Hatch 45; Pawlenty 39; Hutchinson 9

October 30th, 2006 – 10:57 PM by Eric Black

The Center for the Study of Politics and Governance, which is part of the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey Institute, has a new poll out on the Guv race, and it’s full of bad news for Republican incumbent Tim Pawlenty.

The Humphrey poll finds DFL Attorney General Mike Hatch leading by 45-39 percent, with Independence-ite Peter Hutchinson at nine percent and seven percent undecided.

The survey of 663 likely voters was conducted October 23-28, and has a 3.8 margin of error.

The full writeup, which should be on the CSPG’s website tomorrow, finds that Hatch has gained ground since September, fewer voters identify themselves as Republicans, fewer approve of Pawlenty’s performance, fewer think the state is on the right track. Even on personal characteristics, which was supposed to be where the likeable Pawlenty would shine, respondents prefer Hatch.

Here’s another version of the poll story, by my esteemed collegue Conrad Defiebre.

87 Responses to "Hatch 45; Pawlenty 39; Hutchinson 9"

Team Ramrod says:

October 30th, 2006 at 10:59 pm

mn poll, humphrey institute poll- its all the same bs. i will take any wager on the guv race.

Mike Grimes says:

October 30th, 2006 at 11:01 pm

Looks like they oversampled Democrats to me. Pawlenty is gonna win this race by 5%. The people of Minnesota don’t put up with tax and lie candidates like Mike Hatch.

Mike Grimes says:

October 30th, 2006 at 11:03 pm

Hmm then again Pawlenty is a tax and lie candidate too, is there still time for the only honest candidate in the race?

JackinHack says:

October 30th, 2006 at 11:29 pm

Opps. Another poll. Another attack on the results. Goodbye Tim. Goodbye Michelle. Goodbye Mark. Those go negative ads from the start of the general campaign are really paying off.

Phoenix Woman says:

October 30th, 2006 at 11:41 pm

This is what happens when the Fundies nationwide find out they’ve been screwed. First the Foley scandal, which horrified the evangelicals; then the David Kuo revelations. They were already antsy about Iraq, especially as more of them were likely to have sons and daughters fighting there than almost any other group of white people; the Foley and Kuo scandals were the last straws for them.

Phoenix Woman says:

October 30th, 2006 at 11:45 pm

The deal is that the alliance between the white evangelicals and the GOP has taken a hard, hard hit. This is important because the Fundies are the volunteers on which the GOP’s GOTV edifice is built. They are the door-knockers, lit-droppers, phone-bankers, and they do it for free and, up until now, very enthusiastically.

But simmering under the enthusiastic surface were concerns about Iraq and a host of other issues. The Foley and Kuo scandals popped the lid off the pressure cooker and the whole mess is boiling over.

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 12:23 am

I know the 6th district has been getting most of the attention…but check this out:

http://www.cookpolitical.com/

CD1 just changed from lean Republican to toss up. Gutknecht has handily won this district race after race since 94. Looks like Walz is really giving him a run for his money.

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 12:28 am

A couple new polls out tonight too:

Bachmann: 48
Wetterling: 47

Gutknecht: 50
Walz: 47

http://constituentdynamics.com/mw/race-summary

Hatch:46
Pawlenty:45

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-elections06.html

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 12:29 am

Doh! Stuck in moderation…

A couple new polls out tonight too:

Bachmann: 48
Wetterling: 47

Gutknecht: 50
Walz: 47

Hatch:46
Pawlenty:45

Please... says:

October 31st, 2006 at 1:16 am

Team Rammstein: The poll’s not even published and your insightful smear begins. Pawlenty’s campaign manager accepts this is a single digit, competitive race while airing not a word about the messenger.

Sure would be nice if you’d remove that brownshirt, set down the truncheon on the nightstand next to the single bed, and take a cue from Gov. Congeniality by playing nice (mostly).

MJ says:

October 31st, 2006 at 8:22 am

“fewer voters identify themselves as Republicans, fewer approve of Pawlenty’s performance, fewer think the state is on the right track”

All add up to a huge oversampling of democrats…these liberals are truly shameless.

Isn’t this the same poll that had Roger Moe winning by 5 in 2002?

MJ says:

October 31st, 2006 at 8:28 am

If you look at the crosstabs, the DFL-GOP breakdown was 48-37. What a joke. There isn’t any reasonable political observer out there who believes Minnesota is an 11 point DFL state.

Phoenix Woman says:

October 31st, 2006 at 8:45 am

Hey, if the Democrats wind up sweeping all the state races too, will all the white-flighters who moved here to avoid seeing black people (and/or paying for their end of the social contract) wind up moving again?

Ed E says:

October 31st, 2006 at 8:46 am

I recently received a Gutknecht ad that said Tim Walz doesn’t agree that traditional marriage is the foundation of our families and society. Why did they make this claim you might ask? Because Walz believes everyone deserves the same rights and protection regardless of their orientation. It’s appalling that the conservatives think they can make these ridiculous comments.

Oh no, watch out, if we allow gay marriage no heterosexuals will ever want to get married again! The world will fall apart! People will start marrying pets and animals! Children will have no father or mother (although they’ll have 2 caring parents, which ~30% of our children don’t have). The ridiculous claims and fears go on and on. Get over it. These are supposed to be the same people who claim they love God, the same God who loves ALL of his people.

Phoenix Woman says:

October 31st, 2006 at 8:49 am

Poor MJ. Despite the constant waves of hate-radio propaganda and FOX News and its slavish imitators both broadcast and cable, people in Minnesota realize that the yellow stuff Bush trickles down on us really isn’t rain, no matter how often or loudly Hugh Hewitt says it is.

Phoenix Woman says:

October 31st, 2006 at 8:56 am

Ed E. — Sounds like you experienced Karl Rove’s patented voter-targeting system, as tailored to MN-01. Whoever was behind the mailing probably figured that you must be a churchgoer, and that since you were a churchgoer, you stood up and cheered when Matthew Shepard was beaten to death; ergo, an antigay pamphlet wound up in your mailbox. But this is too little, too late; the Foley and Kuo scandals turned off the Fundies, and the rest of us are growing more accepting of gays, so this isn’t going to help the Republicans as much as they’d like. If at all.

Hey now says:

October 31st, 2006 at 9:32 am

Hey Steve B-
I can make up poll numbers and not give a source too!

Hatch 2%
Pawlenty 1%
Hutchinson 2%
Someone talking about issues 95%

Wow! Look at that, it’s a blowout.

Les says:

October 31st, 2006 at 9:45 am

Hmmmmmm.

When it was Bachman 49, Weterrling 43, the Lunatic Lefties were screaming WRONG, now it’s the other way around, (albeit in a different race) and they’re screaming TOLD YA. The Right Wingers as just as bad.

When are you all going to remember the only “poll” that counts is the one on the 7th.

P.W. You seem quick to label everyone with your prejudged derogatory names, You sure your really one of them “inclusive” democrats?

Les says:

October 31st, 2006 at 9:47 am

Also, P.W. Why have you left out the Harry Ried scandal… Were you at the christmas party or something?

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 9:48 am

The links are still stuck in moderation. So, I’ll try again…
Bachmann: 48
Wetterling: 47

Gutknecht: 50
Walz: 47

http://constituentdynamics.com/mw/race-summary

CG says:

October 31st, 2006 at 10:12 am

Anyone remember 1994 Republican promises??

REPUBLICAN CONTRACT WITH AMERICA
As Republican Members of the House of Representatives and as citizens seeking to join that body we propose not just to change its policies, but even more important, to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives.

That is why, in this era of official evasion and posturing, we offer instead a detailed agenda for national renewal, a written commitment with no fine print.

This year’s election offers the chance, after four decades of one-party control, to bring to the House a new majority that will transform the way Congress works. That historic change would be the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public’s money. It can be the beginning of a Congress that respects the values and shares the faith of the American family.

Like Lincoln, our first Republican president, we intend to act “with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right.” To restore accountability to Congress. To end its cycle of scandal and disgrace. To make us all proud again of the way free people govern themselves.

On the first day of the 104th Congress, the new Republican majority will immediately pass the following major reforms, aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the American people in their government:

* FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress;
* SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
* THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
* FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs;
* FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
* SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public;
* SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
* EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.

Enough said. You lie, you cheat, you bring scandal into this congress and you are to be held accountable – which for all intents and purpose means FIRED. Americans are tired of the scandal and lies. The Republicans breached their own contract that they established over a decade ago. Many of them no longer deserve to serve. Accountability…

Gary DeCarlo says:

October 31st, 2006 at 10:19 am

Na na na na,
na na na na,
hey hey hey,
goodbye!

tom k says:

October 31st, 2006 at 10:20 am

The Wall Street Journal Zogby poll has the Guv race at one point. Basically tied.

Also, did anyone notice that Wall Street Journal Zogby has Kennedy only down 7pts. Could his stratagy of embracing the war and not running from it be working?

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-elections06.html

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 10:23 am

Here’s another bad sign for Gutknecht down in the 1st. Last week, first lady Laura Bush made a visit for a rally. According to the local Fox affiliate, “she spoke at a rally before several hundred people in Rochester this afternoon.”

http://www.fox47kxlt.com/news/index.html

Yesterday, Obama visted to do the same. From today’s local paper: “Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois stumped in Rochester on Monday for DFL Senate candidate Amy Klobuchar and congressional candidate Tim Walz before a sign-waving, cheering throng estimated at 3,000 people.”

http://news.postbulletin.com/newsmanager/templates/localnews_story.asp?a=273320

Personally, I would think the first lady and a senator from another state who might run for president should have about the same drawing power. Several hundred versus several thousand?!?

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 10:25 am

Here’s another bad sign for Gutknecht down in the 1st. Last week, first lady Laura Bush made a visit for a rally. According to the local Fox affiliate, “she spoke at a rally before several hundred people in Rochester this afternoon.”

Yesterday, Obama visted to do the same. From today’s local paper: “Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois stumped in Rochester on Monday for DFL Senate candidate Amy Klobuchar and congressional candidate Tim Walz before a sign-waving, cheering throng estimated at 3,000 people.”

Personally, I would think the first lady and a senator from another state who might run for president should have about the same drawing power. Several hundred versus several thousand?!?

bsimon says:

October 31st, 2006 at 10:27 am

Interesting comment in the article that EB links to in the original post. The quote is from Lawrence Jacobs, of the Humphrey Institute.

“”The most interesting part of this survey is the erosion of the Republican ‘name brand,’ ” he said. “Rather than switching to Democrats, these Republicans appear to be gravitating toward thinking of themselves as independents.”"

Of course, it still remains to be seen whether this holds true at election time, but its something I’ve suspected for a while now. That being: the Republicans have moved away from their traditional core values and have let fringe elements of the party take too much control. Thus they’re losing the moderates. The DFL/Dems are gravitating to the center & attracting these moderates.

bsimon says:

October 31st, 2006 at 10:33 am

tom k, thanks for linking to the wsj poll. What is interesting about the Pawlenty numbers there (down 1.4% behind Hatch) is that they formerly had the race a tie. So WSJ/Zogby is also showing a trend of support for Hatch increasing.

Team Ramrod says:

October 31st, 2006 at 11:06 am

Steve B says: Personally, I would think the first lady and a senator from another state who might run for president should have about the same drawing power. Whhhaaatttt? why would a first lady have the same draw of a up and coming senator? now who is drawing for straws?

also PLEASE…SAYS- lets see if we can figure out who you really are, the only time you ever post is to something i say. i wonder if you are one of the usual posters but do not have the spine to attach your usual name. have some guts- stand up for yourself or dont bother posting. its not like anyone can find you.

Dora says:

October 31st, 2006 at 12:19 pm

If the First Lady isn’t a big draw for Republicans then something is seriously wrong. The Humphrey poll saying that people calling themselves Republican is falling is right in line with this observation. Get yourself another straw ramrod.

Ted says:

October 31st, 2006 at 1:44 pm

Are we really talking about the WSJ/Zogby interactive polls?

Ed E says:

October 31st, 2006 at 1:46 pm

Sorry for straying from the topic, but I this was too good to pass up. Yesterday Bush took aim at the democrats by claiming that they have no plan for winning in Iraq. Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. You would think the person behind the war would have a plan, but I guess we shouldn’t make assumptions.

Les says:

October 31st, 2006 at 2:24 pm

Ed;

Truth is, Bush has a plan, you just dont like it.

I would like to see one Dem plan, of any kind, rather than hear all this Bush Bashing. I hear about all these “bring the troops home by Thanksgiving” but no definition of what the criteria for bringing them home is.

On the other hand, I guess throwing your hands up in the air and yelling “I ant gonna play no more” is actually one type of plan.

Ed E says:

October 31st, 2006 at 2:30 pm

Les – It’s not that I don’t like it. He hasn’t shown me what it is yet. What is Bush’s plan? I can’t wait to hear it. He keeps talking about succeeding/winning in Iraq. What is the plan for making it happen and why didn’t it exist before the war started?

Les says:

October 31st, 2006 at 2:45 pm

Ed;
You should watch the news once and awhile:

Plan:

-Assist Iraq in developing a national constitution (done)

-Assist Iraq in conduction elections.(done)

-Continued support of the Iraqi police and army until they are able to assume security operations, then reduce US armed forces. (underway)

-Continued assistance in rebuilding Iraqi infrastrucure. (underway)

Now, that the plan, always has been. Unfortunately, it isnt going forward as rapidly as ANYONE wants.

your favored Pol’s alternative is to just throw up their hands and walk away.

Now, it’s your turn, what’s the dem plan, if not if I stated.

Les says:

October 31st, 2006 at 2:46 pm

Last line shoud read “if not as I stated”

JackinHack says:

October 31st, 2006 at 3:00 pm

If the weather on election day is like today, it will be interesting to see how the Fundies in the 6th District are in getting out the vote after all these scandals and the crappy campaign by the Republicans. They have to be disillusioned and it may be a cold day in hell for them next Tuesday.

Please... says:

October 31st, 2006 at 3:07 pm

Team Reichstag says “…i wonder if you are one of the usual posters but do not have the spine to attach your usual name.”

A quick search of white pages and google shows no listing for a “Team Ramrod” nor any configuaration thereof. Curiously, one finds “Team Ramrod” in Merriam Webster’s list of synonyms to “machiavellian” as well as the fifth most common definition for “hypocrite.”

CG says:

October 31st, 2006 at 3:27 pm

Les,
Perhaps it is you who has not been up to date with everything that has transpired over the past three years. Perhaps this administration has “accomplished” a few things since invading Iraq… let me rephrase that…. this administration has done very few POSITIVE things since invading Iraq. Yes, one could argue that the Iraqi constitution and elections were positive things that have happened since then – even though they have created their own sectarian problems. But let’s take a look at your “underways” you have listed….

“Continued support of the Iraqi police… (etc, etc, etc.) – there are so many problems with that statement. HOW is this administration “supporting” the Iraqi police and army? Is it supporting them when thousands of them don’t get paid when they are supposed to? Does the administration then also support the internal sectarian feuding within the police – Kurds won’t protect Suni areas and visa versa? What is Bush’s plan of “supporting?”

“Continued assistance in rebuilding Iraq” – this statement couldn’t be any more damning to Bush’s argument nor any other person who says that this is a good plan. Considering that BILLIONS of dollars have gone into the reconstruction of Iraq and there are still major regions that do not have electricity or water is pretty bad. Let me just also mention the few billion dollars that have disappeared that were supposed to go into the reconstruction. The outrageous price gouging and contracting that is going on from Halliburton et al is just atrocious. Roosevelt himself said that war profiteering is a treasonous act. Cronyism is NOT an effective way to rebuild a war torn nation. Iraq’s reconstruction is so tainted right now there is one thing Bush has said that is correct – “It will be up to future President’s to finish the job in Iraq.” The key word there is Presidents… plural. It is so bad there right now that it will take more than one term to finish the job. Thanks a lot.

Lastly – how can you have confidence in this plan or in this man when he is such a liar and (dare I say) a flip-flopper?! He retracts his “stay the course” and says that he NEVER said nor the policy ever was “stay the course.” This could not be any farther from the truth. There are countless interviews, press conferences, and rallies where he uses the term “stay the course.” Lying is not an effective plan to get out of Iraq. Oh and when he says they are constantly changing tactics… does that mean he is not following your bullet points, Les or is he just blowin’ more smoke?

The dems have different angles to take on changing things in Iraq. Just when they want to talk about it they are said as being cut and runn and everything falls upon deaf ears…. That’s a load of bs and all I will say about that.

Sorry for the long post everyone. But I’m tired of people who support Bush and support this war say that there is a plan and that it is working…..

Les says:

October 31st, 2006 at 3:35 pm

CG:

You prove my point. You rant against a plan, you just dont like it. It’s possiible it isnt even the best plan.

But as always, from Kerry via Clinton and on down… You offer no alternatives at all. Not a one, other than “cut and run”

When are you all gonna realize that vitrolic objecting to the plan of another is not in itself a plan.

So my question remains, what is the Dem’s plan? You say everyone cuts them off, well, no one’s in the way of your keyboard at the moment, and I dont think the moderator will object to you offering your chosen party’s plan, so fire away.

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 3:53 pm

The car has already left the cliff with the President and Vice President up front with the Democrats in the back seat. While the Democrats are busy pointing out that we’ve left the road, the Republicans yell back at them if they don’t offer any better ideas.

CG says:

October 31st, 2006 at 3:56 pm

It’s not about not liking it. It’s that it is majorly flawed. Would you want to go along with a plan that is majorly flawed. Hey Les, I’m gonna rebuild your house for you that I just bombed the heck out of…. but I’m going to put the front door on the roof and only let you have enough electricity to run one light bulb. Oh and we built a really big moat around filled with alligators that you need to figure out how to cross. Now I know it’s a pretty ass-backwards plan. But don’t say you don’t like it….

Here are a few sites to go visit. All of these are some form of alternative plan to the war in Iraq. If YOU really want to learn about them, you can read them in their entirety. I won’t narrow them down to a few talking points to simplify it for you.

http://www.house.gov/list/press/pa12_murtha/pr051117iraq.html
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=989
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcIeqTt6Eic

Some other things I’ve heard are actually promoting the lives of the Iraqi people. Example – give them electricity and water. Let the reconstruction jobs fall on them – have an American overseer but let the Iraqi’s do the building. A ton of jobs are going to people from India and Sri Lanka. Why? Perhaps if you give them the essentials in life such as electricity and water and give them some pride in rebuilding their own country, perhaps that will stem some of the violence over there. Then maybe they will stop hating us and wanting our troops to leave (83% want us out of there right now). Stop the water boarding and torturing in that country and in other places done by our own men and women… that might help breed people that don’t hate us too. Get rid of the corruption in the rebuilding. Put competent peopole over there who knows a little something about reconstructing a country. Not some guy who’s biggest point on his resume is building a shelter for women who are pregnant – that is a wonderful thing he did, but in no way has anything to do with rebuilding a country or organzing hospitals. Redeploy troops effectively. Fire Rummy… blah blah blah. I don’t see how any of these are “cut and running.” They are just a different way of approaching the insurgency and taking care of our men and women over there and getting them home safe as soon as possible. If you like the current plan so much why don’t you sign yourself up?

Les says:

October 31st, 2006 at 4:00 pm

Steve;

LOL, Not a bad analogy.

I’d modify in this way, while the car’s on the way down, Bush says deploy the parachute our the right hand window, and the Dem’s proptly close all the right hand windows ’cause it was Bush’s idea in the first place, and they are sure the parachute has holes in it cause it was bought from Haliburton.

Their obstructionism doesnt slow the car’s decent, and no alternatives are offered.

CG says:

October 31st, 2006 at 4:02 pm

Les,

I’ve left a comment but it is currently being “moderated” So it will show up shortly.

Les says:

October 31st, 2006 at 4:04 pm

CG;

OK, but I gotta run, So I’ll read it tomorrow.

bsimon says:

October 31st, 2006 at 4:13 pm

Les, while agree that “vitriolic objecting to the plan of another is not in itself a plan,” it is untrue that Dems have not offered alternatives. Sen Biden has, for some months now, been promoting a ‘partition’ plan. Various other Democrats have suggested different timetables for withdrawl, which the Bush team chose to characterize as ‘cut and run.’ Ironically, last week the President suggested that we might need to look into establishing some timelines, to which the Iraqi Prime Minister has not responded positively.

The DFL candidate for the Senate has suggested that we need to engage in more diplomacy in order to stabilize Iraq enough that we can bring our troops home. Her opponent unhelpfully ridiculed the idea as ‘negotiating with people that are trying to kill you’ and instead insists on staying the course, rather than ‘cutting and running.’

The biggest problem in Iraq right now is the sectarian violence. Our military is not going to be able to police the country to a degree that will disrupt that violence; instead, we need to get the Sunni & Shiite leadership talking to each other, rather than trying to kill each other. This involves diplomacy, a controversial technique once considered to be much in fashion by such notable Americans as Teddy Roosevelt and Henry Kissinger (both of whom won Nobel Peace Prizes for their efforts). It may be time for this administration to ‘go retro’ and try some techniques that worked for us in the past.

CG says:

October 31st, 2006 at 4:16 pm

Thank you bsimon for articlating better some of what I was trying to get at. Hence why I’m not personally in politics!

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 4:25 pm

I was thinking the cliff was the violence between the Shiites and Sunnis. The problem has only recently been publically recognized by the administration and I haven’t heard any parachutes to speak of beyond ‘we’re working on it.’ While Maliki was supposed to be the solution to the problem, the news of the last several weeks would suggest otherwise.

Dora says:

October 31st, 2006 at 5:43 pm

The Republican meme that the Democrats don’t have a plan is ludicrous as bsimon points out and CG provides links that show otherwise. It’s a Republican talking point that’s repeated even when evidence proves otherwise.

As for Les’s point about the Iraqi police, there was an article in WAPO just yesterday about this. http://tinyurl.com/vuvyj A quote: The American soldiers and civilians who train the Iraqis are constantly on guard against the possibility that the police might turn against them. Even in the police headquarters for all of western Baghdad, one of the safest police buildings in the capital, the training team will not remove their body armor or helmets. An armed soldier is assigned to protect each trainer.

“I wouldn’t let half of them feed my dog,” 1st Lt. Floyd D. Estes Jr., a former head of the police transition team, said of the Iraqi police. “I just don’t trust them.”

Jon Moore, the deputy team chief, said: “We don’t know who the hell we’re teaching: Are they police or are they militia?” This is clearly not working.

As far as the progress in rebuilding the infrastructure, that is a failed plan as well. Read this from June, http://tinyurl.com/u7oor and you’ll see the problems. At the end they say that building up the Iraqi police force should help well, as it says above, that’s failed too. And it was just recently that WAPO had a story about the disaster of the police academy that is going to have to be torn down b/c it was so bad.

Yet, this is the tripe that Bush’s supporters point to as a plan. A failed plan is not a plan either.

Mark says:

October 31st, 2006 at 6:01 pm

The Iraqis are getting electricity and water. All of the material aspects in the country meet or beat prewar levels, including electicity production.

The claims that we are NOT WORKING on having the Sunnis and Shiites talk to each other are bogus. They are. The fact is it is a slow and complicated process.

Again, the most obvious comparison to the Iraq rebuilding and occupation is Europe after WWII. After the defeat of Germany Europe was a disaster. The level of sectarian violence in post war Europe was incredible. Civil war and political strife were problems in the entire region. There were civil wars in Greece and Yugoslavia, and rampant repressions in Eastern Europe and many western states.

To top it off, the amount of economic devastation was incredible. The entire transportation network of Europe had been disrupted. One bridge remained over the Rhine river for example. The official daily ration for almost every country in Europe for late 1945-1946 was less than 800 calories. In Holland more than 15,000 people starved to death in the winter of 1945.

The fact is, in Iraq, we are “WORKING ON IT”. Any other claims are ridiculous and politically motivated. If the United States has the will there will be a successful outcome. Unfortunately, the country is being influenced by the terroristic violence of dead enders.

The only way to defeat the US is through propagandistic methods. The US goals in Iraq cannot be defeated politically or militarily. Think about that for a second. If the US and the govenrment it backs in Iraq is so unpopular and the mission such a failure, why don’t the opponents of the current Iraq administration simply defeat it politically.

It cannot. The only possible path to victroy is to create a propaganda war that uses extreme violence directed at innocent people in the hopes that this will influence the wavering American opposition, who are very suseptible to this sort of attack. The Democrats and their followers are weak minded, and wanted to cut and run from the very beginning.

Dora says:

October 31st, 2006 at 6:27 pm

Mark says: The Iraqis are getting electricity and water. All of the material aspects in the country meet or beat prewar levels, including electicity production.

You are so wrong on that point. The Council on Foreign Relations had a report out in June that shows otherwise. In fact I have a post ‘awaiting moderation’ with the link to it. Let’s see a link that backs up your claims?

Your comparisons to WWII have been throughly debunked by other posters yet you persist with the same bogus claims.

The Bush policies in Iraq have failed. We have spent billions and billions are unaccounted for and all of the reasons Bush I said for not going into Baghdad have proved correct. Iraq is in a Civil War, October has been the 4th deadliest month for our troops since the war began. Continuing Bush’s failed policies will not lead to a “successful outcome”.

The LA Times has an article out today saying that a growing number of military officers want to set deadlines. From the article: For months, the Bush administration has been politely prodding the Iraqis on political and security reforms including the sharing of oil revenue, a crackdown on Shiite militias and constitutional changes. The discussions so far have yielded little, prompting experts to question whether the Iraqi government will ever compromise if there is no penalty for failing to make hard choices.

Wake up Mark. The Iraq War is a fiasco and the Republicans are the ones who have made it so. That’s why Batiste and the other generals who have spoken out have said they will now vote for Democrats. They no longer have any trust in the Republican leadership.

Dora says:

October 31st, 2006 at 6:34 pm

Let’s see if this works.

Council on Foreign Relations

Team Ramrod says:

October 31st, 2006 at 8:51 pm

Please… says:
A quick search of white pages and google shows no listing for a “Team Ramrod” nor any configuaration thereof. Curiously, one finds “Team Ramrod” in Merriam Webster’s list of synonyms to “machiavellian” as well as the fifth most common definition for “hypocrite.”

so you are a liar as much as a friggin moron- there are 221,000 hits for team ramrod on google alone. why dont you try to post something constructive rather than just watching me- that is why i know you are a spineless dope- probably mds.

Steve B says:

October 31st, 2006 at 10:29 pm

Mark says:
“If the US and the govenrment it backs in Iraq is so unpopular and the mission such a failure, why don’t the opponents of the current Iraq administration simply defeat it politically.”

1-As I pointed out last week to you (confirmation bias), Maliki is also taking actions that support the opposition to a stabil Iraq.

2-Maliki is governing to the majority side, thus he politically popular, but only among the Shia.

3-You deflected bsimon’s summary of the problem with “The claims that we are NOT WORKING on having the Sunnis and Shiites talk to each other are bogus. They are.” Want to provide some evidence of this from a reputable source?

Please... says:

October 31st, 2006 at 11:03 pm

Team Ramrod says:

“so [all democrats, women, peace-niks, social workers, third sons, university professors, non-whites, adoptees, veterans, and keynesian economists are] friggin moron[s.]”

it’s right there, folks! you can’t make this up!

Les says:

November 1st, 2006 at 8:05 am

read your links CG;

Murtha and Obama both call for immediate withdrawl,, Sounds familiar, call it whatever you would like to.

The Strategic Redeployment option may have some promise, needs further study. But, it’s not been touted by any Democrat I am aware of. (Havent read the Biden link yet).

By the way; 2 items:
1. The last war and only war the US ended with a solely political solution was Vietnam.

2. Hey buddy, I’m a retired USAF SMSgt with 21.5 years of ACTIVE DUTY
service. Vietnam era and Desert Storm vet. So dont challenge me to do my part. How many years active duty do you have??

Ed E says:

November 1st, 2006 at 8:46 am

Mark Kennedy has recently stated that we need to listen to the generals in the field. Bush has made the same comments repeatedly in the past. Funny how that never happened. Dumsfeld and his cronies rarely gave the generals anything they wanted without making them fight tooth and nail to get it.

The army was asking for a lot more troops right from the start. They knew that they didn’t need more troops to fight the war, but they were smart enough to know that they were going to have to occupy and control an entire country after the war. That, in and of itself, takes a lot of troops, especially when you de-Baathify the entire government and dissolve the entire army. Did the army get those troops? Nope. Are we having problems now because of that? Yup.

More troops, or the maintenance of the Iraqi army, may have allowed everyone to start rebuilding Iraq much more quickly and effectively. People may finally be getting some utilities now, but it has been 3 years of tough times and that is inexcusable. We needed to be right on top of showing people that we could provide them with security and their necessary daily needs. Instead it came across as though we didn’t really care about them as a people. During that first year is when the insurgency began to build itself.

The CPA was a wonderful plan. I think Bush must have been high when they developed that one. Hey, let’s gather a bunch of very inexperienced young neophytes (whom we’ll make sure agree with every one of our policies) and send them over to redevelop Iraq. Let’s have 4 frat buddies be in charge of the prison system. Hey that sounds great. Let’s allow everyone in the Green Zone to live lavishly and not even have to see the world that is falling apart right outside its gates.

So, Les, the main problem we have is the fact that Bush got us into this mess with a VERY flawed plan and for a reason that turned out to be VERY wrong. Instead of admitting his mistake and taking a new course, he insisted in staying the course with a flawed plan for 3 years. I’m tired of hearing people say that tactics have been changing all the time and never said we had to stay the course. That is a flat out lie and the American people aren’t standing for it.

Les, I thank you for your service to this country and I will not question it. Unfortunately right now I think we are asking other young people to serve and die for our country in a war that cannot be won and will not produce the magnificent results that some people are planning to see in 10 or 20 years. If they turn out to be right, then I give them credit for the foresight they are getting from their great crystal ball. We will not “win” the war on terror militarily. We will not “win” the war on terror in any way. Terrorism is going to exist forever. The only way we are going to reduce it is by trying to understand why people hate us so much and doing something about it. Even that won’t work to any extreme, but our current actions are only making us bigger targets on the world scene. I don’t feel any safer now than I did before 9/11. In fact, I feel less safe, especially outside our own borders.

Les says:

November 1st, 2006 at 9:20 am

Ed.

If folks on these pages were calling for Rumsfields head, I wouldn’t say a word. And I do agree with you on the disolution of the Iraqi Army. I thought that was a mistake when they announced it after the Invasion.

But, as Colin Powell said before the war, if we go in, we bought the problem. So I dont beleive it’s in our country’s best interest to just up and leave. More importantly, we owe to the Iraqi people not to leave them in pure anarchy.

Believe me, the day the Iraqi government say’s “get out” to us, either politely on not, will be a great day, and I’m glad they are beginning to do so, even though I’m not so happy about Sadr gaining so much clout, but hey, that’s the Iraqi’s decision.

So; as I said, I still havent seen the democrats offer a viable option, But I hear their complaining loud and clear, almost every day. But folks, you just cant run home and let the bullies kill the civilians over there. We need to keep assisting Iraqi authorities to maintain some semblance of order, while our ongoing reconstruction efforts continue.

If someone were to offer a plan that says, for example, we’re going to turn complete control of the Basra area over to pure Iraqi only control on or about X Dec 0X, that’d be great, and if we backed them up with continued support in other provinces until the actually had control. I’d by that. But not “were leaving, have a good day”

Dora says:

November 1st, 2006 at 10:29 am

But not “were leaving, have a good day” Another straw man. No Democrat has said that.

You don’t want to leave Iraqi people in pure anarchy? So what are they in today? From the NYT: A classified briefing prepared two weeks ago by the United States Central Command portrays Iraq as edging toward chaos, in a chart that the military is using as a barometer of civil conflict.

It shows a sharp escalation in sectarian violence since the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra in February, and tracks a further worsening this month despite a concerted American push to tamp down the violence in Baghdad.

In fashioning the index, the military is weighing factors like the ineffectual Iraqi police and the dwindling influence of moderate religious and political figures, rather than more traditional military measures such as the enemy’s fighting strength and the control of territory.

The conclusions the Central Command has drawn from these trends are not encouraging, according to a copy of the slide that was obtained by The New York Times. The slide shows Iraq as moving sharply away from “peace,” an ideal on the far left side of the chart, to a point much closer to the right side of the spectrum, a red zone marked “chaos.” As depicted in the command’s chart, the needle has been moving steadily toward the far right of the chart.

The Dems can’t offer solutions if the Repubs refuse to even discuss the proposals the Dems have put forth and Bush refuses to see that his policy needs an overhaul.

bsimon says:

November 1st, 2006 at 11:52 am

Steve B says, in response to a post by Mark:

“3-You deflected bsimon’s summary of the problem with “The claims that we are NOT WORKING on having the Sunnis and Shiites talk to each other are bogus. They are.” Want to provide some evidence of this from a reputable source? ”

More importantly, my comment about diplomacy was directed at Mark Kennedy, who makes fun of Klobuchar for suggesting we “negotiate with people who are trying to kill us.” Which is a total misrepresentation of the suggestion for diplomacy. As Mark alleges, there are efforts at diplomacy being made, which further demonstrates what a moron Rep Kennedy is. Apparently he isn’t up to date with the efforts being made in Iraq.

Les says:

November 1st, 2006 at 12:15 pm

Dora;

How niave; The Dems cant propose solutions because the republicans refuse to discuss them?

I didnt know the Republicans controlled the Dem’s party platform and had final approval authority on their candidates positions on issues.

Ed E says:

November 1st, 2006 at 12:53 pm

Les – That is what is so difficult about the entire Iraq situation. There is no good answer. That’s why it’s tough to come up with a “good plan” now that we have put the entire country into complete chaos.

I admit that part of the problem with the Dems is that are agreeing on any particular plan for Iraq. I agree with Dora that I don’t see anyone truly saying “We need to bring our troops home right this minute”. I think the redeployment argument is probably going to be the most feasible. I think that if we were to keep doing things the way were are now, for the next 10 years, things wouldn’t be any better in Iraq in 2016. The sects are all going to continue to hate and kill each other if we continue to do what we’re doing now. Something needs to change. I don’t think there is ever going to be one Iraq that is democratic, free and happy.

Ed E says:

November 1st, 2006 at 12:54 pm

Oops, left out the NOT in the above post.

I admit that part of the problem with the Dems is that are NOT agreeing on any particular plan for Iraq.

Dora says:

November 1st, 2006 at 3:21 pm

Now that isn’t exactly what I said was it Les. You missed this part: if the Repubs refuse to even discuss the proposals the Dems have put forth Unless you’re having problems with reading comprehension that means they do have positions.

Ed E, I don’t find it to be a problem that all of the Dems don’t agree on one plan yet. As you said there isn’t one “good plan”. You can’t come up with a good plan unless you start out discussing the pros and cons of different options in an open and honest way. There is no way to do that with the current Republican control of both houses of Congress and Bush’s refusal to change his failed plan.

Ed E says:

November 1st, 2006 at 3:27 pm

Dora – I somewhat agree with you on this. The Bushies have definitely not been open to discussing options, and that is a huge problem. But that should not prevent the Dems from getting together and discussing options amongst themselves. More unity in the party on this issue wouldn’t hurt.

Dora says:

November 1st, 2006 at 4:25 pm

Ed says But that should not prevent the Dems from getting together and discussing options amongst themselves They have. And it looks to me like what they don’t agree on is the specific time table.

Ed E says:

November 1st, 2006 at 4:48 pm

Dora – What have they agreed on? I haven’t seen anything clearly stated anywhere. Maybe I’m missing something.

Dora says:

November 1st, 2006 at 4:53 pm

Ed, I have a link that I’ll post this evening.

Dora says:

November 1st, 2006 at 7:47 pm

Here’s what the Boston Globe said in a February article: After months of trying unsuccessfully to develop a common message on the war in Iraq, Democratic Party leaders are beginning to coalesce around a broad plan to begin a quick withdrawal of US troops and install them elsewhere in the region, where they could respond to emergencies in Iraq and help fight terrorism in other countries.

There’s now a 2.0 version of the plan from the original 9 pages referenced in the BG article.
Strategic Redeployment

acid stained concrete flooring says:

February 18th, 2007 at 12:07 am

acid stained concrete flooring

Fresh news on acid stained concrete flooring.

human body pressure point says:

February 18th, 2007 at 4:16 pm

human body pressure point

human body pressure point info and more

artificial insemination much says:

February 19th, 2007 at 7:27 am

artificial insemination much

Books about artificial insemination much.

imp relentless says:

February 22nd, 2007 at 3:11 pm

imp relentless

–>imp relentless

define demographic says:

February 23rd, 2007 at 4:24 am

define demographic

Good information about define demographic.

liberi says:

March 14th, 2007 at 2:50 pm

Du musst ein Fachmann sein – wirklich guter Aufstellungsort, den du hast!

bikini says:

March 16th, 2007 at 2:21 pm

pagine piuttosto informative, piacevoli =)

free anal sex preview says:

March 16th, 2007 at 6:49 pm

free anal sex preview

abrikoskos 2650171 free anal sex preview foundation

skinny black nude woman says:

March 17th, 2007 at 7:50 am

skinny black nude woman

abrikoskos 2650171 skinny black nude woman info and more

anorexic diet tip says:

March 17th, 2007 at 9:08 am

anorexic diet tip

abrikoskos 2650171 Pros and cons of anorexic diet tip.

milton porn twin says:

March 17th, 2007 at 10:23 am

milton porn twin

abrikoskos 2650171 Reviews of milton porn twin.

free adult nude picture says:

March 17th, 2007 at 11:41 am

free adult nude picture

abrikoskos 2650171 Variants of free adult nude picture.

sardinia says:

March 18th, 2007 at 5:45 am

luogo grande:) nessun osservazioni!

serie a says:

March 19th, 2007 at 8:45 pm

Great site! Good luck to it’s owner!

âûâîç ìóñîðà êîíòåéíåðîì says:

July 14th, 2009 at 10:44 am

âûâîç ìóñîðà êîíòåéíåðîì

òðàíñïîðòíûå óñëóãè

igogogo says:

July 28th, 2009 at 6:19 am

igogogo

igogogo

pisatel says:

August 24th, 2009 at 4:37 pm

pisatel

pisatel

This is a place where open-minded critical thinkers of all political persuasions encounter information and arguments that both support and challenge their preconceptions. The goal is not to eliminate differences but to narrow and clarify them. We begin with a bedrock agreement that the search for insight and clarity is important, serious - and fun.

We ask commenters to be civil and substantive and, if possible, good humored. We reserve the right to delete comments that disregard this request.

Follow The Big Question on Twitter Do you use Twitter? Follow The Big Question.