Without Obama, Barnicle and Scarborough baselessly claim, Dems "are weaker" than Republicans
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
SUMMARY: Mike Barnicle and Joe Scarborough said that -- if, inexplicably, one doesn't consider President Obama -- Democrats are "weaker than the Republicans." In fact, recent polling on favorable/approval ratings of members of Congress show congressional Democrats with higher favorable/approval ratings than congressional Republicans.
During the May 14 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, political analyst Mike Barnicle stated that the Democrats, without President Obama, are "weaker than the Republicans." Host Joe Scarborough agreed, saying, "They are weaker than the Republican Party, but ... [t]here's a superstar of a politician running their party." However, according to PollingReport.com, which compiles survey data from national polling organizations, congressional Democrats have higher favorable/approval ratings and lower unfavorable/disapproval ratings than congressional Republicans in every recent survey conducted by Daily Kos/Research 2000, Quinnipiac University, ABC News/Washington Post, Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, USA Today/Gallup, and CBS News.
Moreover, CNN/Opinion Research Corporation and Pew Research Center polls, which ask about approval of congressional Democratic and Republican "leaders," show that congressional Democratic leaders have higher approval and lower disapproval ratings than Republican leaders. Also, recent Daily Kos/Research 2000 and Newsweek polls show that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) received higher approval ratings than House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) received equal or higher approval ratings than Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
From the May 14 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:
SCARBOROUGH: Everybody always talks about how weak the Republican Party is -- take Barack Obama away from the Democratic Party and who do you have? Nancy Pelosi --
BRZEZINSKI: Right.
SCARBOROUGH: -- Harry Reid, Henry Waxman, Barney Frank.
BARNICLE: They're weaker.
BRZEZINSKI: Good point.
SCARBOROUGH: They are --
BARNICLE: They're weaker than the Republicans without the president.
SCARBOROUGH: -- weaker than the Republican Party, but they have got --
BRZEZINSKI: A good leader.
SCARBOROUGH: There's a superstar of a politician running their party.
"The public" has NOT had "enough" of Reid and Pelosi. The RIGHT has had enough of them, and they've undergone a several year long media campaign to smear them and misinform the public. Every single issue the Rigt complains about with them has turned out to be total BS. What's more, they liberals that criticise them do so because we're sick of how ofen they cave in for the Republicans!
So try preaching that stuff to the choir. We're not singing that tune over here!
Sexual harassers {Bill"loofah" O'Reilly, David "diapers" Vitter, Mark "I text pages" Foley, Larry "wide stance" Craig, etc.}
Just look at the amazing faces the Republican can trot out---a bitter lying former VP, a washed up former speaker, a druggie loon, a cadre of TV twits, a not ready for prime time Governor along with a past her time Governor, a bushel of teabagging opportunists, a 9/11 ranting ex-mayor and just for good measure... another Bush.
"They engender no affection from anyone outside of hardline Democrats"
Yeah . . . that MUST explain why NO incumbent Dem lost a congressional seat -- and NO GOP up for reelection won -- in the '06 midterms . . .
Plus, this analogy stinks. That's like saying without Lebron James, the Cavs are weaker than the Hawks. That might be true, but Lebron James is still there. LIkewise, Obama is on the team, so you have to contend with him, the superstar.
And lastly, Right On, don't worry about any of us "diluting" ourselves, some of us might be delusional, but we won't be watered down ;).
Oh, there's Colin Powell and Tom Ridge, both of whom have wives who want to keep their husbands out of politics. And if I thought about it for a couple of weeks, I might think of a equally promising Democrat.
But Ron Paul's son appeared tonight on Rachel Maddow. He's as cute as a four-year-old, seems to be pleasant enough, and he's proposing a formula for the GOP that looks like a winner: combine the respect for the individual that the Democrats sorta plays at, with the respect for the individual who is engaged in business that the GOP sorta plays at, only be serious about both.
Ron Paul comes across as a wacko, and as a racist - but his son does not. He's trying for the Kentucky Senate in 2010 as a Republican, but if the GOP remains in disarray, I could see them coalescing around the younger Paul as their own Messiah, running him for the White House in 2012. Jettison all the optional stuff, just concentrate on the Bill of Rights, and respect for the individual. Sounds like a plan.
In the last month, Joe Scarborough has started sounding more like a human being, and less like a GOP talking-points-bot. You know, the GOP used to be a party worthy of respect, back when Ike was in office. It's be nice to see them rehabilitate themselves. And maybe, miracle of miracles, the Democrats might rehabilitate themselves, too.
I'd like to see the Republicans swing more toward Libertarianism, myself. I might even be persuaded to vote for them once in a while. However, unless they can unload the Evangelical nutbags that make up the majority of their base, it'll never happen.
This comparison so s dumbfoundingly inane.
This is like saying, Hey, this dung heap (Reid)does not stink any worse that this rotting carcass (McConnell).The dung heap might even have fewer maggots.
One could apply this same analogy to Barnicle and Scarborough, MSNBC's Twittle Dumb and Twittle Dumber
They are weak.
Tell me how you feel, back it up with facts, and then lets debate.
I believe that many Democrats knew about torture, knew about the lies that led to the Iraq War, knew about the excesses in the financial industry that led to the meltdown, etc. Both parties S**K.
Over the years I have changed from opposed term limits to now being in favor of them and the reason is simple. The political system, by its very nature, attracts many of the worst people in society. They are power hungry, greedy and lacking in honesty and/or integrity. The longer they are in power, the more corrupted they become. I have experienced these people myself in local politics, so imagine how bad it is at the national level; the major leagues, so to speak, of crap.
This county is in a mess right now, and while I blame the Republicans much more than the Democrats, both have blood on their hands.
"Let's agree on some facts. (I will now present opinions, metaphors, and my own beliefs in lieu of facts.) Since it's obvious that Republicans stink, let's run 'both parties stink' up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes. I would like to change the constitution so that Americans can't have the representatives they would prefer to elect. This is based on my personal opinions of local government, which are clearly the truth about national government. Again, I've given up on defending Republicans, so please believe me when I say Democrats are almost as bad."