Nov. 2nd, 2008
I Don't Get It
Nov. 2nd, 2008 02:06 pmSo, we have a President whose "disapproval rating" is so astonishing that he's not even out publicly raising money for candidates from his party, much less campaigning for them. They are all actively distancing themselves from him, and criticizing at least some of his policies, and most of them avoid saying his name at all.
It's pretty clear that disapproval of GWB is bipartisan in nature.
So why do the pundits think they can accuse the Democratic candidate of "nasty partisanship" for attacking GWBs failed policies?
It's pretty clear that disapproval of GWB is bipartisan in nature.
So why do the pundits think they can accuse the Democratic candidate of "nasty partisanship" for attacking GWBs failed policies?
I Don't Get It
Nov. 2nd, 2008 02:06 pmSo, we have a President whose "disapproval rating" is so astonishing that he's not even out publicly raising money for candidates from his party, much less campaigning for them. They are all actively distancing themselves from him, and criticizing at least some of his policies, and most of them avoid saying his name at all.
It's pretty clear that disapproval of GWB is bipartisan in nature.
So why do the pundits think they can accuse the Democratic candidate of "nasty partisanship" for attacking GWBs failed policies?
It's pretty clear that disapproval of GWB is bipartisan in nature.
So why do the pundits think they can accuse the Democratic candidate of "nasty partisanship" for attacking GWBs failed policies?