Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Gallup: Congressional approval at 12 year low
Posted by: McQ on Monday, April 17, 2006

Even though I'm not a big fan of polls, I found this Gallup poll interesting for one reason.

This graphic:



Why? Because the last time anyone saw ratings like this for Congress (and the President) was in 1994.

Make of it what you will, but there are the numbers. The trend is unmistakable. The numbers present an interesting historical context if nothing else.

Of course I'm coming to the conclusion that my best interests are served by the GIG Party.

That would be the "Gridlock Is Good" Party.

While there's no official party organization and we don't have an official web site, we have an incentive, given the spending habits of the party in power. "The party of smaller government and less spending" has convinced me that divided government should indeed become a reality. Republicans, it seems, are never more conservative and fiscally responsible than when they're sharing power or out of it.

Er, like I said, 1994 - but not exactly the way the Republicans remember it.

Also read Michael Barone.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
This is not a defense of the GOP, which has been horrible legislatively.

The big difference between now and 1994 is the out of power party had a definitive agenda - unlike today’s Democrats, whose message, boiled down, is they’ll do better because they really really really dont like GW Bush.

 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
The big difference between now and 1994 is the out of power party had a definitive agenda - unlike today’s Democrats, whose message, boiled down, is they’ll do better because they really really really dont like GW Bush.
I don’t disagree with you bains, and, unlike 1994 a lot of seats are now pretty well protected. But your right, wanting to win because GW sucks isn’t a satisfactory agenda for winning seats.

I was just interested in the historical context of the poll numbers and taking advantage of that to talk about how I’ve come to regard divided government as a good thing anymore.

I included Barone for serious analysis.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Gridlock allows Congress to fingerpoint as to why nothing gets done. When the Republicans got control of all 3 but can’t balance the budget or appoint a judge, they (all Congress) are exposed for the frauds that they all are.

Go back to Gridlock and all of a sudden fingerpointing is allowed. Congress has always had sway over balancing of the budget. But back in the 80’s, being at odds with Reagan gave them an excuse not to balance it.

I just prefer the Gridlock excuse to not be available.
 
Written By: John
URL: http://
I somewhat dispute the Republicans having full control now on many issues. I believe they are plagued with RINOs. So I’m not entirely sure we don’t have a good dose of Gridlock anyway. Just on paper it doesn’t look that way.
 
Written By: John
URL: http://
Go back to Gridlock and all of a sudden fingerpointing is allowed.
Yeah, John, they’re not doing that at all now (Frist blames the Dems and Harry Reid for killing immigration, etc.).

OTOH, a divided government managed to reform welfare and balance the budget a few years back.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Interesting, but I think you’re missing the point.

A Dem House will result in MORE spending, MORE government, MORE everything we don’t want.

The dynamic for fiscal restraint was Dem President vs GOP Congress. And even that only worked because Gingrich was a hard-core budget cutter. (Remember when he shut the federal government down over spending cuts?) The problem is that Bush was elected as a big-gov’t (i.e. "compassionate") conservative, and he kept that promise. We’d have to elect more Gingrichs to get anything done, and there really aren’t many.

At this point, to achieve real fiscal discipline we need to nuke the entire federal government from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.
 
Written By: TallDave
URL: http://semirandomramblings.blogspot.com
I’ve called this Mi Casa Es Su Casa [updated]; Jon Henke picked the idea up early, with Gridlock Is Good for the Soul.
 
Written By: sammler
URL: http://stonecity.blogspot.com
As bad as the Republicns have been, and they really should take a beating this November, I don’t want to see a Democratic takeover of either the house or the seante. If the dems retake the house, impeachment hearings will begin as soon as the last dead voters ballot has been counted. And the words, Speaker of the House
Nancy pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid, make me wake up with cold sweats in the middle of thenight.
 
Written By: Radical Centrist
URL: http://
Nancy pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid, make me wake up with cold sweats in the middle of thenight.
Two years of Speaker Pelosi might be enough to reorient Republicans and have their voters turn out in droves in ’08.

It certainly would be wonderful fodder for blogs.

I agree with Glen Dean (who agrees with me ... heh), let ’em have the House for a couple of years. With the possibility of a third SC nominee I’d prefer to see the Senate remain in Republican hands.

Maybe Republicans will find themselves in those two years and get back to what they’re supposed to be. If not ... GIG.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Maybe Republicans will find themselves in those two years and get back to what they’re supposed to be. If not ... GIG.

What are we SUPPOSED to be McQ? The proxies for a Libertarian Party more toothless thn the CPUSA? I hate to say it, but has it occurred to anyone here that the GOP IS WHAT THE VOTERS WANT? The 1995 Budget debacle demonstrated that a smaller budget was NOT a political priority for most voters...Two words McQ, "Pauline Kael".....
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
If the dems retake the house, impeachment hearings will begin as soon as the last dead voters ballot has been counted.

As much as I happen to like GWB, the thought of PRESIDENT Richard Cheney after the impeachment is just a wet dream. Pleeeease don’t throw me in the briar patch brere Reid...
 
Written By: s.
URL: http://
s.
When they say Impeach Dubya, they mean Cheney too.....and we’ll crucify Rove.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Joe,

It’s not a two-for-one sale. Between 11/06 and 11/08 there’ll only be time for one bite at the apple. As for Rove, he always seems to rise again after each attempt at crucifiction.
 
Written By: s.
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider