Rasmussen poll: 52% of voters say Biden should resign; 60% favor impeachment, over Afghanistan

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  vic-eldred  •  2 months ago  •  40 comments

By:   Natalia Mittelstadt (Just The News)

Rasmussen poll: 52% of voters say Biden should resign; 60% favor impeachment, over Afghanistan
A total of 40% of Democrats believe Biden should be impeached.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



A poll by Rasmussen Reports found that 52% of American voters believe President Biden should resign following his handling of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, with 60% saying he should be impeached.

According to the poll, 75% of Republicans, 48% of Independents, and 32% of Democrats think Biden should resign. Those who disagree number 39%, with 9% not sure.

A total of 83% of Republicans believe Biden deserves to be impeached, with 58% Independents and 40% of Democrats agreeing.

Only 38% of voters think Vice President Harris is qualified to be president, 25% say she's very qualified, and 33% of Democrats believe she isn't qualified at all.

The poll was conducted Aug. 30-31 of 1,000 likely American voters.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    2 months ago

A total of 40% of Democrats believe Biden should be impeached.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2  Tessylo    2 months ago

Riiiiigggghhhhhtttttt!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2    2 months ago

I'm afraid it is!

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
3  Nerm_L    2 months ago

These polls don't mean much at the moment.  If the only way to express disappointment with the President is to choose impeachment then why are the results surprising?  These pollsters are just exploiting an opportunity to stir the septic tank.  The poll creates a phony fact but there's little truth to be found in the results.

And the truth is that Joe Biden has placed the Democrats' agenda in jeopardy.  Biden desperately needs political wins to regain some semblance of public approval.  Biden can't sell used cars at the moment.  Afghanistan overshadows any spittle-spewing outrage Democrats can muster.  Democrats need to pass legislation fast or they're doomed.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
3.1  Ronin2  replied to  Nerm_L @3    2 months ago

Agreed, except one minor change.

Democrats need to pass legislation fast because they're doomed.

The vast majority of voters don't agree with the agenda and they know it. The border crisis; Covid 19 surge; upside down unemployment and jobs numbers; inflation; shortages of goods (such as cars and trucks); and high gas prices are not going away. The two massive porkulus "infrastructure" bills they are going to pass is just going to super charge inflation and exasperate the shortages.

Same as when they passed the PPACA; the Democrats already have written off some of their members in Congress. Their only hope is to minimize their losses in the House and Senate as much as possible; and hope that Republicans can't do anything with a Biden administration that will still be in full damage control; and cover up mode.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
3.1.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Ronin2 @3.1    2 months ago

Biden's approval rating according to Rasmussen, is at the same point as Trump's was at this time.

512

It's didn't hurt Trump and I doubt it will hurt Biden.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
3.1.2  Nerm_L  replied to  Ronin2 @3.1    2 months ago
The vast majority of voters don't agree with the agenda and they know it. The border crisis; Covid 19 surge; upside down unemployment and jobs numbers; inflation; shortages of goods (such as cars and trucks); and high gas prices are not going away. The two massive porkulus "infrastructure" bills they are going to pass is just going to super charge inflation and exasperate the shortages.

IMO the vast majority of voters support bits and pieces of the Democrats' agenda.  How could they not?  The Democrats massive spending programs are intended to provide a little something for everyone.  That's why they're massive.

The Democrats' agenda is a perversion of governing.  Democrats have turned everyone into a minority fighting for crumbs.  But Karma ain't a beach with piña coladas.  Some in the Democratic party have suddenly realized that their chosen agenda will divide the party if there aren't enough crumbs.

That's why Democrats will turn on Joe Biden because Biden has threatened the house of cards by raising awareness that national priorities matter.  Governing matters.  National pride matters.  Providing crumbs for voters to fight over won't be enough.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
3.1.3  Nerm_L  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.1    2 months ago
Biden's approval rating according to Rasmussen, is at the same point as Trump's was at this time.

So, Joe Biden really ain't Trump after all? 

Ya know it's pretty bad for Biden when it's necessary to compare Biden to Trump.  Why aren't Democrats comparing Biden to Obama?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.1    2 months ago

I really think that to all but the most strident Trump voters, the impact of leaving Afghanistan will be relatively short lived to Biden's ratings.  Most Americans wanted all the troops to leave there. The leaving was not smooth but in the long run it will be a secondary political issue at best. 

And, the news coverage just moves too fast these days. Many other new things will happen which will put Afghanistan behind us. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
3.1.5  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    2 months ago
I really think that to all but the most strident Trump voters, the impact of leaving Afghanistan will be relatively short lived to Biden's ratings.  Most Americans wanted all the troops to leave there. The leaving was not smooth but in the long run it will be a secondary political issue at best. 

That depends to some extent on the scramble to avoid becoming the designated scapegoat.  Political loyalty is a frangible commodity.  And as the poll indicates, there is an incentive to exploit the situation.

We'll see how the more liberal faction in Congress uses Biden's weakened political position as leverage.  The pressure will be for Biden to throw the moderates under the bus.  Interesting how Democrats' inclusiveness depends upon exclusion.

 
 
 
MonsterMash
Sophomore Participates
3.1.6  MonsterMash  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.1    2 months ago
Biden's approval rating according to Rasmussen, is at the same point as Trump's was at this time.

That's something Democrats can be proud of? LOL

 
 
 
MonsterMash
Sophomore Participates
3.1.7  MonsterMash  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    2 months ago
the impact of leaving Afghanistan will be relatively short lived to Biden's ratings.

Wishful thinking on your part Johnny 

 
 
 
Gulliver-Swift
Freshman Silent
3.1.8  Gulliver-Swift  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.1    2 months ago

Rasmussen isn't known for particularly honest polling. And polling is a hot mess better at identifying trends than absolute values.

538 has a pretty decent analysis of Biden's decline in approval:

There seem to be two things that are bothering people: the deteriorating Covid situation and Afghanistan.

My takeaway is that between now and 2024 two things are very likely to happen: the pandemic will have run its course and people will have forgotten about Afghanistan.

2022 on the other hand is right around the corner.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
3.1.9  Ronin2  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.1    2 months ago

It didn't hurt Trump?

So his party didn't suffer any midterm losses; and then lose the House, Senate, and White House in his reelection bid?

No wonder Biden still blames Trump and the Republicans for everything.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
3.1.10  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    2 months ago

You keep leaving out Biden abandoned US citizens in Afghanistan! 

US voters did want the troops out; but they didn't want US citizens abandoned; ignoring that fact won't make it go away! 

First images of US citizens being held hostage; and maybe even beheaded and Biden and the Democrats can kiss what little hope they have goodbye of avoiding a complete land slide. It will be bad enough if all of the US citizens slowly trickle out safely. I am sure every network will vie to have them on for full recounts of the horrors they faced in Afghanistan. All it takes is a few to tear into Biden; and the Democrats will be just as cooked.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4  TᵢG    2 months ago

Impeached for Afghanistan?   People really need to get a grip.   Waaaaay too emotional (and irrational).

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @4    2 months ago

Then impeachment should be a serious matter?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1    2 months ago

Of course Vic.   Always.  But unfortunately our incompetent Congress(es) have diluted impeachment into nothing more than a partisan weapon.   It is disgusting.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.1    2 months ago

It is disgusting and one could argue that the only valid impeachment was the one that never happened when Nixon resigned.

For the record, the Senate minority leader is against all the impeachment talk going on in the House.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.3  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.1    2 months ago

Good job Tig. [deleted]

BTW, both Trump impeachments were justified. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.4  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    2 months ago

Seems to me that it is actually possible that even 'extremists' might be correct on an issue or two.    In this case, we agree that the impeachment option should be based on constitutional principles and taken seriously ... never used for partisan purposes.

BTW, both Trump impeachments were justified. 

IMO both impeachments were used as a partisan attack.    These were not honest statespersons doing what is right for the nation;  it was partisans seeking to tarnish a political opponent.  The first impeachment case was not strong enough to warrant an impeachment conviction (even if the R's were not voting as a group).    What Trump actually did (if we knew all the details) might have risen to the level, but the case as presented did not hit that level.   The second impeachment actually had the potential to be a legitimate, constitutional impeachment but the timing was rushed and the trial did not take place while Trump was in office (thus going against the intent of impeachment in the first place).

Bill Clinton's impeachment was partisan too and it no doubt is what seeded the degradation of the impeachment concept.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.5  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.2    2 months ago
... one could argue that the only valid impeachment was the one that never happened when Nixon resigned

I would argue that.   Even Andrew Johnson's impeachment seemed to fall short of high crimes and misdemeanors IMO.

Nixon's impeachment conviction (if it had happened) likely would have been constitutionally sound.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.4    2 months ago

The fact that the vote on an impeachment or impeachment process may be partisan does not necessarily have anything to do with the correctness of the articles of impeachment. 

Your objection seems to be that no Republicans voted for impeachment. Whose problem is that?  

A day after Trump's impeachment, the evangelical magazine  Christianity Today  published an editorial calling for his removal from office, stating that the president "attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president's political opponents. That is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral ." [118] [119]  On December 21, conservative  Bill Kristol  and a group calling itself "Republicans for the Rule of Law" released an ad encouraging viewers to call their senators to demand top Trump officials be forced to testify in his impeachment trial. [120]

That is more than enough to justify removal from office.  If a governor of one of the states did that he would be impeached. If a US Senator did it he would be forced from the Senate. If Gerald Ford or Jimmy Carter had, while they were president, tried to bribe the head of a foreign government and there was proof in a phone call and other documentation, they would have resigned or been impeached within days.  But because it is Donald Trump, who has a history of extremely unethical behavior , we are supposed to take a "boys will be boys" approach? and say it was an attempt to "get him" by the other political party?  

Why on earth did Trump want the Ukrainian authorities to work with Rudy Giuliani in investigating Joe Biden? 

This was a no brainer in reality, but the right complained Trump was being "picked on" and evidently they had some success with that bamboozling effort. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.6    2 months ago
The fact that the vote on an impeachment or impeachment process may be partisan does not necessarily have anything to do with the correctness of the articles of impeachment. 

Correct.   If you read my comment you will see that while I deemed both impeachments to be driven by partisan interests, I focused on the merits assuming there were no partisan interests.

Your objection seems to be that no Republicans voted for impeachment.

No, that is not my objection.  It is not who voted but rather the established details (and credibility of same) of the presented case.   My objection is what I wrote (see above).  

That is more than enough to justify removal from office.

As I noted (read what I wrote) the actual details (the truth if it were known) of the first impeachment could have been sufficient but the case as presented was insufficient.  IMO.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.8  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.6    2 months ago
In the end, the evidence was inescapable. “The president did in fact pressure a foreign government to corrupt our election process,” Romney said. “And really, corrupting an election process in a democratic republic is about as abusive and egregious an act against the Constitution—and one's oath—that I can imagine. It's what autocrats do.”

According to Romney’s interpretation of Alexander Hamilton’s treatise on impeachment in “Federalist No. 65”—which he says he’s read “multiple, multiple times”—Trump’s attempts to enlist the Ukrainian president in interfering with the 2020 election clearly rose to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” (He told me he would not vote to convict on the second article of impeachment, obstruction of Congress.)

Why Mitt Romney Voted to Convict Trump - The Atlantic

Romney was similarly unmoved by the Trump attorney Alan Dershowitz’s contention that a president who believes his reelection is in the national interest can’t be impeached for pursuing a political advantage. “I had Professor Dershowitz for criminal law in law school,” Romney said, “and he was known to occasionally take his argument to its illogical conclusion.” Nor was the senator swayed by the theory that a president can be impeached only for breaking a statutory law. “To use an old Mormon hymn phrase, that makes reason stare,” he said. “The idea that Congress would have to anticipate all of the offensive things a president could possibly do, and then make them a statute?” Romney posed a hypothetical: What if the president decided to pardon every Republican in prison nationwide, while leaving every Democrat locked up? “There’s no law against that!” he said. “So it’s not a crime or misdemeanor. But it’s obviously absurd.”
 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.9  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.7    2 months ago

Well, you have your opinion, which coincides with that of most Trump supporters. 

But I actually know that your conclusion is more principle based than theirs is.  But the fact is all sorts of people of intelligence and judgement disagree with you. 

The thing I dont like is that you have implied that the impeachment was driven by partisanship. 

No, it was driven by Trump's conduct vis a vis Ukraine. The partisanship came after. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.10  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.9    2 months ago
Well, you have your opinion, which coincides with that of most Trump supporters. 

Do not troll me John.  

The thing I dont like is that you have implied that the impeachment was driven by partisanship. 

Because I am quite confident that it was.

No, it was driven by Trump's conduct vis a vis Ukraine. The partisanship came after. 

I agree given how you qualified your statement.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.11  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.10    2 months ago

Someone in Trump's white house leaked the Zelensky phone call to congressional Democrats. 

At that point they have a duty to investigate the information. The only one to blame for Trump being impeached is Trump. 

It was one of the worst actions taken by a president as regards the internal conduct of a foreign country in our history, and certainly an impeachable offense. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.11    2 months ago
At that point they have a duty to investigate the information.

Yes they do have the duty to investigate.   Then they take the appropriate action.   You and disagree on the appropriate action.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
4.1.13  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    2 months ago

Only in TDS driven minds.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
4.2  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @4    2 months ago
Impeached for Afghanistan?   People really need to get a grip.   Waaaaay too emotional (and irrational).

The public opinion concerning Afghanistan kinda demonstrates that national pride is important.  The pollsters are just exploiting the situation to produce phony facts.  The polls don't really mean much because they're rigged to highlight divisions and to intentionally avoid revealing what the public may have in common.

Impeachment is an emotionally charged response in public opinion because politicians have used it to evoke an emotional response.  But, IMO, that's not what the public is really expressing.  IMO the public is really expressing an emotional response to a loss of national pride.

 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @4.2    2 months ago
IMO the public is really expressing an emotional response to a loss of national pride.

I suspect that is a big part of it.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
5  Tacos!    2 months ago

I’m pretty unhappy about Afghanistan, but I don’t know what we would reasonably impeach the president for. Making a series of shitty decisions? Presidents 1-45 would be like “Hold my beer!”

 
 
 
Baron Creek
Junior Participates
6  Baron Creek    2 months ago

IMO, Biden is not going to resign, nor will he be impeached and I also think he will not run for re-election. Therefore polls are meaningless to him. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.1  TᵢG  replied to  Baron Creek @6    2 months ago

Agreed.   I expect him to run for one term.   I expect Harris to run for PotUS and fail to get the nomination.

He is not going to resign over Afghanistan and there are no grounds for impeachment thus far.

 
 
 
Baron Creek
Junior Participates
6.1.1  Baron Creek  replied to  TᵢG @6.1    2 months ago
I expect Harris to run for PotUS and fail to get the nomination.

I would agree, which leaves 2024 fairly wide open. I would think my generation should completely step aside and I would hope the boomers step aside. The very youngest boomer would be 60 in 2024.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  Baron Creek @6.1.1    2 months ago

I have noted before on this forum that I would prefer a PotUS who is in his/her 50's.   That to me is a great age.   Old enough to have accumulated sufficient wisdom for the job (albeit not a guarantee) but young enough to keep up with its demands (burden of responsibility, stressful decisions, ...).

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
6.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @6.1    2 months ago

You keep forgetting; Democrats lowered the standards for impeachment to the point where you don't need grounds.

Abandoning US citizens in Afghanistan is more than grounds enough using Democrat standards.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.1.4  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @6.1.3    2 months ago
You keep forgetting; Democrats lowered the standards for impeachment to the point where you don't need grounds.

Why do people think that bad behavior by one party means that their party should do likewise?   That is both childish and irresponsible.   Note also that the Clinton impeachment preceded the Trump impeachments and established a modern bar for same.

Abandoning US citizens in Afghanistan is more than grounds enough using Democrat standards.

Forget the Ds.   Think in terms of what is correct and what is constitutional.   Engage in responsible, adult reasoning rather than 'they did it first' emotions.   Failing to get every citizen out of Afghanistan (single digit percentage) is not even remotely close to an impeachable offense.

Note:  My position is that Biden did indeed screw up the withdrawal.   But a failure in judgment which results in a poorly executed mission is not an impeachable offense.

 
 
 
Gulliver-Swift
Freshman Silent
7  Gulliver-Swift    2 months ago

Polling is completely broken and useless.

The hilarious thing about Rasmussen polls is that they just seem to take everybody else's polling and then add an additional 10 points in favor of Republicans.

And for the the 2020 election that made them the most accurate polling organization of the whole lot. Haha.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online



Hallux
Veronica
Snuffy


19 visitors