In addition to the pressure Governor Mark Sanford is getting from the growing list of Republicans (and Democrats) in the Palmetto State now calling for his regisnation, a new poll Sanford is losing the battle of public opinion as well.

A day after last week's press conference in which Sanford first revealed he had been unfaithful to his wife, a poll from SurveyUSA showed 60% said he should resign while 34% said he should remain in office.

A new poll from SUSA shows that after a week's worth of non stop coverage that including an emotional interview with the Associated Press revealing that he "crossed lines" with other women and had more encounters with his Argentinian mistress than previously disclosed, 7 in 10 now think Sanford shoud step down from the Governorship while only 28% think he should stay in office. Sixty-three percent now say they have "no trust" in Sanford's ability to fulfill his duties as Governor of South Carolina.

Lastly, and perhaps most telling about Sanford's handling of the situation and the attendant media coverage it's generated, a week ago only 22% thought Sanford had "said too much" about his personal life, while 36% thought he needed to say more and 36% thought he had revealed "the right amount." Today an overwhelming 68% think he's now said too much.

A UNH/Granite State Poll released today finds that former senator John Sununu (R) would fare well against Rep. Paul Hodes (D) in a race for Senate in New Hampshire (June 24-July 1, 505 LV, MoE +/- 4.4%). Unfortunately for Republicans, Sununu -- who was bounced out of office last November -- announced yesterday that he won't run.

While Sununu trails Hodes by 2 points, Attorney General Kelly Ayotte gets help from independents and leads Hodes by 4 points -- with a quarter of voters undecided. Former congressman Charlie Bass trails by 2 points. Businessman Fred Tausch trails by 20 points.

While Hodes has represented one of the state's two congressional districts since January 2007, more than a third of voters still don't know enough to hold an opinion of him. Same goes for the potential GOP candidates -- especially Tausch, who's unknown by 85% of voters.

Ayotte 39
Hodes 35
Und 24

Hodes 40
Bass 38
Und 20

Hodes 45
Tausch 25
Und 29

Hodes 43
Sununu 41
Und 14

A group of American pundits which includes people as different as William Kristol and Leon Wieseltier is appealing to Barack Obama to make democracy and human rights a priority on his Moscow visit.  Grani.ru reports (in Russian) that, according to Obama's top Russia advisor, Michael McFaul, about half of the President's time on his Moscow trip will be devoted to interaction with "unofficial" persons.  Specifically, nearly all of Day 2 of his three-day visit will be spent in meetings with activists, members of the business community, and youth groups (hopefully not Nashi!).   And Gazeta.ru reports that on the first day of the visit, July 6, Obama will attend a "Civic Summit" of non-governmental organizations including Memorial, Human Rights Watch, and Freedom House.  (Dmitry Medvedev is also expected to attend, though this is not officially confirmed.)   So far, this sounds like good news.

Meanwhile, a resolution urging the Russian government to dismiss the new charges against imprisoned former oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky and co-defendant Platon Lebedev -- a case that reeks of politics and outrageous injustice -- has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by U.S. Reps. James McGovern (D-Mass.)  and Frank Wolf (R-Va), co-chairmen of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission,  and Robert Wexler (D-Fla.), chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe.  A similar bipartisan resolution was submitted in the Senate earlier.

Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, who was in Moscow this week as head of a visiting Congressional delegation, was asked about this on Ekho Moskvy radio (where he appeared with his Russian counterpart, Konstantin Kosachev).

Berman's reply:

I am the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee and I have never heard of this resolution.  There is a tremendous difference between resolutions submitted by members of Congress and the laws Congress actually passes.  I would not focus on the isolated proposals of isolated members of Congress.  We should focus on what constitutes U.S. policy, what legislators enact, not the statements of some politicians.

Not only does Berman not support his colleagues' human rights initiative; he goes out of his way to dismiss it as an insignificant and isolated political move. Nice work, Congressman.

By the way, here is the full text of the resolution's concluding part. (more...)

The lastest from the Global War on Terror Overseas Contingency Operation:

Pakistan's top Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud, is buying children as young as 7 to serve as suicide bombers in the growing spate of attacks against Pakistani, Afghan and U.S. targets, U.S. Defense Department and Pakistani officials say.

The depravity our enemies appears to know no bounds.

I don't know what possessed Governor Mark Sanford to spend four hours sitting on the couch unburdening himself to the Associated Press as if their reporters were therapists, but it seems that decision pretty much sealed his fate.

After all, when people start referring to you as the "blubbering love gov" and writing headlines like "Sanford sob fest fuels speculation he's gone nuts," I think it's safe to conclude your time in elective office is almost done.

New Quinnipiac University poll (June 23-29, 3,063 RV, MoE +/- 1.8%) shows President Obama's job approval rating at 57% (down two points from June) and his disapproval rating at 33% (up two points from June). While these numbers remain healthy, Assistant poll director Peter Brown says they also contain some worrying signs for Obama:

"Those who liked President Obama the most from the start - African-Americans, Democrats, women - still like him by the same margins, but a chunk of voters who were undecided have decided he's not their cup of tea," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Among independents, men, white Catholics, white evangelical Christians and Republicans, his numbers have fallen. He still has a ways to go before his coalition becomes politically unstable, but there are some groups and issues - especially the economy - where he needs to make sure this trend does not continue."

Overall, Obama's job approval rating in the updated RCP Average stands at 59.3%.

Other notables from the poll: 32% say the country is better off since Obama was election, 30% say the country is worse off, and 27% say it remains the same. 18% say Obama is performing "better than expected" as President, 14% say "worse than expected" and a clear majority 64% say he is doing "about as expected."

Obama's approval rating on handling the economy is at 52%, on foreign policy 55%, and on health care only 46%.  Lastly, 54% approve of the President's nominatin of Sonio Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.

Yesterday's New York Times editorializes on the Ricci v. DeStefano decision.  They point out, correctly, that the 5-4 ruling in favor of the plaintiffs is hardly a stinging rebuke to Supreme Court nominee Sonya Sotomayor, who ruled against them earlier as a federal circuit court judge.  The dissenting view is not an opinion of some radical crackpots.

However, the Times also says this:

Cases like this, even the dissenters concede, pose difficult questions of fairness. New Haven's decision to reject a test on which one group did poorly hurt other firefighters, who studied hard and were not to blame for the test's flaws. But in the end, as Justice Ginsburg noted, New Haven was within its rights not to use a flawed, possibly illegal, test to make its promotions.

Of course, the test's only "flaw" is that not enough black and Hispanic test-takers passed it with high enough scores.  As the majority carefully explains, the test was devised with painstaking attention to fairness, with black and Hispanic reviewers involved in the process.  The view that the racial disparity alone makes it flawed and even illegal may not be "racist" (I think we need to draw a moral distinction between race-conscious policies intended to subordinate and stigmatize a group of people, and race-conscious policies intended to remedy past wrongs), but elevating race-consciousness over standards to this degree seems to me deeply polarizing, counterproductive, and yes, discriminatory.  The bare fact is that Frank Ricci and the other plaintiffs would have gotten their promotions if it were not for the fact of their race.

The Ricci ruling is definitely worth reading in its entirety, particularly for the political atmosphere in New Haven that surrounded the decision to throw out the exam (described in detail in Justice Alito's concurring opinion).

For antoher take on Ricci and the future of race preferences, see this excellent piece by John McWhorter on TNR.com.

Cross-posted to The Y-Files.