Posted by Curt on 6 September, 2013 at 2:20 pm. 4 comments already!



Just 25 likely yeses, with fully 184 reps still quietly undecided. Even if that group splits with roughly two-thirds in favor of attacking, the House will be in the ballpark of defeating this thing with nearly 300 votes.

Right now, more than 60 Democrats are either firm no’s or leaning that way. Did O wait too long to deliver the national lecture on Syria?

A lack of any sort of obvious, coherent game plan for convincing the public action needs to be taken against Syria and a decision to leave congressmen in their districts to be confronted by angry voters is making it increasingly difficult for members to back President Obama.

“The calls have been overwhelmingly against. We should have been called back [into session] immediately, there should have been a national address, New Jersey Republican Frank LoBiondo said Thursday…

Leaving a hot button issue to linger in public is something of a rookie legislative move — leaders in both chambers will routinely keep controversial bills under wraps until after a recess to avoid opponents from picking it apart and building a public outcry against it.

But rather than bring Congress back into the protective cocoon of the Washington echo-chamber where they would be insulated from direct constituent contact, and more amenable to agreeing to strikes, the White House has left them vulnerable to public opinion.

According to Gallup’s new poll, support for hitting Syria is running at 36/51, the lowest level at the start of hostilities for any major American military action over the past 25 years. (Conservative and liberal opposition is similar at 33/59 and 37/51, respectively.) Only the intervention in Kosovo in 1999 saw public approval similarly underwater early on, and that was within the margin of error at 43/45. Not only that, but here’s a useful comparison from the Cook Report:

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x