From a just released ABC/Washington Post poll, Most Back Cuts Overall – But Not to the Military:
For all the dire warnings, most Americans welcome a five percent cut in overall federal spending this year. But the defense budget is another matter.
The public by nearly 2-1, 61-33 percent, supports cutting the overall budget along the lines of the sequester that took effect last Friday. But by nearly an identical margin, Americans in this ABC News/Washington Post poll oppose an eight percent across-the-board cut in military spending.
2-1 support sequester cuts save defense. Has Obama made biggest political miscalculation in years? abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics…
— John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) March 6, 2013
The best evidence this poll is bad news for Obama is the reaction:
If spending cuts are so popular, as Rs are claiming today, why won’t they propose specific cuts to avert the sequester?
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) March 6, 2013
Why should we, the sequester cuts — other than the military — are working out fine so far, and there will be bipartisan agreement to give the military more flexibility.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Ha, Greg Sargent is a Sargent in the water carrying brigade. He was having this argument with Brad Dayspring on twitter a few weeks ago and complained of being tired of running in circles with Dayspring. I wrote a sarcastic tweet saying he was tired because Dayspring was whipping his sorry behind. He wrote me back and called me a tea party crazy, lol.
Obama really overplayed his hand and I think polls have finally begun to show it. All of a sudden Barack Obama has discovered a legislative body AKA the Senate whose members have a curious device known as a telephone. You know his internal polling must have been tanking for him to have voluntarily picked up the phone and called Senators. He spent the entire 4 years in office avoiding calling anyone but his campaign and the golf course.
Mary Sue lol about the “water carrier.” 100% correct.
But the GOP has proposed changes. The senate has not acted on them. Like you can expect accuracy from Greg Sargent.
At least twice.
And they offered to allow Pres. Freakout to be fully in control of the management of the REDUCTIONS IN THE INCREASE (we should not mimic the gimmick…if I could get a lil’ Johnny Cochran).
David, I agree 100%. Of course the House GOP has proposed solutions. When I mentioned Obama’s new found discovery of the telephone and the Senate I didn’t mean to imply this was necessary because there were no solutions in the House.
It is really a matter that Obama’s campaign and blame strategy wasn’t working. Now he’ll pretend he is working with reasonable folks in the Senate. If his approval was increasing or holding steady while Americans continued to project blame for the sequester onto Republicans, he’d never have bothered to call anyone in the Senate.
Whenever I see the term water carrier I’m reminded of the Mel Brooks film History of the World Part I, “Piss boy, oh piss boy!”
I’d warn against crowing over Obama’s “failure”.
Two more budget battle loom, and Obama has proven he can mop the floor with Boehner and McConnel with relative ease.
I have never believed that Obama would cut any actual non-military spending, and still don’t.
This so called “sequestration” is a dream come true for Obama.
He gets to completely gut the military. So far, it has affected 4, not 1, carrier groups, has cut health benefits, education benefits, troop readiness, troop levels, equipment maintenance, ended sporting event fly-overs, scuttled the Blue Angles and Thunderbirds…
More importantly, he now has a life-long excuse for his crippled economy.
Lastly, Obama’s just getting started. Never underestimate the creativity of a progressive.
Those new TSA rules? Designed solely to cause chaos and back logs at airports–the opposite of how it’s being sold–making air travel more “user-friendly”.
Memo to Greg Sargent: They did. Now go ask Harry Reid about it. And Obama while you’re at it….
My thoughts, too. There’s been no shortage of suggestions from the Repubs. I cannot fault them, there.
This is your friendly, neighborhood Liberal, telling you that this administration is not living up to Liberal ideas of social responsibility, or of governmental housekeeping.
That was my first thought as well. The “specific cuts” were outlined in more than one budget proposed to the Senate, which the Democrats refused to pass. The indiscriminate cuts (i.e. sequester) are the responsibility of Obama first and the Senate Democrats second. This is what they wanted. They wanted to deceive people in order to delay reconciling with reality.
There can be no military cuts while our forces are deployed. There can be no military cuts until the reasons our military, and security forces generally, are deployed are addressed. This begins, but does not end, with energy policy (not just our own).
The GOP should be all over the news taking credit for the increase in the stock market. It is directly related to sequestration. Since dear leader wanted nothing to do with that, don’t let him take credit for the good results. Of all people, Boehner and McConnell need to get this message: cuts are good, taxes are bad. Recent polls back that up. Their failure to capitalize on this market bounce shows their incredible naivety of the PR game.
I’d love to know how Brit Hume’s point polls: Do Americans think the Obama administration is trying to specifically find ways to hurt voters, so as to exxagerate the impact of the sequester on everyday people?
Have we noticed how awkwardly ABC/WP headlines the results of this poll:
“Most Back Cuts Overall – But Not to the Military”
Isn’t that essentially the same as saying Americans support cuts only to entitlement spending?
The headline ought to have read:
“By 2:1 Americans Back Cuts To Entitlement Spending, Not To Military Spending”
There are 110,000 plus US Military personnel in Japan & South Korea. – much more than the total in Afghan actually fighting a war.
The Duke of York
He mhad 10,000 men
He marched them up to the top of the hill
And he marched them down again.
[…] What if the President threw a Sequester hissy-fit, and no one cared? […]