Plummeting support for GW in new ABC/WA Post Poll

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Ugg, Jul 11, 2003.

  1. Ugg
    macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #1
    link

    As would be expected, the Democrats are losing faith faster than the Republicans but they aren't all that enamored of him anymore either. This is the first time that a majority of Americans (52%) have said the death toll is too high. His overall rating is at 59%.

    How low will it go?
     
  2. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    #2
    Re: Plummeting support for GW in new ABC/WA Post Poll

    Probably not as low as Gov. Davis in California. At 59 percent, the question is will it stop being so high, not how low will it go.
     
  3. macrumors 6502a

    Vector

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    #3
    It is too early to be using this type of poll to judge bush's chances at reelection. First off, this poll is only a sampling of 1,000 people which is too low to create a representative poll. The poll was conducted by phone likely during the daytime, which creates a poll that samples a similar group of people rather than a diverse selection. Newspaper and televison (this poll is from abc) polls are historically unreliable and should not be viewed as research from which one can gain an accurate insight on political situations. Gallup polls are fairly reliable (at least respectively).

    Anyway, this type of fall in approval was expected and even acknowledged months ago by the bush camp. If bush cannot turn the current iraq intellegence situation around, the public will began to question his credibility and his authority for beginning a war. He will began to be questioned by the public on all of his major decisions and some will look back on his past actions and question them. Bush must put the credibility question to rest soon before it becomes larger and cannot be erased come election time.

    Bush must also focus on the economy, which has been improving slightly and is predicted to recover; however, the unemployment situation has yet to be addressed meaningly.

    This poll does help to present a current if somewhat inaccurate picture of Bush's approval and thus his chance at reelection, but i would not place to much importance in its findings as of yet.

    The Gallup Organization provides a slightly better breakdown of his current approval. It provides a good comparison to other two term presidents' ratings at this time in their respective terms. http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr030702.asp
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    Maclarny

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2003
    Location:
    MN
    #4
    I guess the american people are finally getting fed up of a president who cheated his way into office, ruined the economy, gave massive payoffs (tax cuts) to the rich, started an unjustified war in which hundreds have and hundreds more will die, and lied to do it. It's about time...
     
  5. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    #5
    LOL. When the apporval numbers drop into the low 40s or high 30s, your statement that people are fed up will be true, but when they remain in the high 50s, talk about the American people being fed up is little more than wishful thinking.

    Vector,
    A sample of 1,000 is quite sufficient if it is done properly.
     
  6. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #6
    I'd predict that the President's "numbers" will continue to slip, though how low they will go is difficult to say. His support, IMO, is a mile wide and about an inch deep, and a lot of people who were fully prepared to back the President when the stars and stripes were flapping over our troops in Iraq will be less inclined to provide their uncritical support as the grim realities of occupation take hold. It is gradually dawning on Americans that the Bush administration's plans for post-war Iraq were half-baked at best, and the rationales for the war were not, to put it kindly, entirely on the level.

    There's a lot of game to be played between now and November 2004, but one thing is clear: the opposition to the Bush presidency is becoming more motivated and vocal every day, and they have a tremendous amount of ammunition at their disposal. The main question is how they use it, and whether their arguments begin to move the middle of American politics, where national elections are won and lost.
     
  7. macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #7
    The people love a president who wins. It's starting to become clear we didn't win.
     
  8. macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #8
    6 in 10 people approving doesn't sound like plummeting to me. It will be interesting to see how things go over the next year. I wouldn't be too surprised if WMD, Hussein, and bin Laden are all found before the election, or even one or two of them. If that happens in the months leading up to an election, Dubya will ride a massive wave of (war) popularity into a second term. Without them his prospects are much shakier (as in people will be thinking about the economy), although I have to say, none of the Democratic candidates look real strong right now. However, a week in politics can seem like an entire year, and a whole year can seem like forever. Who knows where this debate will be 12 months from now.
     
  9. macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #9
    it's trending downwards -- that's why the media is making a fuss.

    very true.
     
  10. SPG
    macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #10
    The 2004 election is still a coin toss, and will be right up to the last minute.
    The claims of Iraqi WMD, nuculur weapons, and links to Al Queda are all being revealed as lies and the growing storm should help trend those poll numbers even lower. With the door opened by these blatant lies a lot of the people in the middle should wake up to some of the other realities of this administration and all the nasty political games Karl Rove can think of won't ensure a second term for dubya.
     
  11. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    London
    #11
    59% is still quite high, though i understand that the fuss is due to the fact that the trend is downward.

    Also while a 1000 people is large enough to give a representitive sample, if the survey was conducted in the middle of the day, the sample may well be biased, (i.e. over representation of housewives, the unemployed etc, ) What was the aproval rating of the last major poll? The movement may not be statistically significant if its only a drop of a couple of percent or so, given the possibly biased sample. Though it is hardly bad news :)

    He's still faring alot better than Blair.
    The government recently faced its lowest parlimentry majority since it came to power.

    what would be truely sad is if the conservatives won the next election (unlikely as that may be :) ) Though given how much like a conservative blair is, one would hardly know the difference :)
     
  12. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #12
    There is a way out for Labour - get rid of Blair. It was largly his "passionate" personal beliefs which lead to this catastrophic misjudgement.
    With Blair still in charge I (despite being a life-long Labour supporter) will not vote for Labour. With Gordon Brown or Peter Hain in charge, I just might.
     
  13. SPG
    macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
  14. Ugg
    thread starter macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #14
    Very similar numbers and I can't believe that polls like that query the same people. The numbers in and of themselves are not surprising because post war approval of a president always drops but if lies continue to be exposed then that is another story altogether.


    SPG, I've been reading KOS quite a bit ever since I saw it on your sig. Thanks!
     
  15. macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #15
    SPG,
    the poll trends are quite interesting, but what suprised me most was this:
    I'll check back in a week and see if Tenet's falling on his sword is going to slow the trend.
    The election is too far away for this to mean very much, but it might help energize some of the opposition. I worry that this fool is going to march the troops into Syria, Iran, or N. Korea just to move his numbers up. After all didn't just tell the Iraqi opposition to "Bring it on!" He dosn't seem to mind others blood being spilled in order to play John Wayne.
     
  16. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #16
    As long as the opinion is based on Iraq I think Bush's numbers will stay high. People do not want to think we are in a useless war (even if we are). If the question becomes jobs (highest unemployment in 20 years), the environment (the list goes on like this one The Bush administration is now moving to endorse the testing of noxious and lethal chemicals on human beings.), fiscal responsibility ($400 billion/yr. debt), supporting the troops (cutting veterans benefits, cutting combat pay), fairness in tax policies ($100,000 for Cheney - $000 for some poor people), Corporate weaseling (Enron energy policy, etc. etc.), far right-wing judicial appointments

    then he will lose. The problem is that there is so much too dislike. How do you fit it all in a 30 second TV spot?
     
  17. SPG
    macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #17
    As I'm not one to hide my political leanings, I hope that we are witnessing the beginning of the end for bush. The real story will come out about each of his "initiatives" and promises, and I don't think the people will appreciate the constant bait and switch tactics.
     
  18. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #18
    Clearly that was the plan, but I don't think it's going to work. It's now come to light that Tenet personally warned the White House off this information back in October, which only makes Bush's efforts to blame the CIA now for what he said in January look even more cynical and self-serving. This story has "legs," and could easily defy the administration's efforts to control it. It also makes Ari Fleisher's recent statement that the administration considers this to be a "closed issue" sound like a laughable exercise in spin control.
     
  19. macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #19
    the whole idea of saying "bush has moved past this issue" is laughable. it's not for him to decide.
     
  20. Ugg
    thread starter macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #20
    Now that Ari and his patronizing paternalism is fini, I wonder how the new guy will do? A tough job I'm sure, how does any spokesperson (dem or rep, private or public) deal with all the lies they have to tell?

    In a way, I think focusing on the uranium issue is taking away from all the other blatant lies that were told. What about the tons of chem and bio weapons that were "known" to exist? I think it's time for a systematic look at all the claims not just the uranium. I doubt that gw will be able to sidestep them so readily.
     
  21. macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #21
    IJ Reilly, I just read that story as well. It kind of defeats the purpose of blaming it on the CIA if they already stopped the WH from using the story once in October. The Doctors of Spin control must be going crazy at 1600 Pennsylvannia Ave.!

    Ugg,
    couldn't agree more. At some point the focus must be not just on the lies or exaggerations used to justify the war, but also the policy of this administration that could lead us into new conflicts.
     
  22. macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #22
    With all the secrecy combined with the short fuse and hair trigger along with the seeming love for using the military, I wouldn't be surprised if the words "marshal law" have been uttered in the WH.

    After Bush got elected, I had hoped that he would get mired in scandals as a sort of payback for the way the Republicans constantly attacked Clinton, but now...
    GWB actually scares me. He and his administration have shown no desire to work for the little guy. They have shown no desire to try to make the country a better place for the majority. They seem intent only on oil, cutting federal income and estate taxes, and spending money on the military. Plus, to make things scarier, we just don't know what is going on. They love secrecy more than anyone I've ever seen, and the stuff they want to keep secret, affects us all.
     
  23. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    #23
    There was a rather conservative woman I met once while the investigation of President Clinton was ongoing. Upon learning from a TV news report that Clinton had left some evidence on a certain blue dress, she was practically dancing around with glee saying that he was finished. My response to her was that this was far from the case, and I was proven to be correct. Many posters here have the same hopeful tone and blindness to the politcal realities of the situation.

    This issue is just not likely to have traction. Think back just a few short months, and the issues were different: Iraq was going to attack Israel, the Arab street was going to rise up and over thow the governments in Egypt and Jordan, the entire region would be plunged into war. Later, the forces were stretched to thin, and Saddam was going to counter attack and drive them back to Kuwait because General Franks didn't have a good battle plan. Then, there was going to be massive house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. There were going to be hundereds of thousands of casualties in Iraq. The oil fields were going to be lit up like a Christmas tree and cause an environmental catastorphe. Then the entire Iraqi cultural heritage was falsely said to have been looted.

    LOL, mcrain, or should I say, McFly, it's "martial law," not marshal law. Listen to yourself. You sound just like the right wing nut job idiots who said that Clinton was going to declare martial law.

    Ugg,
    Ask the UN weapons inspectors who provided that world with that information. Saddam was also known to exist, but no one has found him.
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #24
    It is only martial law if you haven't been drinking. It's marshal law if you have been! :)

    Yes, I sound like a right wing nut job, but considering those right wing nut jobs got Clinton impeached... I'm not ashamed about that. In fact, I think what Jr. did is far worse, and deserves far more criticism.
     
  25. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #25
    So you really think it's OK to blame the UN for US intelligence failures and OK to blame the UN for the Bush "mistatements". Why then, if Powell claimed to know 3 days after the state-of-the-union address that the African uranium story was weak, did the administration not tell us then? Why did it take hundreds of news stories before the administration admitted to misleading the American people?

    This is not some after work b-job. This is a war where thousands have died and many more are disfigured for life.

    You consider the Iraq stories, the "small" deficit stories, the blocked scientific environmental information and it adds up to an administration whose lying approaches Nixonian levels.

    George Bush is the New Nixon.
     

Share This Page