Washington Times on Bob Barr’s possible presidential bid

The Washington Times just caught wind of the movement to draft former Congressman Bob Barr to run on the Libertarian Party ticket for president.

Mr. Barr, a House Republican impeachment manager during President Clinton’s administration, yesterday confirmed his interest in running as a Libertarian but said he is unwilling to talk about any “polling we may have done or may do, not at this point.”

“There is great deal [of] dissatisfaction with the candidates for the two major parties, particularly among conservatives, but also a great deal of Internet and other support for a candidate like Ron Paul who advocates libertarian and true conservative principles,” said Mr. Barr, who is now a Libertarian.

Activists have started a Facebook campaign to draft Mr. Barr for the Libertarian Party nomination.

Here’s more on the Facebook group, BTW.

GOP presidential campaign pollster John McLaughlin said a Barr bid wouldn’t be good for Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee. It “takes more points from us than Nader takes from them,” he said.

Pollster John Zogby agreed.

“Why should Democrats have all the fun worrying about Nader? Republicans can try to implode, too,” Mr. Zogby said. “My gut sense is that Bob Barr can get some votes as a consistent libertarian who opposed the Patriot Act, budget deficits and gun control.”

It’s interesting to see serious pollsters already talking about the potential impact of an LP candidate who isn’t even in the race. Of course, John McCain’s people have to disagree:

The McCain campaign shrugged off a possible Barr challenge.

“We certainly always expected there would be a Libertarian nominee,” said McCain campaign senior adviser Charles Black. “Bob Barr is has been a distinguished public servant, but one of America’s best-known conservatives, Pat Buchanan, did not poll as many votes running as an independent as did Ralph Nader in 2000. So who knows what the impact will be.”

Of course, there’s the Ron Paul factor:

An aide to Ron Paul, the Texas congressman who remains in the Republican race, said his boss likes Mr. Barr and has talked to him about his prospects with Mr. Paul”s supporters. Mr. Paul broke Internet fundraising records in his run for the Republican nomination and has an e-mail list of 400,000 committed donors and activists that would be helpful to a general-election run by Mr. Barr.

Mr. Barr declined to say whether he has approached Mr. Paul.

Here’s confirmation that Barr and Paul actually met. What they talked about is between the two of them, at this moment.

Barr also introduced Paul at CPAC, where a lot of Romney supporters were asking me to push Barr to run for president.

Funniest of all was the RNC response:

Asked for a response, Republican National Chairman Mike Duncan did not mention Mr. Barr’s name, saying instead that “John McCain is the presumptive nominee, and the Republican Party is uniting behind his vision for low taxes, strong national and fiscal responsibility.”

Mike Duncan may be afraid (one wonders what he might be afraid of) to say Bob Barr’s name, but I’m not afraid to use McCain’s. The conservative wing of the GOP hates McCain, who generally misses CPACs. When he does show, he gets booed. Armed with BCRA, Duncan is cheerleading for the man who has basically pledged a 100 year war on the First Amendment.

“We look forward to engaging all elements of the electorate and working toward a victory this fall that will move our nation forward,” Mr. Duncan said.

Except for those “elements of the electorate” who believe in a smaller and more responsible government, that is. If Barr jumps in, hopefully his campaign will own that base—one which the GOP has been boldly betraying since the 1994 elections.

44 Responses to “Washington Times on Bob Barr’s possible presidential bid”

  1. Mike Gillis Says:

    Well, so much for the theory that Wayne Allyn Root is the LPer to get the most mainstream press.

    Barr gets more mainstream press in a heartbeat than Root’s gotten so far. I wouldn’t vote for either of these men, but Barr sounds like a far superior candidate to me.

    The press actually bothered to ask the major candidates about Barr and his potential impact on the race. The only other candidate the press has done that for is Ralph Nader.

    The LP would be much smarter to nominate someone like Barr. It’d beat the hell out of the pro-war informercial guy who sent 1,000 bucks to Joe Lieberman.

  2. Robert Milnes Says:

    I guarantee that if the LP candidate goes to the Green convention, as I would, & asks for & gets their endorsement, as I would, THAT would get a LOT of poll spikes & MSM attention.

  3. BobBarrFan Says:

    My apologies to SG for accusing him in the past of making up this Barr campaign to generate web traffic.

    Run Bob, run!

  4. Fred C. Says:

    Unlike Pat Buchanan, Barr has actually held elected office.

  5. Ghoststrider Says:

    Here’s my lame slogan to cheer Bob on:

    “Barr them from taking office, Bob!”

  6. Stephen Gordon Says:

    Ghost—my wife’s current favorite is “Raising the Barr!”

  7. silver Republican Says:

    Barr, far from being another activist, is someone people can imagine as president. This would be a wise move from a Libertarian standpoint, especially if Barr doesn’t make any very radical statements. Winning the election and winning the Ron Paul vote are two very different things.

    I wonder whether the press would cover the constitiuon party if they nominated Moore or any other more visable candidate.

  8. Robert Milnes Says:

    silver Republican, I wonder whether Ronulans will double dip for Bob Barr. Or if he would do the pragmatist LEFT libertarian thing & accept matching funds. OR…what? Rely on Liberty Decides? Where is he getting campaign & party funding? I would get mine from matching funds and/or 40 million potential voters.

  9. Bren Burk Says:

    Robert,

    You are the most annoying person in this blog. You have a fetish about liberaltarians and fantasies about becoming the libertarian nominee. You are a horrible speaker and you idle people who other libertarians would view as awful people. You have no chance at winning the nomination and you should go back to writing fantasy novel about how you and Teddy Roosevelt took the Republic into space spreading democracy all the way to the progressive planet of Zwikola, located 2lightyears left of the Milky Way.

  10. Bren Burk Says:

    This is great news. God, I surely do hope he gets the libertarian nomination and on all 50 ballots. And, I would love to see a Barr/Paul ticket. And, 15% in the polls so they can debate. And, they win the nomination. And, the Republic is restored.

    I can have my own fantasies too, can’t I?

  11. Eric Dondero Says:

    Or, imagine this. Barr gets a few millions votes, and McCain still wins. That’s a one-two punch for the Libertarian/Republican strategy. That would crush the liberal media once and for all.

    And judging by the very latest poll numbers out just last night, McCain is doing rather well all over: Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and stunningly up 54% to 28% over Obama in Kentucky.

    Barr gets 3 million votes. McCain wins the election. That’s a big victory for the Right.

  12. Eric Dondero Says:

    I stand corrected. I mistakenly said McCain was up over Obama in Kentucky by 54% to 28%. Here’s the latest numbers from RedState as of yesterday:

    OH: 3/14-16. RV. MoE 4.3% (2/26-28 results)

    McCain 50 (44)
    Obama 43 (47)

    McCain 44 (42)
    Clinton 50 (52)

    MO: 3/14-16. RV. MoE 4.3% (2/26-28 results)

    McCain 53 (43)
    Obama 39 (49)

    McCain 48 (44)
    Clinton 46 (51)

    KY: 3/14-16. RV. MoE 4.3% (2/3-4 results)

    McCain 64 (61)
    Obama 28 (32)

    McCain 53 (53)
    Clinton 43 (43)

  13. Deleted Says:

    COMMENT DELETED by Stephen Gordon

    Reason: Commenter fraudulently claimed the identity of another person within the TPW community.

  14. Richie Says:

    Dondero - Considering the large amount of enthusiasm on the Democratic side and lack of enthusiasm on the Republican side, I don’t see how your scenario is possible. Bush’s approval rating is at an all time low. The American public is going to show up at the polls in droves to elect a Democratic President. It happened in 2006 - it will happen in 2008.

  15. Richie Says:

    Sign the petition to draft Bob Barr @ http://www.bobbarr2008.com/

  16. Bren Burk Says:

    Eric,

    You have a fetish yourself, neoconservative candidates who will carry the torch of the right and lead us to victory against the Islamic fascist fundamentalist extremist.

  17. Wes Benedict Says:

    At the recent Las Vegas LNC meeting, I moved to have the LNC adopt an Iraq Withdrawal Resolution opposing the Iraq War and calling for removal of American military forces from Iraq. The resolution was posted on TPW previously.

    LNC Treasurer, Aaron Starr, made a motion to substitute that resolution with the following:

    “Resolved, the LNC applauds staff’s ongoing public policy pronouncements on public policy matters. ”

    Starr’s resolution came within one vote of passage, which would have killed the Iraq Withdrawal resolution.

    You can see how that vote went by viewing the “LNC Roll Call Votes” compiled by Chuck Moulton. The vote tallies are in the fifth from the right column, and somewhat misleadingly labeled “Sub. commend staff for anti-war resolution:”
    http://www.chuckmoulton.org/libertarian/2008/voting/

    Bob Barr voted against that substitute motion. So, in effect, Bob Barr’s one vote resulted in later passage of the “Anti-war resolution.”

    Bob Barr earned my support that day.

  18. Stephen Gordon Says:

    Wes,

    I thought that you might have been equally impressed when he stood firmly with the minority to support Angela Keaton’s substitute motion on the Steve Burden “resignation” issue.

    If I remember correctly, you and Barr were the key people supporting Angela, and Barr spoke forcefully on the issue.

  19. Robert Milnes Says:

    Bren Burk, a Barr/Paul ticket is probably not going to happen. Paul is going on to GOP convention obscurity. Barr/anybody will not get 15% polling & will not get into the debates. The LP may very well get 49/50 ballots-all wasted on Bob Barr. Excellent fantasy.

  20. Robert Milnes Says:

    I prefer obnoxious to annoying.

  21. Brent Burk Says:

    I didn’t mean to spew so much hate. :) And maybe a Barr/Fein ticket? Dono.

  22. Robert Milnes Says:

    Brent Burke, here’s some hate for you. Steve Kubby & I signed the AFA. American Freedom Agenda. I am reconsidering this. I feel possibly duped. While I have no problem with it per se, part of its purpose is it “...represents disaffected conservatives who are demanding the Republican party return to its traditional mistrust of concentrated government power…founded by Bruce Fein (chairman), Bob Barr, David Keene and Richard Viguerie.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Freedom_Agenda I have no interest in trying to change or reform or have any such thing to do with the Republican Party.

  23. Chuck Moulton Says:

    Wes Benedict wrote:

    You can see how that vote went by viewing the “LNC Roll Call Votes” compiled by Chuck Moulton. The vote tallies are in the fifth from the right column, and somewhat misleadingly labeled “Sub. commend staff for anti-war resolution:”
    http://www.chuckmoulton.org/libertarian/2008/voting/

    I updated the label to hopefully be clearer. It now reads “Commend staff instead of anti-war resolution”. Please suggest wording changes if anything else in that document needs clarification.

  24. Robert Milnes Says:

    Bob Barr & Ron Paul are WAY too coochie-coo with the evil republican party.

  25. Robert Capozzi Says:

    Co-Founder Nolan made a pretty good point that it’s late in the game to launch Barr 08. Still, 08 is an historic opportunity, as McCain and the D will be especially weak candidates. The nation wants a 3rd choice. Barr is the most plausible and articulate shot the LP could mount, in the broad outlines, IMO.

  26. Stefan Says:

    A Barr-Ruwart ticket may raise the bar and attract a lot of votes, not only from conservatives in the GOP, but also Independents, a certain amount of anti-war Democrats and women as well. Paul will go to the RNC and a lot can still happen with McCain and his delegates between now and September. Depending on how the RNC goes, some “struggle” can be expected…in case the GOP does nominate McCain and he goes for a Lieberman VP type ticket, the CP/LP/third party would have even greater potential. McCain faces the ackward position that if he selects a conservative VP, he loses his potential with Independents etc. And in case he selects more a liberal, interventionist Lieberman type VP, the GOP faces a major backlash and the LP and CP would be a great alternative then. If the LP and CP can in some way combine/merge (perhaps under a name like Freedom Party etc.) united in their non-interventionist foreign policy, there could be even a stonger “third force”. They could also agree to co-operate with
    the election and merge later… Personally I am in favor of the Ron Paul startegy to take over the GOP as well, and one should see these are different strategies with the same goal in mind. Obviously one cannot wait 16 years for the GOP to reform back to its roots. If the GOP proves to be unreformable, the conservative-libertarian faction could combine with LP/CP in forming a third party, and in case the GOP does seem reformable, the LP/CP can join the GOP.
    The neoconservatives, that hijacked the GOP can then go back to the Democrats. and the “new GOP”/LP&CP would be able to attract Independents and Democrats that favor a non-interventionist foreign policy.

  27. Eric Dondero Says:

    Richie, what the liberal media doesn’t tell you is that the Democratic Congress ratings is at an all-time low of 13%. Compared to Bush at 31%, what does that tell you?

    Of course, you won’t hear that little fact mentioned on CNN, Time, Newsweek, NY Times, Washington Post, ect…

    And the lack of enthusiasm on the GOP side? Surely you jest. The biggest unwritten story of the last few weeks, is how the Republican Party - Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, Huckabee supporters - have all rallied around McCain with lightening speed, after a weekend of two of groaning about him being the Nominee.

    McCain has done everything right since he secured the nomination. This recent trip to the Middle East was a stunning success for him, and made him appear to be Presidential while the Dem side is all sniping.

    Final number: Norm Coleman has surged ahead of Al Franken in the last couple weeks. He now leads Franken 51% to 41%.

    And this is a Democrat-leaning almost blue state of Minnesota.

    What was that you were saying again about “GOP lack of enthusiasm.”

  28. Eric Dondero Says:

    Stefan, what if McCain chooses a libertarian VP? Someone like fmr. Congressman Chris Cox of California - a self-described “libertarian” and friend of the Orange County Libertarian Party. Or, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin - friend of the Alaska Libertarian Party. Or, often-described “libertarian” SC Gov. Mark Sanford. Or someone who leans libertarian, like California State Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia. Or, fmr. Ohio Congressman John Kasich. Or, Maryland’s Michael Steele.

    Picking a libertarian would be the perfect way to maneuver around the problem you describe for McCain.

    And I predict there’s a good chance we’ll see that happening.

  29. Eric Dondero Says:

    Sorry Bren Burk, NeoCons are a bunch of boobs IMHO. They’re almost aligned with the Islamic Sharia Law advocates. Certainly their two philosophies criss-cross on sexual matters, prudishness, drug legalization, gays, gambling, ect… Well, strike that last one. The Religious Right used to be passionately anti-Gambling. Last few years they’ve backed away significantly from that stance.

    But on all those other issues NeoCons and Muslim Fundamentalists are essentially aligned. Obviously, the NeoCons not being as fanatic as the Muslim Fundamentalists. You’d be hard-pressed to find any of them calling for stoning of Prostitutes or cutting off the genitals of Gay men.

    No, only the libertarian can be truly and honestly opposed to Islamic Fundamentalism for the right reasons: They oppose individual liberties, particularly on sexual matters.

  30. Eric Dondero Says:

    Now yesterday I posted those poll numbers for McCain, including the SHOCKING numbers out of Kentucky.

    I notice not a single one of you here has commented on those specific numbers? Kind of blows you all out of the water, ‘eh?

    What we’re seeing here is utter evidence that Libertarians have an extreme bias for the spoon-fed leftwing media. They ignore Fox, Drudge, RedState, HotAir.com, Pajama’s Media, Little Green Footballs, Newsbusters, National Review, American Spectator, Human Events, RightWingNews, Rush, Hannity, Beck, et.al. in favor of the DailyKos, Huffington Post, Washington Post, NY Times, and most certainly CNN.

    You all need to start getting a more balanced view of the media. Bet none of you had any idea at all about those amazing poll numbers favoring McCain.

    If you get your news spoon-fed from the likes of CNN, and Huffy Post, you ain’t gonna get the real story, just leftwing propoganda.

  31. Richie Says:

    Eric - I’m well aware of the approval ratings of the Democratically controlled Congress. All of the Democrats I know just blame it on Dubya. If you think the Obama/Clinton momentum is weaker then the McCain momentum, you need to take a step back and reexamine the facts.

  32. Eric Dondero Says:

    Then why is it Richie, that posters above, only singled out George Bush’s low poll numbers, while completely ignoring Nancy Pelosi and the Dem-controlled Congress, who have poll numbers far worse?

    It’s because all of them get their news spoonfed to them from far leftwing sources.

  33. dodsworth Says:

    Eric:

    McCain has done everything right? Nonsense. He wrongly said not once but several times that Iran was aiding Al Qaeda. He had to correct himself the last time when Loserman whispered in his ear that he was wrong. He is either a senile old man or simply an ill-informed idiot. Obama will kill him in the general.

  34. Eric Dondero Says:

    LOL. Dodsworth, you can’t be serious. Have you seen the latest poll numbers?

    How can you explain McCain ahead of Obama in a poll released two days ago for Kentucky: 64% to 28%. And Missouri? McCain ahead in the same poll - I believe it was ARG - 52% to 32%. Those are two very important swing states, that the Dems were hoping to pick up.

    And there’s new news on Obama, just breaking. In case you haven’t heard he called his own Grandma a “Typical White Person” on Philly radio yesterday. It’s all over the Political Blogs. This one is going to seriously damage him, even more so than Jeremiah Wright.

    I’d bet you’re a white guy, right Dodsworth? How do you feel about being called a “Typical White Guy”? Can you imagine you or me or any other “White Guy” using the phrase, “So and so, is just a Typical Black Guy.”

    Wow!

  35. Fred C. Says:

    I don’t understand how those polls were meant to blow anyone out of the water Dondero, this is a thread about Bob Barr, and he wasn’t included in them. Also, Kentucky broke about 60/40 for Bush in 04, didn’t it? It should have always been considered safe GOP, so what difference does it make how hard the liberal of the cycle gets rammed there?

    I’m not shedding any tears for that prick Franken though.

  36. Steve Says:

    Ghostrider said: “Barr them from taking office, Bob!”

    Steve Gordon said: “Raising the Barr!”

    I’m for “America needs a shot of freedom - step up to the Barr!” I would save “Raising the Barr” for the post-nomination fund-raising campaigns.

  37. paulie Says:

    Considering the large amount of enthusiasm on the Democratic side and lack of enthusiasm on the Republican side, I don’t see how your scenario is possible. Bush’s approval rating is at an all time low. The American public is going to show up at the polls in droves to elect a Democratic President. It happened in 2006 - it will happen in 2008.

    True. The Al-Sadr truce will break before the election, McCain is weak with his base, and the economy will spin further out of control. All bad news for the incumbent party.

    And I say this as someone who has no interest in voting for either leading Democrat, hasn’t voted for a Democrat since the ‘92 primaries, and considers the present Democratic leadership in Congress to have utterly sold out the voters who elected them - and predictably so.

    I don’t care who wins between McCain, Obama and Clinton, but it won’t be McCain. McCain’s temporary surge is based on two factors - one, the temporary truce in Iraq, which won’t hold into the fall, and two, the bad blood between Clinton and Obama, which will also be old news by then.

    If McCain is lucky, he will be the rough equivalent of Humphrey in 1968 or Stevenson in 1952, and if he is less lucky, of Hoover in 1932.

  38. paulie Says:

    # Wes Benedict Says:
    March 20th, 2008 at 10:42 pm

    At the recent Las Vegas LNC meeting, I moved to have the LNC adopt an Iraq Withdrawal Resolution opposing the Iraq War and calling for removal of American military forces from Iraq. The resolution was posted on TPW previously.

    LNC Treasurer, Aaron Starr, made a motion to substitute that resolution with the following:

    “Resolved, the LNC applauds staff’s ongoing public policy pronouncements on public policy matters. ”

    Starr’s resolution came within one vote of passage, which would have killed the Iraq Withdrawal resolution.

    You can see how that vote went by viewing the “LNC Roll Call Votes” compiled by Chuck Moulton. The vote tallies are in the fifth from the right column, and somewhat misleadingly labeled “Sub. commend staff for anti-war resolution:”
    http://www.chuckmoulton.org/libertarian/2008/voting/

    Bob Barr voted against that substitute motion. So, in effect, Bob Barr’s one vote resulted in later passage of the “Anti-war resolution.”

    Bob Barr earned my support that day.

    1. Stephen Gordon Says:
      March 20th, 2008 at 10:56 pm

    Wes,

    I thought that you might have been equally impressed when he stood firmly with the minority to support Angela Keaton’s substitute motion on the Steve Burden “resignation” issue.

    If I remember correctly, you and Barr were the key people supporting Angela, and Barr spoke forcefully on the issue.

    I was very favorably impressed by both of these votes by Mr. Barr.

  39. paulie Says:

    # Robert Milnes Says:
    March 20th, 2008 at 11:31 pm

    I prefer obnoxious to annoying.

    No, really?

  40. paulie Says:

    I’m well aware of the approval ratings of the Democratically controlled Congress.

    That Congress deserves its low approval. They have not stopped funding for the war or brought the troops home, the main mission they were given control of Congress to do. They have renewed the “patriot” act and basically in all important respects been doormats for Shrub.

    They are not going to get any more popular between now and November. But, in an anti-incumbent year like this one, it’s the president, not Congress, who always gets the bulk of the blame - and this year, there will be a lot of blame.

    One could argue that the new Democratic president could then expect to get a Republican Congress, but I think it is more likely that people will focus primarily on the presidency and that in a blowout year like this, when the Democrats will win easily by double digits, they will also have coattails that will translate into a bigger lead in Congress - despite how unpopular Congress is.

  41. Fred C. Says:

    Don’t forget the 29 retiring house republicans, and the DCCC’s $23 million advantage.

  42. paulie Says:

    A Barr-Ruwart ticket may raise the bar and attract a lot of votes, not only from conservatives in the GOP, but also Independents, a certain amount of anti-war Democrats and women as well. Paul will go to the RNC and a lot can still happen with McCain and his delegates between now and September. Depending on how the RNC goes, some “struggle” can be expected…in case the GOP does nominate McCain and he goes for a Lieberman VP type ticket, the CP/LP/third party would have even greater potential. McCain faces the ackward position that if he selects a conservative VP, he loses his potential with Independents etc. And in case he selects more a liberal, interventionist Lieberman type VP, the GOP faces a major backlash and the LP and CP would be a great alternative then. If the LP and CP can in some way combine/merge (perhaps under a name like Freedom Party etc.) united in their non-interventionist foreign policy, there could be even a stonger “third force”. They could also agree to co-operate with
    the election and merge later… Personally I am in favor of the Ron Paul startegy to take over the GOP as well, and one should see these are different strategies with the same goal in mind. Obviously one cannot wait 16 years for the GOP to reform back to its roots. If the GOP proves to be unreformable, the conservative-libertarian faction could combine with LP/CP in forming a third party, and in case the GOP does seem reformable, the LP/CP can join the GOP.
    The neoconservatives, that hijacked the GOP can then go back to the Democrats. and the “new GOP”/LP&CP would be able to attract Independents and Democrats that favor a non-interventionist foreign policy.

    And what policies will such a party have on social issues such as drugs, abortion, prostitution, gay rights, and religion in government?

    Immigration?

    Tariffs/trade?

    Not to mention it would take several years to get it on state ballots all over the country; the deadline to do so has passed in some states for this year.

  43. paulie Says:

    Nobody is going to care that much who the VP is, very few people end up voting on that issue. It just makes for a lot of speculation by bored media people.

    The only VP choice that will matter much this year will be in the DP. If Clinton picks Obama or vice versa, they will make a lot of progress towards reuniting the party for November. If Clinton goes with being vindictive and irrational, she’ll pick someone like Bill Richardson and thus create an opening for McKinney and Nader to peel away votes. Then again, she can afford it. Likewise if Obama gets the nod.

    McCain will probably pick either Lieberman or Romney. Lieberman would give him a shot at the middle and a halfassed hope to run away from the anger that will be focused on Bush. Romney will be a way he can try to get
    Reaganites from staying home or in some cases bolting (Barr, Moore, or whatever).

    If Ruwart is relegated to the second spot on the ticket, I don’t think it will mollify those libertarians who are skeptical of Barr. Not that he will care, since he will be too busy trying to carve a chunk out of the Republican vote to focus much attention on that.

  44. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    While approval numbers for Congress and the President are both interesting, they are fundamentally different. For a hilarious illustration of why, try PJ O’Rourke’s Parliament of Whores. For the boring version, here:

    There is one President, elected in a nationwide vote (a popular vote, filtered/distorted through the electoral college). There are 535 members of Congress—435 US Representatives, 100 US Senators—each elected by the popular vote in their district or state.

    If the president has a low approval rating, it means that fewer Americans like him. If Congress has a low approval rating, it means that fewer Americans like “them” collectively … but individually is a different story.

    Ask most Americans about Congress, and they’ll say it sucks. Ask most Americans about their particular congresscritter and Senator, and chances are pretty good that they’ll think the two are doing a great job—it’s those other 533 sons of bitches who are screwing everything up.

    It’s entirely possible—and not unusual—for Congress to have an approval rating of less than 20%, with most Congresspeople having approval ratings among those who elect them of greater than 50%.

Leave a Reply