Iraq war is the main reason. Democrats had a chance to make a difference but voted for more money instead. They did that because they want to win the presidency and not to appear too dovish. The compromise extinguished lives!

We the people voted for these gals & guys so we bear a certain election time responsibility. Time to make a clean sweep of both houses and both parties. Time to elect people with new ideas and people who can stand on their own feet instead of their corporate sponsors.

We need to nominate REAL progressives in the primaries, and that's where the DLC will fight for it's life. Down with the DLC! The primaries are now just 7 months away. Any progressive candidates out there? With the current national mood, I suspect that even a Republican could win against the current crop of Democrats. They think they're so slick, sitting on their thumbs and waiting it out. That's not what the public voted for.

Unpopular as Republicans are, the public is impatient for change, and any change will do. It isn't just the occupation, it's about the direction the country is headed. There were almost as many people voting for change because they were upset about corruption as there were voting against the occupation. And these dumb Democrats are maintaining the status quo with the lobbyists. Stirred up some dust, but when it settled, back to business as usual.

how disappointed is the democratic base gonna be when their hero kucinich AGAIN capitulates to the war-mongering, corporatist DNC leaders at the dem. convention? how long are liberals/progressives/lefties gonna stand for this charade called the democratic party?

Democrats are bigger crooks than Republicans. Surprise, surprise. Anybody who expected different from the party of Marion Barry, Richard Daley, Jim Wright, Ed Jew, William Jefferson, or Willy Brown needs to have their head examined. Combine their corruption with their utter lack of ANY program beyond chanting, all at once, "Bush is bad", and of course their approval is in the toilet.

jedediah:

You are so dead on!

Is Kucinich allowed to run only to keep progressives inside and outside the Dem party "involved" during the primaries? Ask yourself if you think Kucinich has a spit's chance in Hell of winning the corporate party's nomination. And if he did, would he actually accept? That would be like throwing all his "progressive" talk to the wind for a chance to be the head guy at the corporate table. Do you think for one minute that the corporate elite in this country would even entertain such a scenario?

No, the DNC knows full well what's it doing by using Kucinich to corral progressives. It happened in 2004 when he led hopeful progressive supporters all the way to the Boston convention, only to capitulate and back the corporate party's pick to run a centrist platform campaign. I can see it all again...only this time he'll be hugging Hillary on stage in a sign of (gag me) party unity.

Progressives inside and those outside the Dem Party had better get their heads on straight and see through this excellently well-thoughtout ploy. It's time to make the committment for change without corporate strings attached. It's time to see through the veil of deceit. It's time to go Green. http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2007_06_06.shtml

I guess we could be thankful that congress hasn't done much since the elections. At least they haven't screwed up anything else. Sometimes nothing is a good thing. Just think how much better off we would be if Congress had done nothing since 2000. Every move they have made in the last six years has made something worse than it was before. They allowed the occupation of Iraq, made it legal to get just about any personnel information about people through wiretaps, records checking and such. Now if all else fails they can declare you an "enemy combatant" and put you in jail forever without a trial. The "Justice Department" is an arm of the Republican party now, some justice. I cannot think of one positive thing to come out of Washington in the last six years. Lewis Black said it best, "the Democrats are a party of no ideas and the Republicans are a party of really f*&ked up ideas." I don't know which is worse. I'm leaning toward no ideas.

I've said it before and I say it again...
"Not a day goes by that I do not wonder why it is we pay these corporate hacks fifteen+ times the minimum wage (plus benefits of substantial value) when they don't seem to have a clue what their job description is!"

Their token votes and political postures are costing lives, our treasury, our environment, our self respect, and our reputation in the world community.
I rarely hear substantial values I embrace reflected in their official political discussions.

Who decided that only businesspeople, judiciary, and lawyers are "electable" representatives of the common American? Why aren't teachers and firemen, and other folks we all deal with on a daily basis, better suited to the task? We actually know how to get along and solve our community problems (without having to be wined and dined to do so!)

No Taxation without representation! Perhaps a boycott of Political salaries until we get results - when Peace, Environmental Integrity, Affordable Education, Universal Health Care, Equal Rights, and Adequate Compensation, are America's central precepts of operation!

Most of them are dirty rats supporting Bush's barbaric invasion/occupation of Iraq, and the barbaric occupation of Palestine.

Hilary & Obama, said that they were against the occupation, but both voted to give Bush another 100 billion.

Dennis Kucinich is the best man for prez in 2008. He'll bring revolutionary changes, like peace and diplomacy, instead of lies and wars.

http://kucinich.us/

aum33:
Before you send for your Kucinich bumper sticker, yard sign and t-shirt stop and think a moment about the sucking noise you'll hear from the DNC and the Democratic Party as it pulls you and other 'hopefuls for the future' in under their tent.

Think outside the box. Think outside the party of two-faced corporate puppets. I love what Kuicinich stands for. His platform couldn't be any more Green if he actually ran as one. But he stands no chance at being nominated by a party that has sold its soul to corporate profits and right/centrist ideas. Unless Hillary's campaign self implodes, it's already a done deal, the sript has been written by the real powers in Dem politics, not by leftists on the fringe of the party.

The new journey starts with the first step.

Surprise, Surprise!

Don't just write in non-party candidates, change your registration to non-aligned (be careful with "Independent" as there are some state parties with that label).

As every lover on the make knows, nothing attracts attention like indifference.

Pelosi proved herself to be a paper tiger. Time to send another message and put an end to "business as usual". Vote out the incumbents, new president, new congress, new start.

I don't think a poll of the American people is sufficient. What we need is a COMPARISON poll. We need a poll of Corporate America to compare to the satisfaction of the Public. I bet somebody in this country is happy with the work of our government and a comparison poll would express the difference between government not doing its job and government doing its job for the people that bought it.

This poll is bullshit! The public in a bipartisan coup fired the worst of the republicans and the remaining republican crooks in office and media are only trying to make it look like the public does not approve of the new Congress. Republicans are desperate liars, cornered like rats! This poll is just another convoluted lie! Don't believe the lie!

The next US President will be Nancy Pelosi.

I agree that congress is doing an awful job, however, in close races only about half of the voters select the winner.

Only half of the eligible vote. So best case scenario is 25% of the eligible voters puts their member of congress in office.

That is a maximum of 25% before they take any position. It is an absolute surprise to me that anyone thinks congress should have higher than 25% approval.

Congress deserves a 1% approval if you base it on who they are working for.

"Dennis Kucinich is the best man for prez in 2008. He'll bring revolutionary changes, like peace and diplomacy, instead of lies and wars."

Kucinich talks a good game. Nevertheless, he is really not that different. Our experience with the Kucinich campaign in New Hampshire during the '04 primary was one of chaos, incompetence, confusion, and ineptitude. Those occasions when candidate Kucinich passed through the area were, for the most part, photo-ops with very little exchange of ideas percolating up from the 'grassroots'. For he, too, the motivational thrust was for money.
Couldn't help wondering at the time if there wasn't something incongruous about a Vegan who dyes his hair?
It's all show biz with smoke and mirrors

I'm not sure I trust any poll anymore, and our elections? Recent history has shown they are just as suspect as they have ever been...
Nevertheless, Progressives need to keep reminding themselves that progress is slow but still inexorable. Did you expect miracles with a one vote majority in the Senate, and Bush still in the White House? The Democrats, with all their faults, are a damn sight better than the other party and, at present, the two party system is still in control. We have to look at last year's election as the first small step in a better direction that has been made since 2000. Don't take you eyes off of the Big Picture, and that Big Picture is making sure a Republican will NOT be our next President. If we achieve that, a lot of things might start to change.
Our time-frame on many issues (not just Iraq) is too short to cut and run to the ever present fantasy of creating a powerful progressive Third Party. As much as I admire the Green Party and agree with its beliefs, I remember the 2000 election and its disaterous consequences.
Our best hope as Progressives is to keep pushing the Democrats toward our philosophies and positions, essentially bringing the party back to its FDR roots. I think this started to happen with the last election. Now is not the time to jump ship unless you really want see to Rudy G. or Mitt the Mormon as your next President.

There is no hope.

Why limit change to Democrats? Surely there must be some Republicans with a brain who oppose secret prisons, massive spying on American's phone calls,
torture, War without End and massive deficits while wasting $690 Billion on endless War.
There needs to be a full-court press across every
possible place to change. There is no reason Republican incumbents should only get challenged by Rovian right-wing crazies when they filibuster against Gonzales censor, cheaper prescription drugs and especially block ending the disaster in Iraq...

We would be better off with no government at all. Sure it would take all my energy just to survive but how would that be different from trying to live on what is left after these thieves get through voting themselves 150,000 per year (on top of all the graft they take) and then telling the rest of us that 17000 a year is not poverty. Besides, no war, no prisons, no military, no death penalty.

Money talks.

The Big Guy said:
" As much as I admire the Green Party and agree with its beliefs, I remember the 2000 election and its disaterous consequences."

Yes, Big Guy, I agree. If only all those progressive Democrats would have had the courage to vote for Nader and the Green Party that carried the platform of their true beliefs we would be in a much better position today. You're right. Those stupid, stupid people who voted for Gore and screwed up the chance for real change in this country should be ashamed. Look where it got them!

"Bush and his Capitol Hill allies have thus far managed to block every Democratic attempt to force a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, much to the chagrin of Democrats around the country."

No. All that has to be done is not pass a spending bill at all.
If the Democrats have a one-vote majority, nothing can pass
unless they cave in. All this BS about not having a veto-proof
majority is political posturing.

newageartist: Indeed, one strategy is that progressives and moderates totally abandon the Democratic Party, to leave it a brain-drained shell of neocons and corporate controllers at the top. Middle America may not listen to its thoughtful progressives, but when it sees an undiluted soul of the corporate Democratic Party they'll lose faith and switch to third parties, making them viable for the first time in like 150 years -- or demanding Range or IRV with pitchforks in hand.

The crux of the problem is that, although they mean well and you could argue that a progressive takeover (for the first time) of the Democratic Party is a viable goal, it is arguably the very presences of progressives in their ranks -- allowed to sound good, but never allowed to the top -- that legitimizes the Great Compromise after the primaries.

I really think we need to get a to a post-left/right politics. We're now at the politics of up vs. down, criminal vs. law-abiding, common sense vs. sociopathic, peaceful vs. hawkish, etc. None of this can afford to be scoped in simple left/right terms. We're beyond that. At this point I'd take a peaceful and honest government first, whatever ideology it had after that would be almost completely moot.

It's possible that a solid number of Americans want to go beyond the artificially pumped up left/right dichotomy and are looking for "a peaceful and honest government first". But such a government can't come out of a vacuum. In other words, can we Americans look at ourselves and honestly say we are a peaceful nation? Are we truly honest with ourselves? I'm not talking about Common Dreams contributors who are doing their utmost to bring friendly dialogue to a new level of art form here.

I was astounded that so many people voted for Reagan, against their real self-interests. I would go around asking friends: Why would workers vote for a man who has a proven history of union busting? Why would ordinary people vote for someone who clearly favored the wealthy and not the average working person? The answer I got was that people identified with the dream of having great wealth themselves and wanted their President to reflect that greatness, i.e., the "greatness" of the promise of material abundance for their children if not for themselves.

True enough, the last two presidential elections were stolen (statement based on Greg Palast's *Armed Madhouse*), yet despite the dirty tricks, apparently millions of people actually voted for George Bush Jr to be the President of the United States! That in itself is astounding, and says something about people's level of discrimination. He was lying from the start when he claimed to be a "compassionate conservative" which was belied by his record as governor of Texas and attested to long and loudly by Molly Ivins. He has been deceitful in so many ways (Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and illegal wiretapping to name two) and yet "impeachment is off the table." And the heart of America, even though bleeding to death, does not rise up and denounce this man's lack of leadership in the lawful manner ordained in our Constitution.

The question is, can we make the next necessary transition in governance, from nation state to limited global governance? We think cleaning up Congress is a tough job? Well, wait for the challenge coming up of voluntarily releasing a portion of our national sovereignty in order to embrace the good of the entire planet. Global warming, the needs for energy, humanitarian considerations demand it. Yet how many of us in our hearts are willing to go beyond not only right/left politics but also my country right or wrong?

Congressional Democrats just don't get it. They apparently have no idea why they were elected, what their constituency expected of them. Thus far all they've provided are feeble token gestures, and there's no sign that they will change this. I doubt they read the polls either.

iris: excellent argument. How do we as Americans look beyond the politics of 'now' to embrace a compassion for 'tomorrow'??? I have no answer. Utopian Socialism? Good luck selling that one in the U S of A!

Sang Ze: May I change your opening statement? "Democratic "VOTERS" just don't get it!" When voters who constantly pull the Dem Party lever out of mindless unquestioning habit more than out of intelligent political conviction to issues, we get what we vote for. Democrats have no reason to complain. They need to look beyond if they really want change. After watching how our political system has melted into one big corporate self-serving blob, one wonders if Democratic voters will EVER get it.