President's Approval Rating Dips Below 40

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by leekohler, Sep 10, 2005.

  1. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #2
    Generally, low numbers for an incumbent put a brake on excessive endorsement for the following candidate of the same party in the next presidential elections, right?

    I've always thought the whole Monica-gate hooha was whipped up to harm the image of Pres. Clinton thus preventing him from appearing too often with Al Gore and thereby also stopping him from leveraging his remaining popularity and trappings of office.

    Do these type of polls also have an effect on Congressional elections?

    In the UK, discontent with the Prime Minister can affect the results of by-elections by mobilising a protest vote.
     
  2. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    It will reflect in the congressional elections if the other candidates have something to offer. Let's hope they do.
     
  3. ham_man macrumors 68020

    ham_man

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    #4
    Handling of gas prices?!?! Since when can the President control gas prices?
     
  4. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #5
    A pertinent question, but more importantly: why is a measure of gas prices one of the key hot-buttons for the US electorate instead of a countless number of other issues?

    Surely in a world of finite resources and infinite possibilities of conflict, nobody can expect gas prices to go down?
     
  5. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #6
    Never- but the public will still blame him, just like they did Carter in the 70's.
     
  6. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #7
    And, of course, we'll all be complaining how unfair it is...

    Actually, it would be the ultimate irony for a man who had done so much to secure a future for the oil industry to be brought down because of gas prices.
     
  7. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #8
    yep.
     
  8. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #9
    Presidents take credit and receive blame often for things they had little or nothing to do with. It's how politics works.

    Remember, perceptions play an important role here. Bush's daddy was roundly criticized for appearing not to care about regular people (regardless of on argument over whether he actually did or not) and it hurt him politically.

    People are seeing our governmental leaders being friendly to oil companies at the expense of average people. Note that they didn't care about that relationship when gas cost under $2/gallon. But when gas prices rise they care.

    People are selfish. They only care when it affects them personally. Go figure.
     
  9. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #10
    Yes, but he had also the added albatross around his neck of a few local difficulties involving hostages and a failed rescue attempt in Iran.
     
  10. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #11
    Exactly, it's difficult for people not to make link between gas prices and the President when they see these things going on.
     
  11. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #12
    And Bush has many albatrosses as well.
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
  13. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #14
    Ha-ha! No- I think just looking at the poll will point out a few.
     
  14. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #15
    I don't think they're as focussed on or to be more honest, don't provide a simple 'storyline' for news outlets to really bear down on. Also, the relentless cheerleaders of the Republican party and affiliated organisations are extremely organised and do a fantastic job of muddying the waters.

    To me, it seems to be a general malaise and dissatisfaction pricked into conscience by recent events in Louisiana and surrounding states.

    Capture Bin Laden? Perceptions might change awfully quickly...
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #16
    Exactly so. The general dissatisfaction with Bush has been building all summer. Lack of significant progress in Iraq combined with the emergence of the Cindy Sheehan-led anti-war movement have proved to be very detrimental to Bush's Iraq and Security at Home qualities that have helped keep him popular with many. Add in the horrible federal response to Katrina and people's suspicion that something that possibly approaches treason occurred among the White House higher-ups along with an economy that is doing well for the rich but horribly for the middle class and the poor, high gas prices, Terry Schaivo etc and you have a severe problem for this president.

    But at least with his approval rating below 40% hopefully the press will stop calling him a 'popular' president. Clinton was 'embattled' while his approval rating was much higher.

    Hopefully the dissatisfaction with the status quo will lead to some Democratic gains in the Congress and state positions as well. The Democrats have become quite adept at losing lately though, so I am not counting on it. Like I said, I think the GOP leadership will try to bring enough troops back home before election season to make Americans happy enough. Whether that works or not depends a lot on how inept the Democrats are.
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #17
    I think the real meaning of these numbers is the increased likelihood of defection in the Republican ranks in Congress. They're running for reelection next year, Bush is not. They are not going to be wholeheartedly embracing the agenda of such a manifestly unpopular president.
     
  17. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #18
    When he chooses to invade a major oil-producing country. When he controls the ability to release the US strategic reserve. When he can call for changes in tax policy. When he has major ties to the oil and gas industry.

    Check. Check. Check. Check.

    I realize that the president doesn't directly control a great deal and that these are all relatively minor variables in the grand scheme of things, but it's not like Bush is unconnected to the issue. Especially on the first point.
     
  18. 3rdpath macrumors 68000

    3rdpath

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    2nd star on the right and straight till morning
    #19
    right-e-oh!

    like rats from a sinking ship...
     
  19. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #20
    Or from a quacking duck!
     
  20. Lacero macrumors 604

    Lacero

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    #21
    The only good news in nearly 6 hellish years of idiocy and incompetence.
     
  21. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #22
    Was not George Bush the candidate that told us that he had the expertise and the relationships with the Saudis to ensure stable gas prices? Hey, don't blame me if I took him at his word!

    IJ, what are those rats doing on a quacking duck? :confused: ;)
     
  22. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #23
    Trust me, you don't want to know.
     
  23. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #24
    Oh, ... Oh my! :eek:
     
  24. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #25
    Don't forget that Nixon instituted wage and price controls from 1971-1973. And, the government set a maximum price on gasoline from 1973-1979. So it can be done.

    On the subject of the Katrina anti-halo effect:

    George H. W. Bush was riding high on the basis of the Gulf War, but then his popularity plummeted as a result of a tax hike he signed into law.

    That was then; this is now.

    Only ten months ago we learned that you can do a lot more dastardly stuff then raise taxes, and still get yourself and your party re-elected. Things have changed. I attribute it to a combination of increased public tolerance for crooked government (don't ask me why); ever-better right-wing propaganda; and a lack of charismatic alternatives from the opposition party, the Democrats.

    So I would not be so sure that even this event, with its attendant low popularity rating for Bush, will mean that neo-cons are finally on the way out. I went into the 2004 primaries thinking that defeating Bush should be a cakewalk. I won't make that mistake again, of Bush or any other neo-con; nor of underestimating the gullibility of the American voter.
     

Share This Page