home

67% Support Not Funding the Iraq Debacle Past 2008: Reid-Feingold Anyone?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 02:45:26 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

barb has this from CBS :

Which of these comes closest to your opinion? 1. Congress should block all funding war in Iraq no matter what OR 2. Congress should allow funding only for a limited period of time OR 3. Congress should allow all funding for the war in Iraq without a time limit.

Block all funding 9
Allow only w/time limit 58
Should allow all funding 29
Don't know/No answer 4

Reid-Reingold anyone? How about you Presidential candidates? Who will join Chris Dodd now?

< Alberto Gonzales: The Lawyers Behind the Hearing | McCain: Out Of Iraq? When The American People Say So >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    67% Support Not Funding the Iraq Debacle Past 2008: Reid-Feingold Anyone? | 5 comments (5 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    maybe they're waiting for a super-majority... (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Compound F on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 02:47:53 PM EST


    67% IS a supermajority....... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 08:52:28 AM EST
    eom

    Parent
    The good news (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 03:18:31 PM EST
    Is that Pelosi and Reid WILL notice these numbers. Bush can wave them away, but he can't force congress to fund with hand-waving.

    Defining Reid-Feingold (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by mattd on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 05:45:02 PM EST
    Hey, BTD:

    Since this isn't getting as much play as you'd like, it might help those like me (who get lost at times) if you link to a definition of Reid-Feingold, like this sentence just did.

    I forget details of some proposals, and TL is currently the #1 result on Google for "Reid-Feingold," so easy fact access may be quite helpful, especially when you're arguing that more people should be supporting it because they actually agree with its provisions.

    Just a suggestion.  (See?  I can be helpful, if necessary.)

    Clarification (none / 0) (#5)
    by jakesavage on Mon Apr 16, 2007 at 12:31:43 AM EST
    The title of the post is technically incorrect. It is true that 67% in the poll support a time limit (58%) or an immediate end (9%) for funding. However, the question doesn't mention a time limit of 2008.

    In a separate question, 57% support setting a "timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq by 2008." It's not a huge difference, I grant you, but it's worth noting if you want to use the 67% number to support the specifics of Reid-Feingold.

    67% Support Not Funding the Iraq Debacle Past 2008: Reid-Feingold Anyone? | 5 comments (5 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment