http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/
"Do you believe President Bush’s actions justify impeachment? "
** 87 percent ** affirmed:
*Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial. *
I will be brief for the moment, browser is being a bowser. WTF? 87%? No, seriously, what the fuck?
Brevity suits you.
Bad use of time to impeach. Subpoena and let the historical record show the facts so that even unto the remotest corner of Alaska, it will be an occasion of deep shame to admit, I once voted Republican.
And in the mainland, the passing leadership will be shunned from coast to coast, hear their name as an obscenity each day, be refused service at public diners and the gas station and known that all about them know who they are.
Brevity takes too long.
You’d think that impeachment would be a death blow to the Republican party (or at least it’s radicalized fundamentalist wing), but I don’t think it would be. Look at how much effort they have put into rehabilitizing Nixon. In 20 years they’ll be spinning Bush into a mis-understood genius.
I think the best option for the Dems is to hold hearings, prosecute when warranted, but most importantly govern competently. I think the best contrast to the Republicans is to govern in the public interest.
And since this is the pit: Fuck George W. Bush, the motherfucking war criminal should burn in hell.
Well, newest Firefucks hasn’t crashed in five whole minutes. Maybe risk a word or two…
I would have been pleasantly and insufferably surprised to find an affirmative of 50 per cent. Based on nothing more than my inuition as to the mood of “the public”. Lord knows, as a symbol, its the joy of my desiring. Broached the subject some years back (something about lying, intelligence, Iraq…) and got my ankles bit, my face slapped and my fuzzy-thinking little head patted upon.
So, yeah, sure. Labored long in this direction, but still…87 per cent?! Thats like, uh…ah…its like…really a lot! It makes me wonder, and stare, and gape. WTF?
Then I realize: I have don’t have one of them there metrics! Nothing to measure it against but my masculine intuition. Which ain’t always the best, ya know? And why don’t I have such a thing? Because I can’t recall any of the liberal tedia even voicing the question, until now. And when they do…Lord love a duck, that is some goddam number!
I will entertain suggestions that somebody is crazy or is lying, so long as it isn’t me.
Well, we now know what is wrong with Nancy Pelosi as potential Speaker of the House – she’s waay too conservative to reflect the actual stance of the American people! 
Seriously, I am intrigued by that poll – I know more than a few hotheads have said Bush deserves impeachment, but that 87% figure!!! Wow!!!
I think Bush is a fucking incompetent idiot with his stupidity only possibly surpassed by those that continue to support him, but I don’t think that’s a reason to impeach him. Full disclosure: I voted for the monkey in 2000 but thankfully not in '04.
-Lil
Oh, fer…
The DU and/or other rabid groups who hate Bush had to have put out the call to flood this survey. I don’t see anything to get into a twist over. I mean, there’s 358645 responses at this moment, which is a ridculous amount for any poll to get. And I say this as someone who thinks there very well could be cause to impeach Bush. But that poll is shit.
Could be. Is this your surmise, or have you any actual evidence?
And for that matter, why wouldn’t such luminary locations as NewsMax and Little Green Turdballs mount a counter-offensive? Thier trucks dont go to the right tubes on the Google?
It’s an online poll. People who do think Bush should be impeached jump at the chance to vote. People who don’t think Bush should be impeached aren’t motivated enough to respond.
This doesn’t demonstrate overwhelming dissatisfaction with Bush, it demonstrates the ovferwhelming uselessness of online polls.
Actual evidence?
That an on-line poll that includes only respondents that choose to add their vote just might not be scientific?
Have you ever seen any rational poster on the SDMB accept an on-line poll as evidence of anything more than that x web surfers could each get their mouse to activate a radio button? (And I am not bothering with the poll, but is there any provision/software lock that prevents individuals from posting more than once?)
The safe “surmise” is that every on-line poll is junk.
Uh, no. That the poll has been buggered by some specific variety of persons bent on poll-buggery.
As in “…The DU and/or other rabid groups who hate Bush had to have put out the call to flood this survey…”
Sorry, thought that was obvious.
Hush now, Tom, you’re going to burst Elucidator’s bubble, being all reasonable, and such.
No viable returns.
He’s the lamest of lame ducks and it would take 2 years to process an impeachment indictment against him, which would not fix the problems he’s cause and would impair Congress’s ability to do anything constructive, and moreover would give the voting public the sense that the only diff between Dems and Repubs is “they’re them and we’re us” and that each party cares most about knifing their opponents as often and as lethally as possible.
I do think he commited high crimes, low crimes, crimes of average height, and misdemeanors. Let the stupid fuck walk nonetheless. Go govern something instead.
I really wanted Bush to be impeached at one time, but I think it might be counter-productive at this point. First of all, we’d just get Cheney in charge, meaning nothing would change, and it might just cause a huge backlash against the Democrats who 1.) promised to focus on moving forward and bipartisanship and 2.) promised not to - ahem - impeach Bush.
Now, if there’s any way we can punish him after a Democrat gets elected in '08 . . .
You wouldn’t get 87% of respondents in a proper poll to even know there were “deceptions” and “secret spying”, much less agree that it deserves impeachment.
If this isn’t a case of ballot box stuffing, I’ll eat my hat.
You might want to examine that “reasonable” thing and emulate it, someday.
Which is not to say that I personally put any trust in this poll. It’s an online poll, and those are, pretty much without exception, scientifically invalid. Online polls have a self-selected sample, which buggers the numbers all to hell. There IS a reason that professional poll-takers sample randomly…
Look, I’m really more interested in the phenomenon itself than in any particular political action that may, or may not, be contemplated. (At his point, I lean away from impeachment because it would take too long and suck up too much energy.)
I am advised that the poll is not scientific, which I had sort of surmised by that thing at the bottom, saying, “This isn’t scientific” So thanks for sharing that. Nonetheless, this thing is remarkable as it is, not for interpretations that may be unscientificly drawn from it.
And my dependent question: how do we know this is nuts if nobody else has asked the question? Has anyone?
A Zogby poll in January of this year had the number in favor of impeachment at 52%. Frankly, impeachment is such a serious option that I can’t see a whole lot of movement upward in that number since, though that’s just my opinion. Pretty much everything we know now we knew then as far as impeachable offenses go. The worsening of Iraq isn’t impeachable. Incompetence isn’t impeachable. And really, the only difference between January and now is that more incompetence has floated to the surface of the murk.