digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Gallup Poll: Congress Approval Rating at All Time Low

blogs.usatoday.com — Just 14% of Americans have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in Congress. This 14% Congressional confidence rating is the all-time low for this measure, which Gallup initiated in 1973. The previous low point for Congress was 18% at several points in the period of time 1991 to 1994.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • markgl, on 10/11/2007, -11/+95If you guys think bush sucks, apparently almost everyone thinks the congress sucks more ass than the commander-in-chief!
    • donwilson2, on 10/11/2007, -33/+84Of course liberals will have some retarded excuse why this is justifiable.
      • rcook18, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What was the question asked in the Gallup poll?
    • NoStoppingUs, on 10/11/2007, -24/+75the one i've been hearing a lot is "BUT BUT BUT THERE ARE REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS TOOOOO"

      of course when republicans controlled congress and had low approval ratings, democrats had nothing to do with it!

      its pathetic!
      • rcook18, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1You are largely right, the republican party has run this country into the ground. It's a good thing for them that the democrats have achieved a majority in time to take the rap.
    • reflex768, on 10/11/2007, -10/+73Jeez. 14%? That's really bad. At this rate, you'd have to say it's going to be a short-lived majority. I don't think I've seen a congress this ineffective, or just flat unwilling to actualize its campaign promises. It's weird too, because Bush has hinted he'd sign many of their proposed bills given minor amendments. Yet they do nothing but mount symbolic challenges to the Iraq war.

      I'd hate to be managing the 08 reelection campaign for some of the freshmen Dems in vulnerable districts. They've got virtually nothing to take back to the voters.
      • rcook18, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Unlike the republican congress, who have soaring debt and a war on multiple fronts to take back to their districts.
    • ChillEnt, on 10/11/2007, -46/+9Screw Congress. Let's cut them out of the system completely. BUSH FOR DICTATOR!!
    • RuffRidr, on 10/11/2007, -5/+92Easy fix: term limits. Get these career self-serving jackasses out of there.
    • Durinthal, on 10/11/2007, -6/+30If everyone dislikes them so much, why do we keep on voting for them?
      • furmanvt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Because everyone loves THEIR Senator. They just hate everyone else's Senator
    • otheruser, on 10/11/2007, -34/+20I think the low approval rating translates into this:

      END THE DAMN WAR!
      FIRE GONZALEZ & HIS AIDES ALREADY!
      COMPROMISE ON IMMIGRATION!
      DO SOMETHING ABOUT HEALTHCARE!

    • sjl127, on 10/11/2007, -6/+25I would love term limits for congress - Reason #1 - Arlen Specter.
      • rcook18, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Is that because he voted with the democrats to serve subpoenas for NSA domestic spying documents?
    • Eivo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15@ RuffRidr

      I completely agree. I don't think that would be an "EASY FIX" however. You got to get them to VOTE on the issue first.
    • karelian, on 10/11/2007, -26/+11There is additional polling data showing that the number one reason for discontent is the fact that Congress won't stand up to Bush strongly enough.

      Funny how many issues *do* revolve around how badly Bush sucks ass - and rightwingers know this. That's why they rush in defensive and pre-emptive responses to threads like this.
      • rcook18, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Absolutely correct. The Bushies must have called out the troops for this thread.
    • TheTaoOfBill, on 10/11/2007, -14/+17You know why? Because they have been pussing out on everything. They failed to cut the funding for the war and they aren't even attempting to put proper checks and balances on the president. And they are taking their sweet time punishing the war criminals in the white house and other parts of the government. Anyone else feel like it's time for a 3rd party to take over but they don't want to waste their vote?
    • endx7, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4"If everyone dislikes them so much, why do we keep on voting for them?"

      Because otherwise the wrong lizard might get in.
    • littlebylittle, on 10/11/2007, -21/+9"Of course liberals will have some retarded excuse why this is justifiable."

      No. They're all a Bunch of Lame-tards. We need some Progressive Leaders who are on fire! Do you hear me!? On fire with Leadership!

      Right now we have a bunch of wimps who won't stand up to BushCo.
    • natmaster, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15This doesn't mean people think everyone in congress sucks - it just means they don't like what congress has been doing recently, which is usually tied to the majority and/or committee leaders.
    • dm33, on 10/11/2007, -18/+6Bush is a dictator and the republicans in congress are happy to enforce his dictatorship. The American public is frustrated that no one can stop Bush. The Democrats are too scared to stand up to the repubs and Bush. Hard to imagine that they have much to lose at the current approval ratings.
    • drakethegreat, on 10/11/2007, -4/+28Lewis Black, "The Democrats, party of no ideas, and the Republicans, party of bad ideas."
    • DangerCollie, on 10/11/2007, -12/+4"They failed to cut the funding for the war and they aren't even attempting to put proper checks and balances on the president."

      That's when I cut off the DNC and stopped donating to anyone who voted for continued funding of the war. I helped put them in there to do a job and instead they rolled over like my dog for a piece of cookie. So what if Bush vetoed it? Keep sending the same bill back up there until the entire government grinds to a halt for lack of money. You put the money on the line for the troops. If their pathetic commander in chief keeps vetoing the legislation, that's not your fault.

      That's when my opinion of the current Congress went right down the crapper. But I never forget it's the Republicans who got us into this and have supported every failed policy and lie of the Bush administration for the last 6 years.
    • SammyJr, on 10/11/2007, -19/+14The President has higher approval ratings because there is always a core of Republicans who will always approve of a Republican President.

      Congress has lower approval ratings for two reasons.

      Most Republicans hate the Democrats who are now in majority, especially that core of Republicans who support Bush.

      The Democratic voters have never shown the same level of unquestioning devotion that the many of Republicans have. Therefore when the Democrats are screwing up, like they are now, their voters don't approve.

      If you remove the starry-eyed true believer Republican vote, I don't think the approval ratings of Congress have really changed since Congress hasn't really changed. They're still supporting the war and rubberstamping Dubya.
    • jspegele, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14How about we stop blaming the Democrats or blaming the Republicans, and start blaming the Democrats AND the Republicans. If we really want to fix this government, we need to do away with our two party system. Everyone cares too much about the goals of party to stand up and do what they know is right.
    • zachblume, on 10/11/2007, -6/+20That's because Republicans are way too conservative at the moment, and the Democrats are a group of big pussies that never commit to anything except for "we're not republicans"

      Spread the word
      Make yourself heard
      Give 'em the bird
      Vote for a third
    • edstate, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6@otheruser

      right on everything except "comprimise on immigration!"

      The VAST amount of America wants no such thing. They want protection and enforcement. Period. But, that, combined with your other points definitely = 14% approval.
    • crweaks23, on 10/11/2007, -8/+9I seriously can't believe how ignorant the highest dugg comments on this page are.

      @markgl: "If you guys think bush sucks, apparently almost everyone thinks the congress sucks more ass than the commander-in-chief!"

      Not true. Congress is bi-partisan, and even though there is a majority, it's not exactly overwhelming. Both parties aren't happy with the current congress, and therefore the numbers sink lower. The president, on the other hand, is Republican. Period. Die-hard republicans will support a republican president blindly. Democrats do the same thing.

      @donwilson2: "Of course liberals will have some retarded excuse why this is justifiable."

      First off, "Liberal" does not equal "Democrat." See: Ron Paul. Second, what is it that's unjustifiable? Congress isn't getting ***** done and I'll be the first one to say it. Why does my party affiliation matter? A Democratic majority is a moot point... there are Republicans in congress, too. My dissatisfaction with Congress is a rating as a whole.

      • natmaster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ron Paul is the only conservative running for President....how does this make him Liberal?
      • jrspartan53, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0yea, nothing says liberal like wanting to cut spending and dumping the IRS and fed reserve. just about the only thing hes liberal on is the war in iraq (thankfully)
    • CaptainJack69, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Wow, that really sucks!!
    • 0xbaadf00d, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10Maybe if they pass another non-binding resolution... Or maybe a no confidence bill...
    • walkable, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3http://digg.com/political_opinion/Are_Americans_Unready_to_Boil addresses the pathetic Congress.
    • Pfhreak, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5"I would love term limits for congress - Reason #1 - Arlen Specter."

      Personally, I'd put Specter a bit further down the list than #1 on a list of "Why we need term limits".

      #1 - Sen. Orrin Hatch (I'm Utahn)
      #2 - Sen. Joe Lieberman
      #3 - Sen. Ted Stevens
      #4 - Rep. Don Young
      #5 - Sen. John McCain
      #6 - Rep. Chris Cannon
      #7 - Rep. John Boehner
      #8 - Rep. Rob Bishop
      #9 - Sen. Arlen Specter
      #10 - Rep. Jim Matheson
      #11 - Sen. Diane Feinstein
      #12 - Sen. Robert Byrd
      #13 - Sen. Ted Kennedy
      #14 - Sen. Bob Bennett
      #15 - Rep. Tom Tancredo
      #16 - Rep. Jean Schmidt
    • dildoolielly, on 10/11/2007, -15/+9""Of course liberals will have some retarded excuse why this is justifiable.""
      --------------------------------------------------------

      Wow you conservatives are so persecuted aren't you? You're just the weak little kids cowering at the feet of the big bad liberals from the way you talk.

      But you know what? You have had the majority of the political power in the country for the last 6 years so I think, wait...yes that's correct, you are todays grand prize winners of a lifetime supply of "Shut The Fvck Up!"

      It goes great with pork and and hot air!
      • jrspartan53, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1someones got a BAAADDD case of bds
    • InetRoadkill, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10The problem is that while congress is given a low approval rating overall, the individual members of congress generally rate favorably within their districts. It's the "It's not our guy's fault congress sucks. It's all those other guys fault." mentality.

      It really looks like it will require another massive purge in 2008 before the reality sinks in that people are getting tired of the same line of *****. But everyone needs to do their part. Call/write you representatives and tell them to get their ***** together or get purged. If they don't get the message, follow thru at the polls in 2008 and show them the door.
    • dildoolielly, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5""Dems in vulnerable districts. They've got virtually nothing to take back to the voters.""
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------

      Things we will miss when the Republicans are finally gone:

      bible-humping xtian wackos, towel-headed islamo fanatics, fat stupid american sheep, bloated military profiteers, scheming greedy Zionists, corrupt arab monarchs, jack-booted nazi skinheads, latté sipping democrats, jingo spewing congressmen, babykilling coward soldiers, token ethnic cabinet members, marionette presidents, alcoholic, old, fat, uneducated, toothless, Big Mac eating, inbred, southern illiterate white trash hillbillies, Wiretapping Warrantless searches, Torture camps, enemy combatants, unending wars, Ineffective natural disaster responses, Power Cuts, Budget deficit, Cowboy accents, e-mails to pageboys, White house midnight male prostitutes, posts with "lib traitors" in title, O'reilly, Jingoism, New vocabulary by the president
      Made in China Flags, Freedom Fries, Macacas, Taxpayers paid vacations to Scotland, Mobster lobbiests, Crusaders attacking the wrong country, Swiftboat men for truth, New Reasons to stay in Iraq, Ann coulter dressed as a woman, Evil Swedish chief UN representative, Flight suits, Condi Playing the Paino while countries are bombed, plastic sheets and duct tape, color coded paranoia levels, High gas prices, Hydrogen economy, WMDs searches, Finding more bones at ground zero 5 years after Iraqis attacking the USA on 9-11, Ricin plots, Liquid Bombs, Shoe Bombs, Dirty Bombs, The twins, Direct orders from God, Going after dady's assassins, Forgetting Osama, Bush dropping dog on head, Pretzel accidents, Segway accidents, The mid-east roadmap to hell Protecting Israel so that Jesus comes, Threatening North Korea with Caviar embargoes, Flip Floping, Staying the ever changing course, Asking Libs for the plan, Deadenders in their last throes before the curve, Gay-Bashing Flaming knob-rubbing meth-addicted hypocrit Preachers, "The Constitution is just a piece of paper.", Defiance of the geneva convention. The death of habeas corpus.
    • Matteos, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6@sjl127
      "I would love term limits for congress - Reason #1 - Arlen Specter."

      Reason #2 - Ted Kennedy

      Aaraah, pass the Chivas Mary Jo...
    • hiphoc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@sjl127 Yes Arlen "Magic Bullet" Spector. He helped push the Magic Bullet JFK theory go Arlen!!!
    • markgl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@crweaks23

      What the crap are you talking about? I know it's a 2 party system. I was making a joke. Would you like me to take a government test that you've created so that I may make another comment???
  • TheEditor1, on 10/11/2007, -38/+27I can guarantee this won't make the front page, not on the liberal (wishes it was) blog of record known as digg. The site is turning into a mirror of thinkprogress.*****.
    • Jwoey, on 10/11/2007, -5/+14front-paged!
    • meltingrobot, on 10/11/2007, -4/+18Your guarantee was worthless. It made it to the front. I want my money back. :P
    • otheruser, on 10/11/2007, -10/+17You were wrong.

      I consider myself a "progressive liberal", but I also recognize the failures of the party that I support.

      They really need to begin using harsher language. Too many people are dying in Iraq, there are too many criminals in D.C., too little is being done on immigration, and there's not much being done in the way of progressivism.

    • JackOCat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Pay up
  • Scar5ace, on 10/11/2007, -10/+43Here's to you Nancy and Harry, you should have "14%" stamped on your foreheads for the rest of your terms.
  • Dewhead, on 10/11/2007, -11/+44I love it.

    "By way of contrast, 69% of Americans have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in the military, which tops the list. "
    • Jwoey, on 10/11/2007, -15/+10Ok... Im not any sort of apologist for this horrible 14% congress rating. But, don't you think the high 'confidence in the military' rating might have something to do with it being a mortal sin to say you don't support the troops? I'm pretty peeved that the democratic congress that I wanted so badly is doing so poorly, but I don't think contrasting it to the military rating is a fair comparison.
    • Conwaysb0718, on 10/11/2007, -6/+26"69% of Americans have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in the military" --Means they know we can still throw down with any country in the world and kick the tar out of them, provided you let us actually fight and not put the cuffs on.
    • sodade, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2That's because this country is full of people who have a blind respect for the millitary.
    • JungleEd, on 07/14/2008, -0/+0I always knew that the US would become a military state. It’s so much easier to win with guns then with debates, advertising money, and an occasional vote.
  • ChillEnt, on 10/11/2007, -20/+2dupe comment....bury me.
  • jmchez, on 10/11/2007, -5/+35To put in perspective, Bush is TWICE as high!

    Good God! How high or low is the approval for the U.S. Supreme Court? Because it appears that we just don't like our government.
    • Durinthal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1234% for the Supreme Court, which is still the lowest in recent years: http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27946
    • Terr01, on 10/11/2007, -6/+11You're abusing statistics. Bush's figure is an approval/disapproval rating. Congress' in this case is how many people said they had "Quite a Lot" or a "Great Deal" of confidence in Congress when shown many different institutions. Any competent social sciences researcher will tell you that you're "twice as much" conclusion isn't statistically or sociologically valid.
    • Double0Doug, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4I don’t think it could be described as “we don’t like our government” as much as we don’t like what our government is doing.

      Bush has low approval rating because of the actions he has taken. Congress has low approval ratings because of the lack of action in general.

      The fact that the president’s approval rating is twice as high as Congress probably doesn’t indicate a relationship like “we like the President more than Congress. The President has been fairly flat-lined lately.

      Congress however can in with very high expectations on both sides of the isle. People are exceedingly disappointed with the lack of effort on the part of Congress. We heard talk of bipartisanship, open and fair play, etc… All that we have seen so far is “meet your new boss, same as the old boss” mentality.
    • Terr01, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Just to be clear, jmchez says "bush is twice as high". The first problem is that in order for him to be twice as high the figure must be 28%, which obviously didn't come from this same poll. The second problem is that "approval" ratings are not always equivalent to "confidence ratings". The third problem is that the Gallup poll has a different set of multiple choice answers. The fourth is that the Gallup poll is (at least nominally) about institutions and not people.

      In the Gallup poll, they're doing "good confidence" (to paraphrase) ratings, and I suspect people react a bit differently to rating "The Presidency as an Institution" (which is the kind of question they're asking) rather than "The President The Man". For Congress, it's probably less pronounced a difference, since it's so large you can't really personalize it.

      And, for context, Congress historically almost always polls worse than the President for a variety of possible reasons. You can't simply take Congress' low relative rating (approval, confidence, or otherwise) as a big sign since it's the norm.
    • lordmike, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2No, actually... according to this poll, at least, he only gets 24%...
  • Sumyunguy, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3WOW! It is awesome to come on a Digg Story and see all your Green "Friend" Comments!
  • adr4, on 10/11/2007, -14/+6Americans are just too retarded to recognize the fact that the guy they hate still gets to say no to whatever bills he wants, and as long as the party tells the senators how to vote.
  • deegeetau, on 10/11/2007, -25/+35The Democrat leadership come off like four-year-olds compared to the much more responsible and respectable Republicans. How to better America?

    - Term Limits (1 term for Senators, 3 terms for Representatives), let's scrape career politicians on both sides of the aisle
    - Line item veto
    - Ban earmarks on legislation
    - Impenetrable border with Mexico, enforce current laws
    - Do away completely with income tax, create a federal sales tax on all consumer purchases with the exception of grocery food, water, clothing, and homes (apartments & houses, rent or own). This will give empower our citizens and promote savings. An additional benefit, this structure spreads the burden to illegal non-citizens not paying taxes and foreign tourists.

    • AlvinBlah, on 10/11/2007, -9/+10Agreed on the term limits. Maybe not in the short cycles that you propose. But term limits should be in place.

      the line item veto is only effective when in the hands of a benevolent ruler. The broad veto is in place because it prevents micro-management, that is a good thing.

      If we're going to wall our ***** off with Mexico, we might as well do the same to Canada. Immigration is an issue, but a wall is like burying one's head in the sand over the why there is such a torrent of people coming into the country.

      I think one could argue back and forth all day about whether a flat sales tax is a true equalizer. I still see worth in taxing what one earns, but I do understand that there should be rewards for moving further up the economic ladder as well....see, could go on all day about it....
    • ViperDaimao, on 10/11/2007, -7/+12I would add, tougher boarder with mexico, but at the same time we need to fix our immigration system. there are millions of people waiting 3+ years to get a green card and to get in. If we can speed that up, there will be less of a reason to come across illegally.

      The line item goes with the earmark thing. We need more transparency in our lawmaking process. Lawmakers currently refuse to let the people know what they're spending our money one, nor who's spending it. This is plain outrageous.
    • otheruser, on 10/11/2007, -11/+18"The Democrat leadership come off like four-year-olds compared to the much more responsible and respectable Republicans. "


      Err... The "responsible" Republicans put us in Iraq and created the situation we have today. The "respectable" Republiacns were voted out of office in the 2006 election...

      I agree with your points, but that first sentence cannot be taken seriously.
    • maczealot, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2I was totally 100% behind you and your statements (i.e. Career Politicians = Career Criminals)

      UNTIL you got to the no income tax. I used to think this was a good idea but now I am convinced that were it to happen the Internet and the lucrative commerce there would immediately be taxed through the nose and out the ass.

      I am an "enforcement first" immigration policy supporter but I am pretty sure most illegals still pay income taxes (cuz it is withheld automagically from them, with no return for overpay). If I am wrong on this hit me with a link pls.
    • Timetheos, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5Hate to break it to you, but term limits won't do crap. They'll just move to K-Street jobs to lobby the next set of noobs.

      The real solution: public funding of campaigns and restrictions on moving to lobbying positions after leaving office.
    • Eilarais, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6@deegeetau

      Good ideas, but a few problems:

      1. You can't really ban earmarks, because they're impossibly hard to define. You have to establish in each case whether the amendment actually relates to the legislation and to what degree. What you have to do is redefine the system so that legislators do not stand to benefit from earmarks. This involves disconnecting politicians from moneyed interests, which is really the root problem of congress anyway (along with stupidity).

      2. Illegal immigrents are a lot more tied into the American economy than most people realize. They don't pay taxes, but they provide a great deal of labor at a very low cost, especially in the mining and agricultural industries. One of the reasons we never go through with mass deportations is that there are entire sectors of the economy that would stop functioning until they were re-engineered.
    • billmccartney, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I agree with you except for the first sentense ( I don't think that republicans are any more competent that democrats at this point)... But as far as term limits go, I think that term limits should be very short... 1 Term MAX... and possibly shorten the terms. Being in congress should be a little like jury duty. It's some service your doing for the state for a very brief time - Not a career!!! I also think that any elected official should be banned from lobbying for at least 10 years. It seems extreme, but it can fight corruption!!
    • anonym41414, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3So you're basically not really about the whole Constitution thing, huh? Term limits, the line-item veto and your suggested funding ban are not things we can implement unless we change the Constitution. In the case of the line-item veto, it would have to be a drastic change to the Constitution to grant the President legislative powers.

      I find that the people who are in favor of such things are often unaware of why the Constitution presently prohibits them in the first place.
    • Philodox, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5"If we're going to wall our ***** off with Mexico, we might as well do the same to Canada."

      Uhhh... what? I can think of a couple of problems with this.

      1) The US-Canadian border is *huuuuuuge* (if you thought it was expensive to fence the Mexico border... )
      2) There isn't a significant source of illegal immigrants coming from Canada so there's not much to gain from fencing it off.
      3) It would significantly hurt relations between the US and its biggest trading partner.
    • Philodox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Just to clarify: I know the OP was a little tongue in cheek, but my point is that securing the Canadian border is significantly different than securing the Mexican border.
    • JAVandiver, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4How about a 2.5% tax on every dollar transacted? That way Corporate America could share the burden as well.
    • zorcha, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2http://www.fairtax.org/
  • Dougman82, on 10/11/2007, -9/+12I'm glad to finally see Congress get some heat instead of just Bush. Contrary to popular belief, the President does not single-handedly run the country. I agree with deegeetau above - career politicians are the bane of our government. With our current congressional system, NOTHING gets done.
    • gigawatts2k, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3It's also worthy to point out who is the ones that are being discovered as the perpotrators of the president's actions.... He has a staff of advisors... and guess what, they are the ones who "advised" him to make the decisions he has. Again, I respect the President as a good man, who sticks to his guns (no pun intended), but at the moment he is mostly a puppet to the Vice president and advisory board.
  • bjkrautk, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9"But the current 14% confidence rating for Congress is down from 19% last year and is the lowest in Gallup’s history, surpassing the 18% confidence in Congress measured in 1991, 1993 and 1994."

    ...and we all remember what happened in the 1994 election, don't we?

    Whoever wins the Presidential election is going to end up bringing in Congress on his / her coattails.
    • slickriven, on 10/11/2007, -11/+7Please don't joke - the President will bring Congress in on HIS coattails... lets not doom ourselves and think that crazed Socialist Neo-Nazi Hillary will win, cause if she does, I'm moving to Canada.
    • irvman21, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Ummm, 1994 wasn't a presidential election year. It was the year where Clinton lost more seats in congress than any sitting president had in 150+ years. Maybe I missed what you were getting at.
    • InetRoadkill, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I don't care for Hillary, but I would really like to know where the neo-nazi charge is coming from. If all the repubs have to show for themselves is Godwin'ing opposition candidates, then they should just fold their tent and go home.
    • bjornski, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2When you can't run on issues, smear your opponent.
  • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24Hard to approve of someone if they aren't doing *****
  • Battleloser, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14Is it time to revolt yet or what?
    • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2yes, its time to go vote for a good candidate... even if they aren't in a major party
    • bjornski, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3If you say Ron Paul, I'll reach through your monitor and punch you in the face.

      Unrestrained free-market mentality is what got us into this *****. It's not going to get us out.

    • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Actually, I'm not a fan of RP...
  • timbo83251, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3we should run our Congress like the German Bundestag. It's much better. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundestag
  • brianzero, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10The 14% that approve are most likely governmental appointees, bureaucrat's, and war profiteers.
    • fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Not really, because most of those types are Republicans. (zing)
      More likely, it is uninformed Democrats.
  • techweenie1, on 10/11/2007, -5/+19Hmm imagine that...Congress not doing what the people what...Hey Congress you listening? Seal the border with Mexico, Deport Illegals, Make English the official language, do something with the war and see those numbers jump...just a hint
    • anonym41414, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4Yes, I'm sure Congress would get a lot of approval if they implemented racist policies.

      But fortunately not every American is a disgusting, racist *****.
      • moin1097, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Implementing an amnesty policy, like you described, would make their numbers go down.
        But we can get rid of the disgusting, racist assholes if we deport them with those that they support.
    • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13How the ***** is that racist?
    • gigawatts2k, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12Exactally, how can deporting ILLEGAL immigrants, and making English the National language "racist". Sound more like saving tax dollars and standardization to me. I'm tired of being asked to press "1" for English... shouldn't that be the default?
    • techweenie1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8Yep cohesion = racism...yep lets keep people divided by having them not learn a common language in which we can share ideas and communicate with each other...I would love to meet the guy whoever came up with the idea that cultural assimilation is racism...what a *****.
    • BabyWookie, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3How about we forget about kicking out the Mexicans, keeping gay from marrying, the official language and other equally silly conservative ***** and instead try all the neocons for their crimes against Humanity, try all the polluters for their crimes against Mother Earth, join the Kyoto Protocol, create tougher environmental laws, implement a 50% tax on the rich, create a nationalized health care system, implement tougher consumer protection laws, tougher worker protection laws, tougher enforcement of separation of church and state , crack down on corporate tax evasion and eliminate corporate welfare, pay our past UN dues, end the Cuban embargo, rejoin the ABM treaty and generally go around the world and kiss ass, trying to undo all the damage this administration has done? Thanks.
    • techweenie1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2BabyWookie, please move to Quebec, you'd have all that and much more.
      • BabyWookie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You wish, connie. I'd rather stay and fight for a more just America.
  • JJsays, on 10/11/2007, -11/+14This Democrat congress is a disaster!
    • JJsays, on 10/11/2007, -9/+6The people have spoken, Democrats should step down. That is what the people want you know.
    • SammyJr, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Lets rephrase that:

      Congress is a disaster. Until we get some people in there from either party who do something beside rubber stamp Bush, it will always be a disaster.
    • justinjstark, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I have to say it is probably better than another Republican Congress. It's just that rather than having only Democrats pissed at the Republican Congress, now we have Democrats AND Republicans pissed at a Democratic Congress.
  • hittnrun, on 10/11/2007, -9/+186% believe democrats suck.

    How can you dims still be dems?

    The people have spoken

    Let's have a re-vote.

    ...sarcasm off.

    hee!
    • techweenie1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18Hey I'm conservative and I think the Republicans are sucking ass in congress too...I'm ready for someone who actually wants to implement some of the changes I suggested above.
    • Jwoey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9@techweenie

      agreed, though I'm a democrat. Is it really too much to ask for some changes? With all these things the democratic congress promised, the one thing they actually came through on was one of the things I vehemently oppose! Thanks for the minimum wage increase! It hurts more than it helps!
    • smitting, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I don't think this is a specific party issue. We just don't have any leadership in congress. We have a government designed by committee, and its not effective. No one wants to go outside of party lines (at least the house does so more than the senate).

      Ban political parties in government. Make politicians work to form coalitions to push good ideas through.
      Ban political parties on voter forms. Make politicians make themselves known to consituents.

      American politics is presently about representing your party, not representing your people.

      That's why America hates its congress.

      Ban political parties.

    • irvman21, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"Hey I'm conservative and I think the Republicans are sucking ass in congress too...I'm ready for someone who actually wants to implement some of the changes I suggested above."

      I agree with that, it's not like the 04-06 Congress got anything accomplished. This was extremely disappointing to me given that they had picked up seats in the House, the Senate, won the White House (with a popular majority) and picked up State Governorships. Republicans should have been passing major legislation left and right.
  • chad, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5But whats the approval rating for Gallup polls?
    • Kyderdog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+313%
    • Jwoey, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1I think the highest of any pollster? I might be wrong about them having the top spot. But they're certainly highly regarded.

      But, it is trendy to say polls are meaningless.
    • zachblume, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Ah, but that figure (13%) was found using a Gallup poll!
  • insomniacal, on 10/11/2007, -8/+7Umm, excuse me, but isn't 14% a heckuva lot lower than 28% or 24% or whatever the lowest twenty-something percent was that Bush ever got?
    • Chebyshev, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6No, you're obviously doing your math wrong.
    • insomniacal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Keep up the denial, let's see how far it gets you ... ;-)
  • pcghost, on 10/11/2007, -9/+5To the first-poser (sic). Maybe, just maybe we elected them to end your little neocon war machine and they failed to do that and instead bent over to the czar in chief. Just a hunch, but I bet that is the #1 reason for their low ratings these days.
  • DesignerScott, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Let's face facts, no congressman or cogresswoman is like the majority of their constituents. Politicians are money/power grubbing maniacs, so it's no wonder that most people don't like them.
    Here's an idea. Pay congressmen and congresswomen minimum wage, and force them to work 30 hours a week.
  • rhabd0mancer, on 10/11/2007, -8/+11Right, so when that stupid ***** Bush vetoes the stem cell research bill, which is favored by two-thirds of Americans, it's the Dems fault?
    • techweenie1, on 10/11/2007, -8/+8yeah because Stem Cell Research is the main focus of all the nation's problems right now...
      /sarcasm off
    • BabyWookie, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1@ techweenie1:
      LOL. Aren't you the guy who thinks that making English the official language is a big priority?
    • techweenie1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2@BabyWookie...
      LOL. Aren't you the guy who should move to Canada?
      • BabyWookie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Why don't you move to... wait Pinochett in not in power any more. They pretty much don't want your kind any where in the world.
  • ontain, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1The time might be right for an independent candidate *cough* Bloomberg*cough*
  • pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8i found it interesting when everyone was calling bush a lame duck president when the democrats got "control" of the house. they only got the majority, but not enough to override any presidential vetos. they ended up being the lame ducks. they got voted in because people are sick of the war and they promised to do something about it. they shouldn't be making promises they can't keep.
    • HypocriteDigg, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6Pretty hard to do when the President vetoes bills to pull the troops out.
    • pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3hypoctritedigg: that's partly the point i was making. but this is something they knew beforehand. they thought they could gain support by denouncing the war and let bush take the hits, since he's the ones vetoing the bills. but they turned pussy and voted his version of the bill through anyway. people saw through it.
  • JJsays, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7C'mon Democrats HOLD another hearing, apparently the people are behind you.
    • RuffRidr, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Ya, then turn it into a non-binding resolution. That'll really fire up the people!
  • HypocriteDigg, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4I'm trying to figure out what's the difference between this Congress and the one before it? Seems to me people base their 'approval ratings' on nothing other than a few headlines they read or hear in the fascist mainstream media.
  • etnu, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The current congress is useless because any meaningful legislation they try to pass is just going to get vetoed. The dems don't have the necessary majority to override a veto, so effectively nothing is getting done.

    On the bright side, at least nobody can ***** things up worse than they already are. Here's hoping that we can just ride things out until January 2009.

    How about term limits for congress? Maybe forced change is the only way to get rid of these bums.
    • techweenie1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Term Limits all the way! We need to find some normal people to elect to make that change first...the greedy bastards in both parties now would never do anything like this, they'd be effectively shooting themselves in the foot.
    • JJsays, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6Elections are term limits.
    • aceg1357, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Term limits only place more power in unelected bureaucratic hands. Is that what you really want? More power for the Bureaucrats. If ya don't like them, vote them out. It's pretty easy. Also, why would you want to kick out an good/effective politician just because he has served 12 years?

      I understand the frustration with politics and politicians sometimes, but term limits is not the solution.
    • techweenie1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2@jjsays

      is that the definition Senators Kennedy and Byrd gave you for Term Limits?
    • JJsays, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2If people didn't want them in office they would have voted them out. Are you some how smarter then the framer's of the Constitution??
    • justinjstark, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Democrats sure as hell could have defunded this war. They could also push for an impeachment of Bush and/or Cheney.

      You can't just say they can't do anything because it will get vetoed. There certainly ARE things they could do, they just aren't doing them!
  • Pebbles2, on 10/11/2007, -8/+1It's going to take a looooong time to undo the damage this administration has done. Expect continued public dissatisfaction in the many years to come.
  • Kyderdog, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3They were Vote in to End the war.. they rolled over and played dead when it came to a vote.
    We need Ron Paul as president to fix our America.
    • bjornski, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Yes, because unrestrained capitalism is the cure for thieving, money-grubbing, back-room government and an industry that makes more money by paying Chinese to build products to sell to Americans than hiring Americans so they can afford to buy products.

      Ron Paul has a few good ideas, but his unrestrained free-market ideas would be devastating to what's left of the economy.
  • walkable, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6What do you expect from a Congress that's been in place less than 6 months, a split Senate, and a President that is starting to veto bills. It's called checks and balances.

    That's not to say that I strongly support Congress, there is definite room for improvement for both political parties.

    I think most politicians have low approval ratings when they take office - perhaps they are getting their feet wet? There's a lot to learn about the processes and bills are very, very complicated if you ever take the time to read legislation.

    Remember how low Bush's approval rating was before 9/11? 51%. Down from 56%. Same percentage decrease: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=665
  • KnightMareInc, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7when has congress ever had a good rating?
  • manicallday, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4The only thing I have to say is that the Republicans have way hotter female staffers. They're a little crazy but they're hot. I've really notice a drop in talent here on the Hill.
  • endustry, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Democrats: when sickly-looking little Dennis Kucinich becomes the hands-down ballsiest representative of your party, it's time to consider being a little more forceful.
    • manicallday, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5btw. He does have the hottest wife on the Hill. I really don't know how he pulled that off.
    • lordmike, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"btw. He does have the hottest wife on the Hill. I really don't know how he pulled that off."

      Power is attractive... or maybe it's his magic ears!
    • walkable, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Here's how they met. She graduated from high school in 96' and he's over 60 years old:

      http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1030-04.htm
  • aceg1357, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7To be fair Congress has always had a lower rating than the President. That said, an all time low really tells you something.

    But I thought this was going to be the most ethical congress of all time. They already have more ethics problems in 6 months than the Republicans had in 6 years and do nothing but cover up their ethics lapses. Corruption and pork barrel spending is running a muck. The good old days of the Dem controlled congress are back with a vengeance. The Dems have only proven they can whine. They have not yet proved that they can govern. They are the ones in power, it is time to step up. Sadly I can't see that happening.
  • Terr01, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6*THIS IS NOT AN APPROVAL RATING*

    Rule number one of polling: The details matter, and even small changes in a question can make big differences in result. This figure should can only be compared to previous gallup polls without running real risks of misapplication.

    The 14% figure is *not* an approval poll, because it's not asking "approve/disapprove" style questions. Instead, they were asked "What is your confidence in the following institutions", and then the 14% are the number who said "Great Deal" or "Quite a Lot" for Congress as one item on the list. I see a lot of people trying to compare this percentage one-on-one to approval ratings and other statistics, but it's a very different question being asked and types of answers being collected, so it's not statistically comparable except in talk of "trends".

    =====

    Side note: In other polls this month people were asked about their approval or disapproval for "The Democratic portion of Congress" and the "Republican portion of Congress" seperately. There is a very clear qualitative difference, which can be generalized here: The Democrats in congress have more support.

    I'm sure that if Gallup had taken the time to check that difference, the poll would have been more interesting because we'd see where most of that dropping rating was coming from.
  • slapthemonkey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Though we dislike them, still we keep on voting.
    • bjornski, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yes, because not voting is such a better option.

      Though, I'll assume you forgot to add "for them" at the end.

      We shouldn't be voting these thieves out of office, we should be pulling them out of their offices by force and lynching them.
  • TruthWillWin, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1I don´t get it.

    China has 1 party, which is a obvious fraud ofcourse.

    But the U.S. has 2 truly trustworthy parties to garantuee that the people get the best there is !

    so you guys in the U.S. have a real choice !! instead of China with only 1 party..

    sarcasme... (for the 1 braincell digg/brigade, who are allergic to the constitution and the cold hard truth)
    • JJsays, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4are you saying we don't have the best system money can buy? Dammit! Do you know what we spend on that.
    • bjornski, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You can't even spell, and we're supposed to listen to your opinion?

      )chuckles(

  • reed311, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5The new Democratic Congress hasn't done anything since they took office and I'm glad! Why? Because I'd rather have them do nothing at all then try and pass ridiculous bills. Such as: constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, amendment to ban flag burning or the Terri Schiavo fiasco/embarassment a few years ago.
  • origclubsoda, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Must because the Democrats are in majority.... HAHAHAHAHA - I am not even a Republican
  • kmg365, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4like Timetheos said:

    Public

    Campaign

    Financing

  • gthrank, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5And THIS is the system of "democracy" that you yanks want to impose on the rest of the world?
  • nickymouse, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3People are just pissed b/c congress won't listen to the will of the people. They represent us! Unlike the president who is not voted by the people nor creates laws. The Democrats and Republicans are just doing a terrible job. We want to stop illegal immigration, wasteful spending, and create a smaller government. We need true conservatives (not a republican) to run for office. I believe that most democrats believe in many of the core values of a conservative. Less government, less and/or better spending, more power to the individual and less taxes is something we can all agree upon.
  • TexasScott, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4So 14% approval. That leaves 86% who are fed up with the way the government is lead. Hmm that's enough for a constitutional convention and fix this mess if we all stood together. We can start by giving states their rights back by strengthening the 10th amendment and fixing the Interstate Commerce Clause. I don't think the congressmen are interested in their own state's needs; rather, their power over the will of all of the states.

    Article V
    The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, ON THE APPLICATION OF THE LEGISLATURES OF TWO THIRDS OF THE SEVERAL STATES, SHALL CALL A CONVENTION FOR PROPOSING AMENDMENTS, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
  • mwayne, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators." --P. J. O'Rourke
  • theNthDoctor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1It only takes one man to be a world-class authoritarian butcher, but it takes an entire branch of government to be mindless pussies on behalf of a nation.
    • bjornski, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1And one man to veto anything they try to do.
  • irvman21, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I'm just sitting around waiting for them to pass that ethics bill they kept talking about while campaigning as "the most ethical Congress in history". I guess they just haven't gotten around to it, with all the important legislation they have passed otherwise.
  • jpsucks3999, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3First and foremost, our congress is almost uniformly filled with a bunch of greedy opportunistic con men/women regardless of party affiliation. Our fault for electing the same crooks over and over. Until the majority of this country joins the anti incumbent movement, there's no chance for change. It is interesting that the last Republican controlled congress took a hit for supporting Bush (being the least productive and arguably most corrupt congress in history had something to do with it too) and the current Democratic group is taking an even bigger hit for not fighting him hard enough. What they should do is think "what would Bush do?" and DO THE OPPOSITE!
    • mwayne, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Your naiveté is laughable. Newly elected representatives making a difference. One Congress more corrupt than a previous Congress. Stop playing with yourself and read American history if you want to know about Congressional corruption through the years.

      "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss"
    • jpsucks3999, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I guess my naiveté is only out done by your smug pompousness!
  • lordmike, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Not surprising, really... The current congress was elected to behave like democrats, instead they are behaving like republicans...

    Sadly, they will probably behave even more like republicans in a panicked effort to get reelected, which will only exacerbate the approval problem. Americans have rejected 30 years of Republican rule and want a change... if the Democrats go all DLC and move to the right, they will suffer the same fate that their attempts at being "republican-lite" did them the past decade.

    Why vote for the lite version when you can have the real thing?
  • diggingbar, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Term limits could cycle out statesmen for politicians.. Case in point.. Ron Paul.. The vote is the limit.. Every 2 years I limit the terms of politicians in favor of statesmen.. With my vote.. Term Limits are in effect Vote Limits..
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.