Perhaps not having an identifiable or coherent message is exactly what Rahm Emanuel's style of political strategy is.

It's his style to be mushy, obtuse, and wishy-washy.  He thinks that endears the caucus to the moderates.  

Rahm is a bona fide believer in Clintonian centrism and triangulation.  He's stuck in the 90s.  And, what makes that worse, is he seems to not have learned a thing from the 2006 election.

Rahm's strategy ensures that we accomplish much less of what we in fact can, whether on the war or any other issue.  But he's happy, because he's in Congress and could give a shit about progressive change.

funding the occupation for another 18 months? - stupid and immoral.

bleh.

after years of support i just sadly cancelled my moveon subscription - because they are supporting continued funding of the occupation until 2 months before the 2008 election. craven.

Rahmit, 'Chuckie' and 'Madame Speaker' are determined to snatch defeat from victory.

I submit to you Matt, and anyone else out there, that no group, no group, of politicians since the Civil War has been stupid enough to think they could 'wait out' or 'finesse' the level of rage in the citizenry we see now.

Frankly what I want is Rove, Bush, Cheney et. al. to go to the gallows, after a fair trial, for crimes against humanity and what do we get?

Mealy-mouthed bullshit, apart from Biden's surprising speech, about 'our hands are tied', 'there's nothing we can do', or Joey the LiarMann and 'SlimeBall' McCain saying 'Give Bush a Chance'.

Scum the lot of 'em and....

I think the people are going to sweep them out of office in droves in 2008.

Especially after the 'Great Housing Crash of 2007', 'The Khartoum Event of 2008 in Iraq' and Bush declaring that he is standing tall against those who would oppose him.

And he gets away with it.

On the plus side there should be plenty of opportunity for progressives to get elected.

How does Senator Stoller sound?

Nah, I really see you in the House...bein' a 'man of the people' and all.

Payback is beeotch Madame 'Off the Table' Pelosi.

Yeah, you'll be the one 'off the table...'.
.

Pass resolutions & laws in pieces, with clear titles and purposes, with a storyline for each, such as suggested in The Nation Magazine http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?pid =176729

[Concretely, Congress should be pushed to take legislative action to renounce the Bush doctrine of "preventive war" enunciated before he invaded Iraq.]

Another, forbid invasion of Iran, as Pelosi has promised will be debated next, separately from the supplemental.

I think Pelosi's clarity is what keeps her popular. She shares the stage but when it comes to policy, her voice is the One.

Reid should have let 'em filibuster their tails off instead of giving them an already decided vote on Iraq. The outrage of shutting down the Senate to support Bush would have been eclipsed only by an H-bomb. This was the only chance he will ever get to break their backs by an outrageous filibuster.

This poll is really about Harry Reid and nobody else. Watch for somebody to Tom Daschle him in the '10 election unless there is a new Majority Leadass in the Senate come next January.

Oh, yeah. I'm from Nevada and nobody here's real happy either with Reid and his playmate Ensign. There's the smell of blood in the water (or desert as the case may be).

If the supplemental bill passes the House, I expect this slide to reverse itself.

What if the supplemental bill fails in the house?

Or passes in the house and fails in the senate?

What's your prediction then?

The Democrats face another disadvantage in that their caucus is comprised of moderates and some conservatives.  It truly is a big tent, which presents some problems.  

Contrast this with the Republicans, who have largely purged themselves of moderate and liberal members, making them a more cohesive unit.  They don't have to worry about firming up the support of the left flank of their caucus.

I was disinclined to believe the media hype about how the '06 elections were actually a triumph of sorts for conservatism, but the Blue Dogs and some of the freshman class are largely proving it right through their actions (and more importantly, their inaction).

If you think this is wrong, please explain.

Someone wrote once that the biggest difference  having a Democratic majority in Congress would make would be having the right to subpoena power.  We don't have a veto-proof majority, so legislating amounts to incremental changes invisible to the public at this point.  

But investigations in the early stages are mostly convincing only to those who "knew it all along."  It is quite possible that the USAttorney case at this point is not actually showing clearly the abrupt changes brought about by the party change in Congress.  But my prediction is that, after a year or two of ever more sordid scandals, even if that means that not much governing is done, there may begin to be a general impression that SuperNanny has arrived.  (My apologies. I live in Europe without a television.  Is Supernanny shown in the United States?)

Obvious explanation: Many liberals, including myself, think Pelosi doing a great job but are mad at the Senate over Iraq. It feels good to say it: I'm mad at Ried and the Senate Democrats! Get your friggin' act together! If it takes you that long to get a resolution to the floor, with all of that public support, then how do you expect to pass the resolution, let alone pass a decent supplemental or a deauthorization? Rrrrr!

Like you said, Matt, if the supplemental gets through without being watered down too much, then my faith in Ried et al will be somewhat restored. But I'm not exactly holding my breath.

"Since Gallup didn't ask why approval ratings are falling, it's difficult to know what's going on."

Taking impeachment and the power of the purse off the table did it for me.

Now off to cancel my membership to moveon.

Obviously, Democratic and Independent voter approval of Congress went up with the optimism associated with the first 100 hours legislation passed by the House.  Those were good, heady days for Dems.  

And now...what has happened to all that good legislation folks?  It would seem that Reid and the Senate have it bottled up in committees going...where?!  Hurry up Senators!  That legislation must be passed in the Senate, go to conference, then put on Bush's desk pronto, ASAP.  

IMHO, the drop in ratings reflects a sense of disappointment that there have been no actual, completed legislative accomplishments...yet.  And yes, that disappointment is exacerbated by the Iraq resolution defeat in the Senate.  Where to begin with that "largely symbolic" bill and that fiasco?  

Pelosi and House Democrats have done well.  The Democrats in the Senate have NOT done so well.  Democrats are angry and impatient with Congress.  They do not want to see business as usual.  They don't want excuses.  They want results.  Give them some actual results folks.