress's approval may be around 26 percent and so could the president's.
But assuming Congress's rating is indeed lower than the president's, what could account for that?
One possibility is that the president has hit rock bottom with most voters except those within his political base. They would be the voters most likely to support his stance on Iraq, his insistence on finishing the job there before U.S. troops withdraw.
So by standing his ground on Iraq, he reinforces his position with that base though he has clearly lost some standing there as well because of his support for an immigration bill that many in his base refer to as an amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Congressional Democrats, on the other hand, have a base that's totally opposed to the war. By having to fold their efforts, for lack of a veto-proof majority, to include timelines for military withdrawal in the Iraq spending bill, Democratic lawmakers weaken their support within their base.
A poll result that likely interacts with that 23 percent approval number for Democrats is that 54 percent of the respondents thought Iraq had gotten worse in the past three months.
The stronger that sentiment, the more pressure on the Democrats to do something about curtailing U.S. involvement. The more their inability to bring concrete changes on the war, the weaker their approva from votersl. Democrats are in an unforgiving cycle.
The irony is that Iraq has shattered the public's faith in both parties, the opposition party is not benefiting by being in opposition. While the war has brought Bush low, it is bringing congressional Democrats low as well.
Another result in the poll that should trouble Democrats is the anti-incumbent mood the survey picked up.
More respondents, 48 percent, said they thought a new candidate should be given a shot representing them than the 41 percent who favored the incumbent. Eleven percent were undecided.
For Democrats to have a real chance to turn this around would take a breakthrough in their ability to determine the course of U.S. Iraq policy. But that doesn't appear to be in sight.
They can take some encouragement though from one poll result, the country seems to be tilting their way when all issues are taken together.
Nearly half of the respondents said the Democratic Party was more in line with their "values and positions" while 36 percent said that of Republicans. That gives Democrats something to work with
• 
• 
• 
Comments
The last time I looked, congress was made up of both dems and repubs with some indies thrown in. So why do you lay the burden on the dems only?
Also, the last time I looked, the president had veto power which means the dems can't do squat without some repub votes.
Posted by: Bruce Y | June 14, 2007 10:18 AM
This isn't any newsflash, Frank, and is hardly an interesting story. Congress always scores lower, even when it was Republican-controlled. It's because Congress is made up of talking point-speaking, buzzword using publicity hounds who actually get very little done, regardless of party.
Posted by: Joe | June 14, 2007 10:59 AM
The low polling numbers of the Dem controlled Congress could result from a variety of non-Iraq factors that Frank James never considers:
1) the illegal alien amnesty bil, concocted in secret and drawing support from only 25% of the American people;
2) the collapse of the Dem-promised "100 hour" legislative blitz;
3) the proliferation of secret legislative earmarks and other species of pork barrel;
4) "Cold Cash" Bill Jefferson and other corrupt Democrats.
Posted by: Bruce | June 14, 2007 10:59 AM
Couldn't agree more with Frank James on this one. The voters who put the Dems in the majority clearly did so on the assumption that the Dems would do what they could to get the US out of the civil war that is raging in Iraq (see Iraqi Prime Minister Al Maliki's op-ed piece in yestrday's Wall Street Journal, where he compares the conflict in Iraq to the American Civil War). The Dems, by failing to make Bush veto war funding legislation that included "hard" troop withdrawl timetables, failed miserably in following through on what got them elected to the majority in the first place. The Dems will see their poll numbers rise when they start reflecting the will of the American people.
Posted by: Buster | June 14, 2007 11:26 AM
Bruce Y. makes a good point because the average Joe in America doesn't understand how Congress works (i.e. Dubya's veto pen). However, I hope this is a wake up call for all politicians if they want to keep their jobs they are going to have to make some major changes.
Posted by: Janstress | June 14, 2007 11:40 AM
All good points, Bruce. Here are a couple more. You had folks buy into the (stuff) dispensed by the Democrats last fall about getting things done and being ethical. Instead, it's been nothing but partisan (stuff). And, of course, the dregs of Society -- the Deranged, Demented Loony Left -- thought with a Dem Congress, Bush and Cheney would have been impeached by now with Bug-Eyes Pelosi installed as president. Since that hasn't happened, they are upset too.
I just can't wait until 2008 when Congress becomes GOP again and either Thompson or Guiliani becomes president!! Then we'll have mass suicides as many of the Deranged, Demented Loony Lefters will end their sad, pathetic, little lives!!
Posted by: John D | June 14, 2007 11:43 AM
"The low polling numbers of the Dem controlled Congress could result from a variety of non-Iraq factors that Frank James never considers:
1) the illegal alien amnesty bil, concocted in secret and drawing support from only 25% of the American people;
2) the collapse of the Dem-promised "100 hour" legislative blitz;
3) the proliferation of secret legislative earmarks and other species of pork barrel;
4) "Cold Cash" Bill Jefferson and other corrupt Democrats."
Poor Bruce, he was born with a silver keyboard for a mouth.
Posted by: Pathetic Awarness Alert | June 14, 2007 12:08 PM
"Then we'll have mass suicides as many of the Deranged, Demented Loony Lefters will end their sad, pathetic, little lives!!"
Posted by: John D | June 14, 2007 11:43 AM
Poor little Johnny D. Now that you've been investigated by the Secret Service for your threats to shoot the Democratic Leadership and other Democrats you have resorted to asking Democrats to shoot themselves. You are clearly sick. It won't be long before the FBI snatches you up for posting fake weather reports to the National Weather Service though. You are going away for a long time you natural born terrorist.
PS How was that 4th donut?
Posted by: Janet | June 14, 2007 12:39 PM
The sad thing is that Frank James sees the low poll numbers for the Dem Congress, and his range of possible reasons ranges from "they aren't liberal enough" to "they aren't liberal enough". Put another way, to Frank James, the fault with Congress is that it doesn't agree with Frank James often enough
A more nuanced mind--a true reporters mind--might at least consider the possibility that the Dem Congress is unpopular for precisely the opposite reason: because they are too liberal.
Posted by: Bruce | June 14, 2007 1:07 PM
As usual it's the Wingnuts in Congress who are preventing any progress on ending the Iraq civil war.
That will change this fall when the Republicans realize that they can't continue to support W.'s stupid civil war in Iraq and still get re-elected.
Posted by: John E | June 14, 2007 1:09 PM
Wow, what a strong argument from Janet, "how was that fourth donut?" Man, you really got me with that one!
By the way, Janet, or are you another one of John E.'s aliases?, it's not me the FBI is going after, but you and the rest of your ilk. See, I have connections with the Secret Service, FBI, CIA and U.S. military, and one of these days we're going to snatch up all you Loons and feed you to the Gitmo detainees for dinner!
Posted by: John D | June 14, 2007 2:00 PM
Johnny D'Lusional,
That's all well and good, but what about the AFL-CIO?
Posted by: Doug Zook | June 14, 2007 3:59 PM
Johnny D, you have to take the medication every day. Now go take your pills before you have another episode.
Posted by: Tony | June 14, 2007 5:38 PM