Barnes falsely claimed Pelosi "is the most unpopular national politician in America"
SUMMARY: In his latest column, Fred Barnes wrote that Nancy Pelosi "is the most unpopular national politician in America," ignoring recent opinion polls showing that President Bush, his vice president, his defense secretary, and the Republican leaders of both houses of Congress are far less popular than Pelosi.
In his column for the October 23 edition of The Weekly Standard, executive editor Fred Barnes wrote that House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (CA) "is the most unpopular national politician in America." However, recent opinion polls do not support Barnes's claim, and, in fact, show that President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL), and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) are far less popular than Pelosi.
In his column, Barnes wrote:
If politics were fair, Democrats would be in as much trouble as Republicans. And they'd be just as vulnerable. They've been obstructionist, anti-tax-cut, soft on terrorism, and generally obnoxious. On top of that, Pelosi is the most unpopular national politician in America. But in the sixth year of the Bush presidency, with a GOP-run Congress, Democrats aren't the issue. Republicans are.
As Media Matters for America noted when Fox News host Brit Hume said that Pelosi is "not a popular figure or respected figure nationally," an October 6-8 CNN poll found that 35 percent of respondents had a "favorable" opinion of Pelosi, compared with 26 percent "unfavorable"; 29 percent responded that they had "never heard of" Pelosi, and 11 percent were "unsure" how they felt about her. The poll's margin of error was +/- 3 percent. A recent USA Today/Gallup poll, also conducted October 6-8, found that the difference between those who viewed Pelosi favorably and unfavorably was within the poll's margin of error: 26 percent of respondents indicated that they had a "favorable" opinion of Pelosi versus 28 percent who answered "unfavorable." Nearly half -- 46 percent -- said they have not heard of Pelosi or formed an opinion of her. The USA Today/Gallup poll's margin of error was also +/- 3 percent.
Pelosi's "unfavorable" ratings, however, are far lower than those of many prominent national Republican figures:
- Bush: According to an October 10-11 Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, 54 percent of respondents had an "unfavorable" opinion of Bush, compared with 43 percent who had a "favorable" opinion. The October 6-8 USA Today/Gallup poll put Bush's "unfavorable" rating at 55 percent.
- Cheney: An October 5-8 CBS News/New York Times poll put Cheney's "unfavorable" rating at 48 percent, compared with the 20 percent of respondents who had a "favorable" opinion of him.
- Rumsfeld: According to a September 22-24 CNN poll, 50 percent of respondents had an "unfavorable" opinion of Rumsfeld, compared with 35 percent who viewed him favorably. Moreover, the October 6-8 CNN poll found that a majority of respondents (52 percent) thought Rumsfeld should be fired as defense secretary, and 48 percent thought he should resign (compared to 41 percent who thought he should not).
- Hastert: The October 6-8 CNN poll found that 36 percent of respondents had an "unfavorable" opinion of Hastert, compared with 28 percent who viewed him favorably, 24 percent who had never heard of him, and 12 percent who were "unsure." The October 6-8 USA Today/Gallup poll also put Hastert's unfavorability rating at 36 percent, compared with 27 percent who viewed him favorably, 23 percent who had "no opinion," and 13 percent who had never heard of him.
- Frist: The October 6-8 CNN poll found that 36 percent of respondents had an "unfavorable" opinion of Frist, compared with 28 percent who viewed him favorably, 22 percent who had never heard of him, and 14 percent who were "unsure."
And she isn't even a "national politician" (yet?), as Barnes writes. If she is one, let's see the poll numbers for other House members... William Jefferson anybody? Out.
...your name is very appropriate by the way, Conman, what a perfect name, Nancy Pelosi is the leader of the minority party in the house she is a national politician and in a few weeks could very well be speaker of the house. Now on the other hand William Jefferson is not hardly known outside his district except to those who are aware of him having cash in his freezer.
It is quite obvious to most people with a minimum of critical thinking skills who is national and who is not.
It is also quite obvious why you would bring him up and not Ney, Cunningham, Foley or any of the other people currently under investigation who are members of the Republican party.
MMFA does enough pointing out of Republicans, but yes, those would do fine too. And thanks, my name is fitting in many ways. ;-)
It can't be done enough.
I love the smell of Republican Fear, it is though the Republican is so afraid of the world seeing what they really did to our nation that the mear possiblilty has them wetting themselves.
I would be happy, but the truth is going to be real ugly. It don't matter if the most sincere, honest, smartest bunch of politicians in history was 6 yrs in power of all branches of government that there would not be a incredible amount of graf, corruption, and incompetance. That the whole rease OVERSIGHT is so important.
The truth is that when Pelosi takes power, the Republicans will be fitting themselves for the latest in Federal Prisoner garb. The kind of crimes that have been done in our name, the absolute corrupt nature of this government is going to make us rethink our government, and the Republicans are going to seem like the wayward son who's mother can't believe her son could do such atrosities.
We as a nation will be in such a state that the apathy created by Nixon will pale compared to the anger that will be left behind by Bush.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
If this is the GOP game plan, and it obviously is, this is pretty sad. It seems to me that it is a little late in the game to first educate the general public on who Nancy Pelosi is (since the big thing in all the polls is the lage percentage who have never heard of her), and then convince them that she is the antichrist. If they were gonna play this card, they should have started a few weeks earlier.
We've been out there pumping the whole "Speaker Pelosi" thing for weeks now.
And we'll see how it worked come November 8th. MWahahahahaha!!!!
What a maroon! Your teams gonna win, I just know it!!
bush, cheney, rummie et al would be in jail. Republicons have been winning on the assumption that politics aren't fair. What was fair about the clinton fishing expedition? what was fair about the smearing of Max Celand by a draft dodger? or the swiftboating of John Kerry? oh the sweet unfairness of being caught in your own rotten web.
140 hours was spent in Congressional hearings to determine if Bill Clinton used his Christmas list to identify/solicit Democratic contributions.
14 hours was spent on torture at Abu Ghraib.
If Democrats win the House, at least this crap will end, and all the attacks (a la Tom "partisan witch hunt" DeLay) on Pelosi will be laughed at by reasonable people.
Check the laundry list of straw man arguments and insults before that!
(Democrats have) been obstructionist, anti-tax-cut, soft on terrorism, and generally obnoxious.
Obstructionist? Some of the ludicrous Republican bills, such as eliminating the inheritance tax, needed to be obstructed, so to that I say GOOD!
Anti-tax cut? For the rich and rich corporations, yes; for everyone else, tax cuts are fine.
Soft on terrorism? For being against torture and the eradication of habeas corpus, that makes them SANE.
Obnoxious? Barnes must have been looking into a TV monitor.
Now Barnes writes it in his column. It looks like Karl Rove must have faxed that one over to all of the troglodyte overseers in the media. By the way, they always say IF Nancy Pelosi becomes speaker, and now they say that she is already a national figure and that she is unpopular. So much for consistency with these people. They can't even keep their arguments straight. What idiots.
THANK YOU. njguy93@yahoo.com
Just makes up lies out of whole cloth, without even any regard to how ludicrous they are and tell them. Barnes isnt even making an attempt to fool the somewhat knowlegeable, just out and out lie to the gullible.
Apparently Fred Barnes slept through the 90's. The Republicans were obnoxious, mean-spirited, and wild-eyed in their orgasmic zeal to get Bill Clinton. We were dragged through the whole impeachment charade, and all the other clownish things the Republicans did, and that helped lead to how polarized the country is today, along with the Bush Administration and their strategy of injecting fear into the bloodstream of America.
THANK YOU. njguy93@yahoo.com
Whether Pelosi is popular or not, it's mostly irrelevant anyway. The Republican operatives and their talking points are trying to paint her as dangerously left wing, therefore hoping to scare voters casting ballots in their local House races away from the Democrat, for fear of "her" majority. Typical political gamesmanship that usually fails.
The fact is when people vote, they vote for the person running in their distict and give little, if any, thought to Pelosi or who will end up as the majority party in Congress. If someone finds Pelosi distasteful but love their local Democrat, that Democrat will probably get elected, regardless of party affiliation.
It's the close undecided races that, I guess, are being focused on - the 20 or so that could swing the House. I still doubt whether Pelosi will have an effect either way.
All politics are local, as someone once said.
own your lies on the Blitzer/Rice thread from Friday tommy? I doubt it. It may be old news to you tommy, but it shows what a dishonest person you are. why should anyone take anything you say seriously now?
i didn't see tommy's post on the blitzer/rice whatever...but tommy does make a great point in this post. Namely, the GOP's use of the politics of fear. Watch out for that bogeyman...but don't worry if you vote for tough guys like us we''ll take care of you...but if you vote for those wimps and immoral leftists you're gonna die and the whole country will go down the tubes. Be afraid, be very afraid. Oh, and when you're in the voting booth don't forget: "Boo".
i did see some of tommy's posts on iraq/blitzer/rice. they were bunk, and i was there denouncing them. nevertheless, people come with their own point of view, and whether we agree with them or not, and whether they are credible or not, they add to the discussion. personally, tommy is my favourite foil on this site. you can always count on him for a contrarian position, which i usually feel like rebutting. if it was only leftist sycophants on the site, i likely wouldn't post here.
and I'm not trying to tell tomnmy to shut up. I am going to keep calling him on his cr@p however. What tommy was doing on the aforementioned thread was more than honestly disagreeing, it was dishonest. he mis-represented the meaning of a quote he posted in order to make a point, and when he finally got cornered, he denied what he'd said in the first place and took his ball and went home. If he's going to behave like that, he should expect to get called on it. I enjoy arguing with tommy, when he's being honest.
Exactly what my post above has to do with anything I have written to the contrary on another thread?
I am responding to you since I am indifferent to Fatbob at this point. His endless and childish personal attacks are boring me. If he had more convictions in his opinions and facts, he wouldn't be so threatened by me and my opinions.
and this is sooooo mature. " I'm not talking to FatBob" You're funny tommy, even if you don't know it. but you're still a liar. You're still dishonest. and you're still a bush apologist.
That's interesting, Tommy.
Fatbob makes a perfectly legitimate complaint about your disinformation on Friday, and you claim he insulted you?
The problem was you not telling the truth, and when you were boxed into a corner, you simply stopped commenting. Fatbob points that out, and you claim he is doing something wrong and obnoxious.
Well, you did it first.
he'll make a resonable post now and then, even one's that you don't agree with (you in the generic sense, not you personally) but more often than not he hijacks threads with disengious word games and strawman arguments. Tommy is, in fact, the most polite troll you'll ever meet.
I've been hanging around this site for a few years now... you hit it on the head.
As is done with their war, the GOP has been "educating" thier faithful for weeks. The Hannities & Limbaughs have been priming their listeners of all the evil things Pelosi and Reed will do to their children once they "TAKE OVER THE WORLD".. (sound of bellowing laughter in the background)...
Right out of the pagebook. Predictable, juvinile and oh so GOP.
."But even Clinton thought there were wmd's in Iraq, which was the major justification for the invasion"
"I never said Clinton said for certain there were wmd's. I said, he said, he didn't know as they were unaccounted for" words have meaning tommy. even yours. * - fatbob / Friday October 13, 2006 05:29:58 PM
***********************************
This is what you lost sleep over your weekend over? Are you kidding me? How pitiful. There is nothing contradictory about my two statements at all, read them again if you need to. Just to clarify, Clinton thought there were wmd's, he was not certain, of course not, how could he be?
Don't waste my time with your silly indignation, find someone else.
Sorry, thread off topic but the other was archived.
first off, clinton never said he thought there were wmds, he said he didnt' know. you twisted his words to fit your agenda.
second off, you deny saying that you said that. that is what makes you a liar.
third off, like a typical republicon, when confronted with your own words, you whine.
what's next tommy, are you going to tell people that if they want to be friends with you they can't be friends with me?
Just own your dishonesty tommy, revel in it. it looks good on you.
Okay maybe Tommy said something that is argueable. Isn't that the point of DEBATES! I don't care who is right or wrong in the previous thread but to call Tommy a liar because he posted something you disagreed with is just stupid. If you go to other progressive blogs (TP, NewsHounds, etc) Tommy is much more intelligent and inciteful than the trolls who hang around there. Hey you should be thankful someone on the right actually cares what we have to say. The left talking to the right is one way we can bring together our heavily divided country.
Say anything that is arguable.
Clinton said that since we had not been able to verify the status of Iraq's WMD programs, we could not tell.
Clinton did not say what Tommy said he said.
Tommy got caught in a lie, trying to distort the facts.
hilarious!
How popular Pelosi is or isn't won't even come into people's minds while they go to the voting booths. They'll be thinking of the individual candidates.
I think that's exactly why Fox is playing up Pelosi the "unpopular national politician" though. They want their base to overlook that a name like Tom Delay or Mark Foley might be on their ballot as the Republican, and instead think of the "national picture". I think guys like Fred Barnes are scared by the polls, which show a lot of powerful Republican incumbents possibly losing their seats.
Hey Tommy;
The premise that politics is local is a political truth to be sure, but in our history when government has run amok as did Nixon, we get Jimmy Carter, a good man, honest politician, but to fair minded, committed to his calling to be understood, and followed by a nation of cynics.
The Bush Administrations and Republican Senate & Congress has run so far afoul that the resulting changes shall be much more pronounced, and hopefully we can parlay this into real election reform, that has the K-street crowd tossed out of politics.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
The "someone" who said that wasn't Newt Gingrich. If you were alive in 1994, you know House races aren't local.
Was Tip O'neill
Most people don't even know who their OWN congressperson is, because they don't give a crap. No one is going to vote for a Representative because Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader, might become Speakerof the House. Half of Americans have no idea who she is, and another quarter don't care, because she''s never been attached to a scandal that had any traction. I know, I was one of them only a few years ago.
but most of the time he just uses up a thread making baseless arguments that people have to rebut one by one and it is still never enough. When I start to see a thread going this way I just save time and skip past all the back and forth with Tom tom. You just can't put the dots close enough together to get this guy off his time wasting dime. If other people have the unmitigated patience to constantly rebut his mostly specious arguments, more power to them.
Barnes repeating talking points reflects poorly on his intellectual capacity. Obnoxious indeed.
Rather than wasting your time posting about not wanting to waste time posting about me..........well, don't you just look a little ridiculous now?
I dont see all the posts you have made in the past(as I began going to this site in July of this year), but most of your comments are well thought out and are not usually straw man tactics. I don't understand some people's attacks on you but some people don't like different view points. Most liberals(including me) are rational but some are just plain crazy.
Anywho back to the thread I agree Tommy, nobody in America is going to vote just because of Pelosi. I researched her on the web and still do not know much about her. The big deal SHOULD be the issues, not the people and I believe most Americans know that. Barnes, Hume, and others are definately barking the wrong tree if they think this tactic will work.
Looks like your fan club is up and running! Can't you just feel the love?
;-)
Some radicals are just to hateful of differing opinions they have to unjustifably attack others. FatBob, and LeatherFace(where did he go anyway?) are in my opinion are the worst offenders...
I appreciate your thoughtful discussion and your civil and gentlemanly approach. Many here would do well to follow your example, even myself from time to time.
LeatherHelmet is one thing... Fatbob is another. While Fatbob does use vitriol and rhetoric some of the time... he isn't quite as bad as LH.
You are missing a whole bunch of worse offenders. ;-)
Fatbob is no where near as bad as Leatherface, and Leather is nowhere near as moronic as S_Lamante, but people who do not engage in meaningful conversation do not have my respect, regardless of political affiliation...
Most often the posts of these people are only a sentence or two long so their handle is quickly noticed.
For those mentioned and a few others, when I see they are the authors, I simply skip their posts.
Maybe I should follow your example and not read the ridiculous posts! Do you skip mine?
If you do than I guess I am ridiculous ; )
Apparently the only person more unpopular than Nancy Pelosi.............is me.
No you and Pelosi are still more popular than Bush and Chaney. I am not quite sure this is a compliment...
Cheny probably leads the pack, Bush, Foley, I can think of lots of people more unpopular than you OR Pelosi
Sheesh... Tommy's no angel. He just toned down his bit a tad. I seem to remember a time when he destroyed an entire MMFA piece with his incessant needling. Back then, he was labeled a 'troll'. But, whatever...
..."a time when he would ROUTINELY destroy MMFA pieces with his incessant needling"...
Mostly because I didnt feel he needed it. Since you brought it up. I have seen Tommy be hardheaded and stubborn. I have been too. I have seen Tommy be unreasonable in his arguments. He has as far as I can tell always made arguments, not like a troll, not incitement without logic or merit. I think Tommy overall is reasonable, I mean we get trolls here like S Lamonte or tracker or a few others. They bash liberals with general baseless assertions and do a Micheal Weiner impersonation. I think we ought to encourage the conservatives that are usually reasonable here. I think they add to discourse. They give us a platform to expand on our views. Tommy, Bruce, Jeter, these are the guys we can talk too. Sure it can be frustrating but thats ok. Anyway, thats just how I see it.
My only point in the post you responded to is what I said. People like Darth Cheney are far more unpopular than Tommy OR Pelosi
And, I agree. No offense intended. Just that, I've seen these 'roll out the red carpet for Tommy' posts here and there... and, well, what can I say? He's gotten a lot better. But, there're a few posts today decimated by him and some other person filling up the thing with two word retorts... that ain't cool! Anyway... keep up the fight.
BTW: There's a SOLON lookalike...goes by SOION. Keep an eye out ;-)
Considering the audience Barnes is playing to, I would imagine if you polled FOX News viewers that they would overwhelmingly agree with his assessment of Democrats being hateful, obstructionist bigots.
From my perspective, seems to me that a bit of projection is going on here. Mind you, I still like to think that most Americans are reasonable people who favor civility and the rule of law..
Maybe I'm wrong? I hope not..
That's a pretty motley crew on that list of ratings for the leaders of the Republican party too.. whoo boy..
Spintronic,
I see you are doing your best to sound reasonable but your condescending and arrogant viewpoint comes through loud and clear.
First of all, where does Barnes assess any Democrats as being "hateful, obstructionist bigots"? It is pure projection on your part.
Secondly why would you say Fox viewers would overwhelming agree with that? What would lead you to state prejudiced?
Finally, to refer to the list above as, "That's a pretty motley crew on that list..." is a public display of disdain for those on the list. Not very civil if you ask me.
You see my friend, it is not Barnes, but you who is the one who is making bigotted and uncivil statements.
It may be a bit of an overstatement but Barnes DID say:
They've been obstructionist, anti-tax-cut, soft on terrorism, and generally obnoxious.
Not that far away, and as for Fox viewers agreeing, I took that as a remark on the partisanship. I mean realy exactly what other reason than rabid partishanship could possibly explain being a Faux news viewer?
vapididty, vacuousness, idiocy, immense gullibility, bigotry, insecurity, or just plain dumb-assedness?
...to have a Congress that will, among other things, adequately fund stem cell research.
That'll speed the day that they'll find a cure for whatever it is that causes you to twitch so.
I don't know, I always feel she is one step from hysteria when she speaks..... Drives me nuts to listen to her.
Why is Pelosi considered so crazy? I will admit I don't know much about her but I just don't see her as being as radical as the right has pictured her is as. Is she crazy because she supports gay marriage? Even if you can convince me gay marriage is wrong (which I highly doubt) their other politicians who support it. To name a few; Feingold, and Chafee...
I meant what I said. " She always sounds on the edge of Hysteria".... That is it.
When I listen to a politician, I like a calm, concise leader.
Why do you bring gay marriage into it as if that is the reason I do not like her.
I could not give a rats as@ about gay marriage either way. Won't vote for it, or against it.
It just always seems like those who dislike Pelosi are the anti-gay crowd. i was a bit presumption and I apologize for that. I have never heard her speak and I will take your word that she is crazy. Hopefully she is not as loony as Robertson, Dobson, etc....
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of that bunch have long ago cornered the hysteria market. I live in Texas and I listening to Bush is pretty close to torture for me.
They're definitely behind the curve when it comes to pushing the "Nancy Pelosi is evil" TP . . . by rights they should have started this MONTHS ago, but I guess they were still stuck on blaming Bill Clinton for the Iraq war, Katrina, N. Korea, and Mark Foley . . .
You're slipping, Karl . . .
Just say that over and over again on mainstream news channels and after a few months most Republicans won't like Nancy Pelosi.
The after that, change it to, "People hate Nancy Pelosi." It's that easy. Repeat process.
there are thousands and thousands of voters that just learned Nancy Pelosi's for the first time this week and the only thing that they have heard about her is that she is "unpopular."
If someone is just now learning who Nancy elosi is, they will have forgotten who she is by the time they wake up tomorrow.
Aren't these the same people who said Hillary Clinton would "never be elected" because "nobody likes her" ?
As for Nancy Pelosi, I think the fear here is, that as speaker, there will be a lot of investigations which will uncover things the GOP doesn't want the public to find out, and the consevative's Empire of Image will be exposed as a fraud.
(I'm referring of course to the current "conservative" mutation, not traditional conservatives)
...of various politicians.
This is the kind of article we need Media Matters for.
Before Media Matter, Fred Barnes could have gotten away with this nonsense.
If the repubicans maintain control of the House, the beloved Denny Hastert will continue to be speaker (provided he isn't removed because of Foleygate). Everyone would have to agree that "coach" is of the great figures in contemporary American politics and vastly more popular than Nancy Pelosi ever could be. One of Coach's legislative feats was to secure a nice federal highway bordering on property that he owns, thus enriching him by $7,000,000.