Limbaugh beats Pelosi!

[PLC1]

By a very, very, small margin, of course, proving not who is most popular, but who is least unpopular. It's Limbaugh by a nose.


Rush Limbaugh Approval Rating Beats Speaker of the House

“Limbaugh’s Favorable Rating: 19 Percent,” shouts the headline at the top of CBSNews.com tonight. A look, however, at the PDF of the full CBS News poll results, posted at 6:30 PM EDT Tuesday, pegs House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s favorable rating a point lower at 18 percent — within the margin of error, but evidence Limbaugh is no less popular than the leader of congressional Democrats.

Here's a "conservative" blog going on about what a great thing it is to have a 19% approval rating, vs an 18% one.


Of course, they're comparing apples to road apples, or elected officials to entertainers may be more like it.

Is it easier, or harder, for an entertainer to get high ratings vs an elected official?

 

[top gun]

People Congress & Congress in general on a national scale almost always have low approval numbers.

Any individual Representative already has everyone in the opposition Party polling him or her unfavorably... then you have the extremist in their own Party that don't think they are Left or Right enough... and then you have the non-interested voters that probably have never even heard of them... plus the special interest groups that oppose any particular members positions that effect them... and it's easy to see why Representatives show poor polling numbers.

If you want a true poll of popularity for a Representative you have to go poll the District they actually were elected to represent. In San Francisco for instance Speaker Pelosi is bullet proof.

As far as Rush... 19% sounds about right.

I can believe a little less than one 5th of the country either likes his fearmongering & saber rattling for partisan political reasons... or are just too stupid to know it's all really just his little circus.

 

[samsara15]

I concur. I pay no attention to the popularity ratings of people in Congress. The only thing that counts, in their case, is how well the people back home like them.

Many of the Right Wing people here, for example, undoubtably think Kuchinich is a strange person; those in his district who recall him as mayor of Cleveland think he walks on water.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Is it easier, or harder, for an entertainer to get high ratings vs an elected official?

Much easier, of course. All the entertainer has to do, is recite the normal liberal talking points for whatever day this is, and their high ratings are assured. See "Sean Penn", "Rosie O'Donnell", "Michael Moore", "Jane Fonda", and the rest of the usual Hollywood crowd. Nobody ever checks to see if the entertainer's statements are true, or if whatever predictions they make, come out right. And the entertainer never has any responsibility for their words, so they can recite the silliest tripe without anyone going broke or losing their job as a result. In a nutshell, nobody cares what an entertainer thinks, especially a garden-variety leftist drone. What could be easier?

If the entertainer tells the truth, though... especially truth to power, as Limbaugh is doing... the entire mainstream media will come down on him like a load of bricks. Let's see YOU become popular as an entertainer when the entire media is screaming that you are eeeevil, heartless, and one step removed from Attila the Hun.

As for politicians, again if they are the liberal variety... well, once in a while they actually have to answer for their words, as Nancy Pelosi is finding out now... unlike liberal entertainers, who never have to.

Only conservative (or even moderates like Trent Lott) politicians are held to their word. If they are Republicans, God help them - if they praise some guy on his birthday, and it later turns out that guy supported segregation before most of us were born and has since renounced it... that politician's career comes crashing down to ruin, right now.

Only liberal politicians get to spend 20 years in a church where the pastor spews the vilest racial attacks and denigrates his country daily, and hang out on a regular basis with terrorists and other murderers, without the media saying a peep about it... even when lots of people are asking for the information.

So, to answer your question, yes, it's somewhat harder for a politician to get a good approval rating, than an entertainer. Though their tendency to support conservative or liberal philosophies, has a LOT more to do with their popularity rating, than their chosen occupation does.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Much easier, of course. All the entertainer has to do, is recite the normal liberal talking points for whatever day this is, and their high ratings are assured. See "Sean Penn", "Rosie O'Donnell", "Michael Moore", "Jane Fonda", and the rest of the usual Hollywood crowd. Nobody ever checks to see if the entertainer's statements are true, or if whatever predictions they make, come out right. And the entertainer never has any responsibility for their words, so they can recite the silliest tripe without anyone going broke or losing their job as a result. In a nutshell, nobody cares what an entertainer thinks, especially a garden-variety leftist drone. What could be easier?

If the entertainer tells the truth, though... especially truth to power, as Limbaugh is doing... the entire mainstream media will come down on him like a load of bricks. Let's see YOU become popular as an entertainer when the entire media is screaming that you are eeeevil, heartless, and one step removed from Attila the Hun.

As for politicians, again if they are the liberal variety... well, once in a while they actually have to answer for their words, as Nancy Pelosi is finding out now... unlike liberal entertainers, who never have to.

Only conservative (or even moderates like Trent Lott) politicians are held to their word. If they are Republicans, God help them - if they praise some guy on his birthday, and it later turns out that guy supported segregation before most of us were born and has since renounced it... that politician's career comes crashing down to ruin, right now.

Only liberal politicians get to spend 20 years in a church where the pastor spews the vilest racial attacks and denigrates his country daily, and hang out on a regular basis with terrorists and other murderers, without the media saying a peep about it... even when lots of people are asking for the information.

So, to answer your question, yes, it's somewhat harder for a politician to get a good approval rating, than an entertainer. Though their tendency to support conservative or liberal philosophies, has a LOT more to do with their popularity rating, than their chosen occupation does.

bla bla bla bla bla..liberal media bla bla bla bla bla...cry cry cry.....

 

[PLC1]

Much easier, of course. All the entertainer has to do, is recite the normal liberal talking points for whatever day this is, and their high ratings are assured. See "Sean Penn", "Rosie O'Donnell", "Michael Moore", "Jane Fonda", and the rest of the usual Hollywood crowd. Nobody ever checks to see if the entertainer's statements are true, or if whatever predictions they make, come out right. And the entertainer never has any responsibility for their words, so they can recite the silliest tripe without anyone going broke or losing their job as a result. In a nutshell, nobody cares what an entertainer thinks, especially a garden-variety leftist drone. What could be easier?

If the entertainer tells the truth, though... especially truth to power, as Limbaugh is doing... the entire mainstream media will come down on him like a load of bricks. Let's see YOU become popular as an entertainer when the entire media is screaming that you are eeeevil, heartless, and one step removed from Attila the Hun.

As for politicians, again if they are the liberal variety... well, once in a while they actually have to answer for their words, as Nancy Pelosi is finding out now... unlike liberal entertainers, who never have to.

Only conservative (or even moderates like Trent Lott) politicians are held to their word. If they are Republicans, God help them - if they praise some guy on his birthday, and it later turns out that guy supported segregation before most of us were born and has since renounced it... that politician's career comes crashing down to ruin, right now.

Only liberal politicians get to spend 20 years in a church where the pastor spews the vilest racial attacks and denigrates his country daily, and hang out on a regular basis with terrorists and other murderers, without the media saying a peep about it... even when lots of people are asking for the information.

So, to answer your question, yes, it's somewhat harder for a politician to get a good approval rating, than an entertainer. Though their tendency to support conservative or liberal philosophies, has a LOT more to do with their popularity rating, than their chosen occupation does.

In your view, then, is Limbaugh bravely bucking the liberal media, the liberal establishment, the liberal thinkers, and getting the truth out there despite the personal costs?

Or, is he telling his audience what it wants to hear, and reveling in the notoriety?

Is his $400 million dollar contract a reward for being a brave truth teller, or is it a result if his ability to attract an audience that will also listen uncritically to the advertisements of his sponsors?

Just wondering.

 

[top gun]

Much easier, of course. All the entertainer has to do, is recite the normal liberal talking points for whatever day this is, and their high ratings are assured. See "Sean Penn", "Rosie O'Donnell", "Michael Moore", "Jane Fonda", and the rest of the usual Hollywood crowd. Nobody ever checks to see if the entertainer's statements are true, or if whatever predictions they make, come out right. And the entertainer never has any responsibility for their words, so they can recite the silliest tripe without anyone going broke or losing their job as a result. In a nutshell, nobody cares what an entertainer thinks, especially a garden-variety leftist drone. What could be easier?

If the entertainer tells the truth, though... especially truth to power, as Limbaugh is doing... the entire mainstream media will come down on him like a load of bricks. Let's see YOU become popular as an entertainer when the entire media is screaming that you are eeeevil, heartless, and one step removed from Attila the Hun.

As for politicians, again if they are the liberal variety... well, once in a while they actually have to answer for their words, as Nancy Pelosi is finding out now... unlike liberal entertainers, who never have to.

Only conservative (or even moderates like Trent Lott) politicians are held to their word. If they are Republicans, God help them - if they praise some guy on his birthday, and it later turns out that guy supported segregation before most of us were born and has since renounced it... that politician's career comes crashing down to ruin, right now.

Only liberal politicians get to spend 20 years in a church where the pastor spews the vilest racial attacks and denigrates his country daily, and hang out on a regular basis with terrorists and other murderers, without the media saying a peep about it... even when lots of people are asking for the information.

So, to answer your question, yes, it's somewhat harder for a politician to get a good approval rating, than an entertainer. Though their tendency to support conservative or liberal philosophies, has a LOT more to do with their popularity rating, than their chosen occupation does.

Could it possibly be that the other celebrities you cite are always saying things like...

let's work for peace, let's feed the children, let's not pollute the whole planet quite so quick, let's help Katrina victims and let's fight AIDS & develop stem cell research to cure injury & disease...

and Druggie Limbaugh is always saying... INVADE, TORTURE , FEAR, KILL KILL KILL, PRESIDENT BECAUSE HE'S BLACK. STUPID MINORITIES, GAYS SHOULD QUARANTINED, WOMEN ABUSE THEIR RIGHTS, KILL KILL KILL....

I'm thinkin' this may be the difference here... but that's just me.

This clip is a pure unfiltered example of how bad Limbag really is even to his own people...

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Much easier, of course. All the entertainer has to do, is recite the normal liberal talking points for whatever day this is, and their high ratings are assured.

Aw, c'mon, now....Porky's QUITE capable of makin'-up crap, on his own.....

He needs to find himself a new-boyfriend, lose some lard, and settle-down.....or, he's gonna find himself bumpin'-ugly with Jerry Falwell, soon.

He can't get-by on his looks, anymore.......

​