Even polls conducted by your buddies at Fox News disprove your numbers:

Do you approve or disapprove of Congress setting a deadline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq?

April 17-18
Total…………….54% approve, 42% disapprove, 3% don’t know
- Democrats……78% approve, 18% disapprove, 4% don’t know
- Republicans….29% approve, 70% disapprove, 1% don’t know
- Independents..56% approve, 41% disapprove, 3% don’t know

That is because even the Democrats realize that the antiwar in this country only consists of 20 percent. Actually last figure I saw was 19 percent.

Antiwar=Those who are actively and vocally opposing the war and working for its end.

Nobody,

You are either out of touch with the facts or deliberately lying. That 20% figure you cite is completely bogus.

According to a poll conducted Rassmussen on April 23-24, 57% of American voters now favor either an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq or a firm deadline for withdrawal while 35% of American voters oppose either an immediate withdrawal or a firm deadline for withdrawal:

Moreover 37% of Americans favor an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq. This number is up from 28% on November, 1, 2006.

In other words, Nobody, even if you discount the people who oppose the war but don’t want an immediate withdrawal (20%), the number of people who want our troops to withdrawal immediately (37%) is roughly twice as high as the numbers that you just made up.

Also, several recent polls conducted by CBS/New York Times disprove your numbers:

March 22-25
For: 59%
Against: 33%
Unsure: 8%

Washington is a very brutal town – I think that’s why our president’s have to be political powerhouses to survive it. Think of how many presidents recently have complained that their enemies have coopted the media- Nixon, Clinton , Bush 43. 41 was brought down by his own party who were angered that he raised taxes. Carter, likewise had a lot of enemies in his own party- Ted Kennedy fought him tooth and nail, because he thought Carter wasn’t liberal enough.

they’d have to override Bush’s veto in the Senate with a two-thirds vote- where it basically a virtual tie- even though they do nominally have the majority.

Wrong. They just don’t have to pass anything. Bush can not appropriate funds, that’s the job of Congress, and if Congress doesn’t give Bush any money for the war, it will end.

They’d only need to override Bush’s veto if they want to extend the war while instituting a timetable.

That is because even the Democrats realize that the antiwar in this country only consists of 20 percent. Actually last figure I saw was 19 percent.

Antiwar=Those who are actively and vocally opposing the war and working for its end.

Displeased with George Bush and the Republicans 61 percent. I have been polled twice in the last 6 months. Both times they asked are you satisfied or dissatisfied with Bush. Both times I answered in the negative. However I am not an AntiBush or Antiwar. The Democrats understand this.

The smugness of the antiwar is that you think because 60 percent of the people disagree with the job Bush is doing that when it comes nut crunching time that they will be against the war and on your side. They wont. Everyone except this 19 percent understands that you just can’t pull out. That is why the Stupid, stupid, stupid Democrats are pandering to the 19 percent by passing NONBINDING legislation. Everyone in the world understands this but the 19 percent.

This is one of the few times that I actually agree with you. Kucinich came across as more principled in the debate than the triumverant of first tier candidates. The point he made about the Democrats being able to end this war if they really wanted to is true. Congress has the power of the purse, and it takes a majority of congresspeople in BOTH Houses to pass the supplemental bills needed to fund this war. Politically, it would be a risky move, as Republicans would paint the Democrats as “voting against our troops”, but there’s no point being in congress if one’s going to refuse to take positions that are politically risky.

Democrats have the power to end the war. The Democratic Leadership just doesn’t have the backbone to do so. And Kucinich is calling them on it.

That being said, Kucinich’s move to impeach Dick Cheney was a bad idea. I don’t see how a futile attempt to remove the Vice President brings us any closer to ending the war. It may even hinder it.

Senator Gravel is immoral.

He denounced the war apologists in both parties. He’s pretty much saying that it’s not enough to put all the blame on the Republicans. He’s arguing that Democrats are part of the problem with regards to our foreign policy.

No wonder you don’t like him, Holly.

I read somewhere that the lesser candidates would have to be really aggressive and go after the frontrunners, and Gravel definitely did. Kucinich knows he has to work with most of these people in Washington.

I actually liked Hillary more than I thought I would. She has an air of confidence about her and gives very complete answers. So does Obama- who has the WOW factor. I always think of JFK when he speaks.

Hmmm. Senator Gravel is immoral.

Classy bomb throwing there. Want to back that up?

While bombastic, he was the only candidate besides Kucinich that seems genuinely anti-war and anti-nuclear weapons. How is that immoral Holly?