Bush approval rating hits new low

[zimv20]

link (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-08-bush-approval_x.htm)


WASHINGTON — President Bush's approval rating has slumped to 31% in a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, the lowest of his presidency and a warning sign for Republicans in the November elections.

[...]

Bush's fall is being fueled by erosion among support from conservatives and Republicans. In the poll, 52% of conservatives and 68% of Republicans approved of the job he is doing. Both are record lows among those groups.

Moderates gave him an approval rating of 28%, liberals of 7%.

"You hear people say he has a hard core that will never desert him, and that has been the case for most of the administration," says Charles Franklin, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin who studies presidential approval ratings. "But for the last few months, we started to see that hard core seriously erode in support."

Only four presidents have scored lower approval ratings since the Gallup Poll began regularly measuring it in the mid-1940s: Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter and the first George Bush. When Nixon, Carter and the elder Bush sank below 35%, they never again registered above 40%.

Truman twice sank into the low 30s and then rose into the 60s, but the third time his rating fell, it stayed below 40% as well.


and some analysis from mydd.com (http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/5/8/163651/1802):

A net approval of -34 is worse than the low suffered by either Jimmy Carter (-31) or Bush's father (-31). Only Truman and Nixon ever fared worse. (click for more on this)

Since 1950, this is the lowest job approval for a President facing midterm elections by more than ten points.

This is the first poll showing Bush's disapproval to be more than twice the size of his approval.

This is the lowest approval rating for Bush in any public survey since the start of his term.

A disapproval of 65% ties for the second highest ever recorded. The highest ever recorded was just one point higher, 66%, for Richard Nixon in August of 1974, about one week before he resigned.

[yg17]

What I want to know is, how the hell do 7% of the liberals approve of him? :confused:

[zimv20]

What I want to know is, how the hell do 7% of the liberals approve of him? :confused:
jokewriters?

[scem0]

People who didn't understand how to fill out the poll, maybe?

It struck me as odd too. 7% seems awfully high to me, I'd understand 1 or 2 percentage points, but 7 in every 100 liberals actually approve of Bush? I find that hard to believe.

e

[IJ Reilly]

People who didn't understand how to fill out the poll, maybe?

It struck me as odd too. 7% seems awfully high to me, I'd understand 1 or 2 percentage points, but 7 in every 100 liberals actually approve of Bush? I find that hard to believe.

e

Maybe they think he's just they guy they need -- to destroy the GOP.

[scem0]

a fine point. Maybe so.

e

[Thomas Veil]

President Bush's approval rating has slumped to 31% in a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, the lowest of his presidency and a warning sign for Republicans in the November elections.http://smilies.vidahost.com/cwm/cwm/eek2.gif
I can't believe it's still going lower! Pinch me, somebody, I must be dreaming!

More good news:

WASHINGTON, May 8 — With Democrats increasingly optimistic about this year's midterm elections and the landscape for 2008, intellectuals in the center and on the left are debating how to sharpen the party's identity and present a clear alternative to the conservatism that has dominated political thought for a generation.

Many of these analysts, both liberals and moderates, are convinced that the Democrats face a moment of historic opportunity. They say that the country is weary of war and division and ready — if given a compelling choice — to reject the Republicans and change the country's direction. They argue that the Democratic Party is showing signs of new health — intense party discipline on Capitol Hill, a host of policy proposals and an energized base.

But some of these analysts argue that the party needs something more than a pastiche of policy proposals. It needs a broader vision, a narrative, they say, to return to power and govern effectively — what some describe as an unapologetic appeal to the "common good," to big goals like expanding affordable health coverage and to occasional sacrifice for the sake of the nation as a whole.

This emerging critique reflects, for many, a hunger to move beyond the carefully calibrated centrism that marked the Clinton years, which was itself the product of the last big effort to redefine the Democratic Party.

This analysis is also, in large part, a rejection of the more tactical, consultant-driven politics that dominated the party's presidential and Congressional campaigns of the last six years — the emphasis on targeted issues like prescription drugs for retirees and careful, constituent-based appeals.

"What the Democrats still don't have is a philosophy, a big idea that unites their proposals and converts them from a hodgepodge of narrow and specific fixes into a vision for society," Michael Tomasky, editor of the liberal journal The American Prospect, wrote in a much-discussed essay in the May issue.

A broader vision, many of these analysts say, will help the Democratic Party counter the charge, so often advanced by Republicans, that the Democrats are merely a collection of interest groups — labor, civil rights, abortion rights and the like — each consumed with their own agenda, rather than the nation's.

John Podesta, who heads a center-left research group, the Center for American Progress, says an appeal to the common good "gets away from what we've sort of gotten used to in the last couple cycles — a pollster-driven niche idea framing — toward a larger vision of where you want to take the country."

Democrats and progressive intellectuals have a history of debating philosophies and world views. Sometimes those debates result in a consensus and even a winning campaign, like Mr. Clinton's; sometimes the results are irrelevant in the rush of real-world campaigning.

This discussion, still early, is bubbling up in journals like The American Prospect; research organizations like the Center for American Progress, The Third Way and the Democratic Leadership Council; a wave of new books; and — especially — among bloggers who are demanding that the party become more assertive in fighting for what it believes in....

This discussion of first principles and big goals marks a psychological shift for many in the party; a frequent theme is that Democrats must stop being afraid, stop worrying that their core beliefs are out of step with the times, stop ceding so much ground to the conservatives.Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/09/washington/09dems.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1147147200&en=37c6253f0c776610&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin)

Hallelujah! The Dems are talking about a real philosophical change, a vision, an appeal to the common good...instead of just playing it safe. Now if they can only follow through....

[mactastic]

http://smilies.vidahost.com/cwm/cwm/eek2.gif
I can't believe it's still going lower! Pinch me, somebody, I must be dreaming!
I know, it's like the continual "Oldest person in the world dies" threads. Seems like you have a new one each week. ;)

Hallelujah! The Dems are talking about a real philosophical change, a vision, an appeal to the common good...instead of just playing it safe. Now if they can only follow through....
Don't worry they won't. Both DiFi and Jane Harman were out there supporting Hayden's nomination yesterday even while some Republicans were voicing doubts.

[freeny]

jokewriters?
You win the funniest quote of the day award!:D :D :D

[tristan]

It's like a game of limbo... Can't wait to see the republicans treat him like a leper during the midterm elections.

[princealfie]

how low can he go?

[freeny]

how low can he go?
Obviously lower......

[Dont Hurt Me]

I would like to know who the nuts are that think he is doing a good job? Is their TV stuck on only 1 channel being Fox? What has this president done that was right? To think you can constantly screw up and still have 30% is scary.

[zimv20]

link (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2006/05/11/bushs-approval-ratings/)


Bush’s Approval Rating Drops

President Bush’s job-approval rating has fallen to its lowest mark of his presidency, according to a new Harris Interactive poll. Of 1,003 U.S. adults surveyed in a telephone poll, 29% think Mr. Bush is doing an “excellent or pretty good” job as president, down from 35% in April and significantly lower than 43% in January.

Roughly one-quarter of U.S. adults say “things in the country are going in the right direction,” while 69% say “things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track.” This trend has declined every month since January, when 33% said the nation was heading in the right direction. Iraq remains a key concern for the general public, as 28% of Americans said they consider Iraq to be one of the top two most important issues the government should address, up from 23% in April. The immigration debate also prompted 16% of Americans to consider it a top issue, down from 19% last month, but still sharply higher from 4% in March.

The Harris poll comes two days after a downbeat assessement of Bush in a New York Times/CBS News poll. The Times, in analyzing the results, said “Americans have a bleaker view of the country’s direction than at any time in more than two decades.”

i'm assuming this data does not take in account today's revelation about tens of millions of americans being spied on.

[IJ Reilly]

Someday Americans might finally come around the opinion that it's more important to elect a president who knows what he's doing than worry about whether he boffs his interns.

Someday, maybe? Anybody think?

[bousozoku]

Someday Americans might finally come around the opinion that it's more important to elect a president who knows what he's doing than worry about whether he boffs his interns.

Someday, maybe? Anybody think?

Perhaps, in 100 years or so. I don't think the fanatical religious groups are ever going to see it that way. They can identify with the current president. Unfortunately, the rest of the world can't.

[solvs]

Once it drops below 30% across the board, that's pretty much it. There's little he can do to turn things around, and I'm kinda scared that'll he knows that so he's just going to do whatever the heck he wants. Um, not that he doesn't do that anyway... but I can actually see it getting worse. No really, it could get worse. If the Dems don't get a few seats in Congress, I'll know someone's been screwing with Diebold. No matter how much they try to distance themselves, part of this is the Repubs fault too. What did they expect when they handed the keys to the kingdom over to a madman?

Not that half of us didn't help :rolleyes: though some of us voted for the other douche bag.

[bousozoku]

Gore is starting to look like a really good choice these days. Well, maybe not really good, but better than what we got.

[solvs]

Gore is starting to look like a really good choice these days. Well, maybe not really good, but better than what we got.
A dead mouse would be better than what we got now. Every problem I had with Gore suddenly seems more and more petty by comparison the worse Bush gets. Even the Clinton thing looks like nothing considering how relatively decent the rest of his presidency was. Of course, it was nothing, but we were so comfortable back then, it seemed like a big deal. Lying seemed so horrible.

Of course, we got a guy now who wouldn't know the truth if it bit him on the butt, so in retrospect Clinton and Gore don't seem so bad.

[bousozoku]

A dead mouse would be better than what we got now. Every problem I had with Gore suddenly seems more and more petty by comparison the worse Bush gets. Even the Clinton thing looks like nothing considering how relatively decent the rest of his presidency was. Of course, it was nothing, but we were so comfortable back then, it seemed like a big deal. Lying seemed so horrible.

Of course, we got a guy now who wouldn't know the truth if it bit him on the butt, so in retrospect Clinton and Gore don't seem so bad.

I remember thinking that Gore was a bit lame but he probably wouldn't change anything so we'd have a decent chance. Cheney made me think that we'd be in serious trouble but of course, my white, adoptive parents thought that Cheney would be great because he cared about senior citizens.

Looking at the abuses, even Nader might have been better and I suspect that he would have abused plenty.

[pseudobrit]

link (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2006/05/11/bushs-approval-ratings/)


i'm assuming this data does not take in account today's revelation about tens of millions of americans being spied on.

29%

Daddy's record low tied - check

Next up, Carter's 28%, Nixon's 24% and Truman's 23%.

[mactastic]

Ouch... Guess I was wrong about the newest NSA scandal being the straw that breaks the 30% floor.

Limbo on brand-W Republicans. Dance with the ones who brung you...

[Thomas Veil]

how low can he go?Well, his elevator's in the basement. There's still the sub-basement and the underground parking garage. ;)

(It might even be like one of those Daffy Duck cartoons, where there's one level even below that where the elevator doors open to a place with fire and brimstone. :D )

[zimv20]

link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060514/us_nm/bush_laura_dc_2)


Laura Bush doesn't believe bad polls on husband

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - First lady Laura Bush said on Sunday she does not believe opinion polls showing her husband's approval ratings at record low levels.

Interviewed on Fox News Sunday, Laura Bush said she did not think people were losing confidence in President George W. Bush, despite a series of polls showing support for him at its lowest point in his five-year presidency and among the lowest for any president in the past 50 years.

"I don't really believe those polls. I travel around the country. I see people, I see their responses to my husband. I see their response to me," she said.

"As I travel around the United States, I see a lot of appreciation for him. A lot of people come up to me and say, 'Stay the course'."

[...]

In a separate interview on ABC's "This Week," Laura Bush said her husband's popularity was suffering because the country had been through a difficult year.

We've had a very, very difficult year, starting with the hurricane last September, but already because of the terrorist attack in 2001 and then the war on terror since then," she said. "He's the one that has to make the hard decisions. And, of course, they don't please everyone."

apparently, mrs bush's anecdotal evidence trumps the statistically valid polls. i suppose she just "feels it in her gut".

[solvs]

apparently, mrs bush's anecdotal evidence trumps the statistically valid polls.
Apparently she doesn't talk to the same people I have. I wonder if the people she does get to speak with are prescreened. I know when she visited my Mom's school, no one was allowed to really talk to her. Security issues apparently. She's got to know how people feel about him, but remember, Ms. Clinton stuck by her hubby too. ;)

Not that she's the most unbiased source either. I hear his Mother thinks he's doing a fabulous job. Even during Katrina, which it sounds like even Laura has her reservations about. Could be reading a bit too much into that though.

[ReanimationLP]

Dubya is a running train wreck thats heading straight for a concrete wall.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Dubya is a running train wreck thats heading straight for a concrete wall.Thats what Happens when you ignore the desires of the American People. Bush has shown time after time his interests are the corporations,the corporations and the corporations.

[pseudobrit]

i suppose she just "feels it in her gut".

While the American people are feeling it in the ass.

[Don't panic]

Bush approval rating hits new low

from now to the end of his regime, could you guys please mark which of the weekly new lows we are talking about with date and time of the day in the thread title, so to avoid confusion? thxs

[mactastic]

from now to the end of his regime, could you guys please mark which of the weekly new lows we are talking about with date and time of the day in the thread title, so to avoid confusion? thxs
I'd suggest the same for the "Oldest person in the world dies" threads!

[zimv20]

from now to the end of his regime, could you guys please mark which of the weekly new lows we are talking about with date and time of the day in the thread title, so to avoid confusion? thxs
good idea. i tried editing this thread's title, but i guess i'm not allowed.

[Dont Hurt Me]

good idea. i tried editing this thread's title, but i guess i'm not allowed.whats with the 68020 Zim? Maybe we can get a Mod to add again to the Title.

[zimv20]

whats with the 68020 Zim?
you mean that i'm no longer a demigod, right?

there was some confusion with my subscription. after my first year, i manually re-upped (my bad), but then i was auto-reupped, but not for a year, something like 8 months. when i contacted the mods about it, they refunded $20 of the $40 and removed the demi status.

the title doesn't bug me, the important part is that i'm (even now) supporting the site. though now that i think about it, all this happened about a year ago.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Just wondering, im surprised i noticed it.

[zimv20]

link (http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2006/50StatePres060515Net.htm)

1. idaho, net approval 7%
2. utah, 5%
3. wyoming, 1%
4. oklahoma, -3%
[...]
42. missouri, -39%
[...]
50. rhode island, -52%

i put missouri in there because it's the most negative state that voted for bush in '04.

[blackfox]

link (http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2006/50StatePres060515Net.htm)

1. idaho, net approval 7%
2. utah, 5%
3. wyoming, 1%
4. oklahoma, -3%
[...]
42. missouri, -39%
[...]
50. rhode island, -52%

i put missouri in there because it's the most negative state that voted for bush in '04.
ooo...I see how Bush fares in his "home" state(s):

Texas (#11) - neg 14%
Conneticut (#38) - neg 37%

anyone know how his address altered his approval ratings, either nationally or in the southern border states?

[jelloshotsrule]

we should just make this topic a sticky.

[mactastic]

ooo...I see how Bush fares in his "home" state(s):

Texas (#11) - neg 14%
Conneticut (#38) - neg 37%

anyone know how his address altered his approval ratings, either nationally or in the southern border states?
Which address? Last night? Too soon to tell.

Although if the reactions G.G. (http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/05/presidents-speech-mauled-by-his-base.html#links) catalogs are representative of the whole, it didn't go over well with the one group that counted -- his base.

[solvs]

we should just make this topic a sticky.
Yes, but it wouldn't make sense in about 2 and a half years. Or sooner. I hope.

[emmawu]

Let's see if we can make it go even lower, I'm thinking single digits. C'mon we can all try. Aim high, Abby Hoffman tried to raise the Pentagon with just thought and the Army investigated him. Let's aim for the number 6.

[solvs]

Let's see if we can make it go even lower, I'm thinking single digits. C'mon we can all try.
Bush could rape peoples dogs and run over their Mothers in an SUV with a swastika on it while yelling about how much America sucks and mooning everyone and he'd still have a 20-something approval rating. The fact that he's gone down this low is very telling, and it just keeps getting lower.

[Blue Velvet]

Was just reading this (http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1777285,00.html) piece in the Guardian this morning and a broad consensus for most of the problems seems to be this ill-planned war in Iraq.

What are the Democrats proposing be done about it? Is there a national line or are candidates taking various positions depending on their constituents?

I'm not a detailed follower of American politics but I'm a little unsure of how it works in terms of opposition. Where does centralised policy come from in an opposition party in the US?

For instance, in the UK, it's the Shadow Cabinet which formalises and coordinates opposition policy.

[FFTT]

It's more than the failed hostile takeover of Iraq's natural resources.

We have our own problems here and the cost of our involvement in Iraq
has spiraled out of control.

Katrina made the American public wake up and realize that when all hell breaks loose, you're on your own. FEMA's job is primarily to insure continuity
of government.

Gas prices and the announcement of record oil company profits do not sit
well with anyone.
The cost of everything is going up because of fuel costs.

This time last year, the real estate market was booming and low interest rates meant that nearly anyone could afford to buy a home.
Buyers and investors we happy making considerable profits on their investments.
Now with higher interest rates, the affordability factor has suffered greatly,
utilities are way up and investors are getting ready to dump their properties at a loss or at great reduced prices.

Last but not least, the public in general has tired from all of the corruption
and greed.

Even the most conservative faith based supporters have seen through this administration's smoke and mirrors.

[IJ Reilly]

The next poll will be interesting, with the stock market having given up a year's worth of gains in one week. The performance of the market was about the only leg of the stool left, the only evidence that the Bush administration could point to as a sign of confidence in the economy.

[Thomas Veil]

Well, they still point to "low" unemployment figures...conveniently ignoring the fact that people who've been out of work for so long they've given up, and people who can only find part-time work, are not counted. Nowadays, that's a lot of people.

[IJ Reilly]

Well, they still point to "low" unemployment figures...conveniently ignoring the fact that people who've been out of work for so long they've given up, and people who can only find part-time work, are not counted. Nowadays, that's a lot of people.

Let's see how long the low unemployment rate lasts if, as the markets appear to be signaling, we're headed towards a recession.

BTW, what happened to Maxwell? I miss Max!

[Thomas Veil]

Would you believe my avatar was hacked and deleted by al-Qaeda?

Would you believe it was stolen by a Nigerian businessman?

How about a cease-and-desist letter from Universal Studios? ;)

[solvs]

What are the Democrats proposing be done about it?
They aren't. Some have made rumblings, but they're basically raising a stink about how stupid it was in the first place (even the ones that voted for it and supported it in the beginning). They're hoping people are just sick of the neocons and will vote for the other guys. Some have tried to get a consensus, or even a little support, but the Dems as a whole can't seem to get it together enough make an actual decision as a whole for what their plan will be if they come into power. It's like they're still afraid to do anything and haven't learned from their mistakes. Depressing isn't it.

Now you know how we feel. Read here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12823166/), here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12675876/from/RL.1/), and here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12676020/from/RL.2/) for more info.