NYT: Bush approval rating sinks to lowest level ever

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • delirious
    Addiction started
    • Jun 2004
    • 288

    NYT: Bush approval rating sinks to lowest level ever

    IMO quite a balanced article since it highlights both Bush and Kerry's weaknesses. This election is gonna be very interesting

    President Bush's job approval rating has fallen to the lowest level of his presidency, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. The poll found Americans stiffening their opposition to the Iraq war, worried that the invasion could invite domestic terrorist attacks and skeptical about whether the White House has been fully truthful about the war or about abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison.

    A majority of respondents in the poll, conducted before yesterday's transfer of power to an interim Iraqi government, said that the war was not worth its cost in American lives and that the Bush administration did not have a clear plan to restore order to Iraq.

    The survey, which showed Mr. Bush's approval rating at 42 percent, also found that nearly 40 percent of Americans say they do not have an opinion about Senator John Kerry, the likely Democratic presidential nominee, despite what have been both parties' earliest and most expensive television advertising campaigns.

    Among those who do have an opinion, Mr. Kerry is disliked more than he is liked. More than 50 percent of respondents said that Mr. Kerry says what he thinks voters want to hear, suggesting that Mr. Bush has had success in portraying his opponent as a flip-flopper.

    Americans were more likely to believe that Mr. Bush would do a better job than Mr. Kerry would in steering the nation through a foreign crisis, and protecting it from future terrorist attacks. Support for Mr. Bush's abilities in those areas has declined in recent months, but the findings suggest that Americans are more comfortable entrusting their security to a president they know than a challenger who remains relatively unknown.

    Even so, the poll was scattered with warning flags for Mr. Bush, and there was compelling evidence that his decision to take the nation to war against Iraq has left him in a precarious political position.

    As he heads into the fall election, Mr. Bush appears to have much riding on the transfer of power in Baghdad yesterday. The 42 percent of Americans who say they approve of the way Mr. Bush is handling his job is the lowest such figure in a Times/CBS News survey since the beginning of Mr. Bush's presidency in January 2001; 51 percent say they disapprove.

    Over the past 25 years, according to pollsters, presidents with job approval ratings below 50 percent in the spring of election years have generally gone on to lose. Mr. Bush's father had a 34 percent job approval rating at this time in 1992.

    Similarly, 45 percent said they had an unfavorable opinion of Mr. Bush himself, again the most negative measure the Times/CBS Poll has found since he took office. And 57 percent say the country is going in the wrong direction, another measure used by pollsters as a barometer of discontent with an incumbent.

    Yet the survey found little evidence that Mr. Kerry has been able to take advantage of the president's difficulties, even though Mr. Kerry has spent $60 million on television advertising over the past three months.

    Nationwide, Mr. Kerry has the support of 45 percent of registered voters, with Mr. Bush supported by 44 percent. When Ralph Nader, who is running as an independent, is included, he draws 5 percent, leaving 42 percent for Mr. Kerry and 43 percent for Mr. Bush

    In the 18 states viewed by both parties as the most competitive ? and thus the subject of the most advertising expenditures and visits by the candidates ? the race was equally tight. Forty-five percent of voters in those states said they would support Mr. Kerry, and 43 percent said they would back Mr. Bush. Indeed, on a host of measures, the poll found little difference in public opinion between the nation as a whole and that of voters in the competitive states.

    The tight race indicated by the poll reflects how aides to both Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry have described the overall state of play for weeks. But other polls have, at times, shown Mr. Kerry or Mr. Bush bumping ahead. A CBS News poll taken last month found Mr. Kerry with a lead of 49 percent to 41 percent over Mr. Bush.

    The nationwide poll of 1,053 adults, including 875 registered voters, was taken by telephone June 23 to June 27. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

    For all the signs of opposition to the war, Americans appear prepared to stay in Iraq until the situation becomes stable. The poll found that 54 percent of respondents said that the United States should remain in Iraq "as long as it takes," while 40 percent said the United States should withdraw "as soon as possible."

    Overall, the poll's findings left little doubt about the extent to which Mr. Bush's decision to go to war is proving to be perhaps the most fateful of his presidency. About 60 percent of respondents said they disapproved of Mr. Bush's Iraq policy, while just over 50 percent said they disapproved of his foreign policy. Those disapproval figures are the highest measured in his presidency on those subjects.

    And 60 percent of respondents, including a majority of independents, said the war has not been worth the cost.

    "We attacked a sovereign nation, and we went in there and we did things that the United States shouldn't have done," Charles Drum, 36, a Republican from Alameda, Calif., said in an interview after the poll was taken. "I feel that we went after the wrong people, and it's unacceptable, and it's absolutely ridiculous that innocent people are dying over there in Iraq, and our own troops are dying for a cause that is not just."

    Respondents said that Mr. Bush's policies in Iraq were having the effect of creating terrorists and of increasing the chances of another terrorist attack at home. Concerns about the war appear to undercut what has long been one of Mr. Bush's strong suits, his handling of the fight against terrorism. Fifty-two percent of Americans now say they approve of the way Mr. Bush is conducting that fight, down from 90 percent in December 2001.

    "I watch the news quite a bit, and I'm kind of thinking it's getting these terrorists motivated to do more," said Charlie Buck, 54, a Republican from Indiana, Pa. "Whether it's their religious beliefs or it's us trying to step into their country, I just get that feeling that they feel that we're stepping into where we shouldn't be, and it's inciting them. It's stimulating them to be more aggressive in getting us out."

    In what could prove to be a particularly far-reaching development for Mr. Bush ? especially because he and his campaign have sought to undercut Mr. Kerry's credibility ? nearly 60 percent said he was not being entirely truthful when talking about Iraq. Similarly, just 15 percent said the administration had told the entire truth when it came to abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison.

    There are some ways in which Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush are viewed similarly. They are seen as political leaders who keep their word, and both are viewed as optimistic, suggesting that Mr. Bush's attempt to portray Mr. Kerry as pessimistic has not taken hold.

    But there are signs that Americans are beginning to form very different personal perceptions of these two men. Mr. Kerry was described as more likely than Mr. Bush to admit a mistake, and to listen to divergent opinions. Mr. Bush is viewed as someone who takes a position and sticks with it, and while those interviewed were split on whether that was a positive trait, it is a contrast that Mr. Bush's campaign has encouraged as a way of trying to undercut Mr. Kerry

    "Kerry has flip-flopped too many times," said Joseph Martin, 52, an independent voter who lives outside Seattle. "The one thing that I think that a lot of people understand is a position of strength, and you cannot be waffling around. You've got to show a commitment, show a determination and keep a steady hand, and I just don't think Kerry has got that."

    For Mr. Bush, the poll contains a number of potentially worrisome findings. By 51 to 32 percent, Americans believe that he has divided the nation, rather than brought it together. The number of Americans who said that Mr. Bush did not care about the "needs and problems of people like you" edged up to 42 percent from 36 percent in March. More than 50 percent said that Mr. Bush did not have the same priorities for the country as they did.

    On the issue of the economy, even though job-creation numbers have been rising over the past few months, 45 percent of Americans say that the Bush administration has been responsible for a decline in jobs, compared with 24 percent who say it has brought an increase. Fifty-five percent of respondents said they were very or somewhat concerned that they or someone in their house would be out of work over the next year.

    Republicans, remembering what happened when Mr. Bush's father lost in 1992, have long expressed concern that any improvement in the economy will happen too late to capture the notice of voters.

    Both men are disliked by more people than they are liked. The number of people who view Mr. Kerry unfavorably has jumped to 35 percent from 29 percent in mid-March, when Mr. Bush began a huge television advertising campaign against his opponent.

    In Mr. Kerry's case, 36 percent said they had no opinion of him, despite the campaign's record-setting expenditure on television advertisements. That figure is fairly typical for challengers at this point in the campaign; in June 1992, 44 percent of the public did not have an opinion of Bill Clinton.
  • brakada
    Gold Gabber
    • Jun 2004
    • 622

    #2
    Too bad, Kerry is too much of a dumbfuck to take advantage of such situations... :?

    flip...and flop...and flip...and flop...

    Democrats seem totally incompetent after Bush came to power. They had a couple of good candidates, but they pick Kerry...
    We shall boldly dance, where no man has danced before..."

    Comment

    • Civic_Zen
      Platinum Poster
      • Jun 2004
      • 1116

      #3
      Originally posted by brakada
      Democrats seem totally incompetent after Bush came to power. They had a couple of good candidates, but they pick Kerry...
      Democrats have been totally incompetent for more then 20 years now. And not a single nominee that could of been chosen in Kerry's stead, would have made a better choice. Perhaps you would have wanted Howard Dean to bust some rhymes for you. :ROFLMAO:
      "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus (55-117 A.D.)
      "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Comment

      • brakada
        Gold Gabber
        • Jun 2004
        • 622

        #4
        Originally posted by Civic_Zen
        Democrats have been totally incompetent for more then 20 years now.
        IMO Clinton's administration did a lot better job than the current one. But I judge your administration's mostly according to their international politics and not internal affairs.

        Originally posted by Civic_Zen
        And not a single nominee that could of been chosen in Kerry's stead, would have made a better choice. Perhaps you would have wanted Howard Dean to bust some rhymes for you. :ROFLMAO:
        Actually I kind of liked Wesley. At least he would be able to solve the Iraq crisis properly. But I am quite comfortable with the fact that I am not a US citizen and I do not have to choose the "lesser evil".
        We shall boldly dance, where no man has danced before..."

        Comment

        • Civic_Zen
          Platinum Poster
          • Jun 2004
          • 1116

          #5
          Originally posted by brakada
          Actually I kind of liked Wesley. At least he would be able to solve the Iraq crisis properly. But I am quite comfortable with the fact that I am not a US citizen and I do not have to choose the "lesser evil".
          Wesley Clark is as much of a joke as Kerry and the rest of them. He claims that he would have never voted for the war in Iraq, just like Kerry did and yet BOTH OF THEM either voted for it or supported Bush on it 100%. And of course they both decided later, once they became presidential candidates to change their stance.

          Thats what democrats do, they back peddle. And Clinton was in no way better then the current administration. He was the worst president we had since Nixon.

          And to you last sentence. Exactly. Which is why your opinion is completely irrelevent. Hoping for a certain candidate to win isn't going to bring the "get one vote free card for any European" from the Voting Fairy.
          "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus (55-117 A.D.)
          "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."
          - Thomas Jefferson

          Comment

          • brakada
            Gold Gabber
            • Jun 2004
            • 622

            #6
            Originally posted by Civic_Zen
            Wesley Clark is as much of a joke as Kerry and the rest of them. He claims that he would have never voted for the war in Iraq, just like Kerry did and yet BOTH OF THEM either voted for it or supported Bush on it 100%. And of course they both decided later, once they became presidential candidates to change their stance.
            If the tables were turned, Bush would be doing the exact same thing, don't you think so? Everyone acts according to their interests and no one really cares, but that's politics.

            Originally posted by Civic_Zen
            Thats what democrats do, they back peddle. And Clinton was in no way better then the current administration. He was the worst president we had since Nixon.
            How surprising. And I always thought George jr. is the worst American president since Nixon. But as I said, regarding foreign, not internal affairs.

            Originally posted by Civic_Zen
            And to you last sentence. Exactly. Which is why your opinion is completely irrelevent. Hoping for a certain candidate to win isn't going to bring the "get one vote free card for any European" from the Voting Fairy.
            If I can remember right, you stated you are not going to vote anyway, so I guess my opinion is just as relevant as yours. And as I said in my previous post, I wouldn't really want a vote free card. Do I have to repeat everything around here? :? :wink:
            We shall boldly dance, where no man has danced before..."

            Comment

            • Alpinevpr
              Getting Somewhere
              • Jun 2004
              • 249

              #7
              I think that Carter was the worst president. Clinton had the worst values, but Carter messed the country up. It took Ronald to get everything taken care of. Shit he should have ran for president rather than Bush Jr.

              Comment

              • Civic_Zen
                Platinum Poster
                • Jun 2004
                • 1116

                #8
                Originally posted by brakada
                If I can remember right, you stated you are not going to vote anyway, so I guess my opinion is just as relevant as yours. And as I said in my previous post, I wouldn't really want a vote free card. Do I have to repeat everything around here? :? :wink:
                The difference is that I actually have that choice. I can vote, or not. And I don't have to decide until the last minute because I procrastinate and thats what I do. I don't do anything unelss its at the last minute.

                Originally posted by Alpinevpr
                I think that Carter was the worst president. Clinton had the worst values, but Carter messed the country up. It took Ronald to get everything taken care of. Shit he should have ran for president rather than Bush Jr.
                I would agree with this statement for the most part. But Carter and Clinton are pretty close.
                "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus (55-117 A.D.)
                "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."
                - Thomas Jefferson

                Comment

                • phishfood
                  Fresh Peossy
                  • Jun 2004
                  • 41

                  #9
                  actually clinton turned this country around from the f'd state george the 1st left it. george jr sure isnt 'fixing' this country. way to turn that surplus into a deficit. oh way to go pissing the rest of world off at us. i think its time for george jr to go take some vaca. that must be nice ...

                  Comment

                  • cosmo
                    Gold Gabber
                    • Jun 2004
                    • 583

                    #10
                    IMO Clinton's administration did a lot better job than the current one. But I judge your administration's mostly according to their international politics and not internal affairs.
                    You think apologizing to the world for nothing and letting threat's gather is great international policy? The man accomplished absolutely nothing. He praises his economic policies, but he was held down by a Republican congress. People remember peace and prosperity under his administration. That's because he confronted nothing, and rode the tidal wave from the Reagan years.


                    Actually I kind of liked Wesley. At least he would be able to solve the Iraq crisis properly.
                    Dear god. Don't get me started on this guy. Wesley Clark has to ask his own advisors where he stands on the current issues.

                    Comment

                    • cosmo
                      Gold Gabber
                      • Jun 2004
                      • 583

                      #11
                      I love this. Bush's weakest approval rating ever. Especially when CBSNYTimes have been busted in the past by sampling more democrats than republicans to get their poll to show the numbers they want.

                      Comment

                      • brakada
                        Gold Gabber
                        • Jun 2004
                        • 622

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Civic_Zen
                        The difference is that I actually have that choice. I can vote, or not. And I don't have to decide until the last minute because I procrastinate and thats what I do. I don't do anything unelss its at the last minute.
                        So you're a flip-flopper. You say one thing and then do the other... You ahould be a liberal. And thank you for enlightening me that American citizens have the right to vote.

                        Originally posted by cosmo
                        You think apologizing to the world for nothing and letting threat's gather is great international policy? The man accomplished absolutely nothing. He praises his economic policies, but he was held down by a Republican congress. People remember peace and prosperity under his administration. That's because he confronted nothing, and rode the tidal wave from the Reagan years.
                        I am almost positive that if Clinton stayed in office, the 9/11 would have probably never occured. I disagree that the threats have gathered because of Clinton's peaceful policies and I am definitely sure, that world is NOT a safer place since W came to office.
                        We shall boldly dance, where no man has danced before..."

                        Comment

                        • cosmo
                          Gold Gabber
                          • Jun 2004
                          • 583

                          #13
                          I am almost positive that if Clinton stayed in office, the 9/11 would have probably never occured.
                          Are you serious? Really? What could he have done to stop that catastrophe? His appointed agents built the 'wall' that caused this catastrophe. Jamie Gorelick drafted a bill as to where our seperate intelligence agencies could not cooperate with one another regarding intel issues.

                          The terrorists came here in 1996 and blended in with our populous. How in the hell could Bush be held accountable?

                          I disagree that the threats have gathered because of Clinton's peaceful policies and I am definitely sure, that world is NOT a safer place since W came to office
                          Oh really? It's my impression that they kept attacking us because we were quote: 'a paper tiger'. Bin Laden called us that name because Clinton never confronted this issue. The world was peaceful on September 10th, 2001, when Bush was in office. War was waged on US the day after.

                          Comment

                          • Civic_Zen
                            Platinum Poster
                            • Jun 2004
                            • 1116

                            #14
                            Originally posted by brakada
                            Originally posted by Civic_Zen
                            The difference is that I actually have that choice. I can vote, or not. And I don't have to decide until the last minute because I procrastinate and thats what I do. I don't do anything unelss its at the last minute.
                            So you're a flip-flopper. You say one thing and then do the other... You ahould be a liberal. And thank you for enlightening me that American citizens have the right to vote.
                            Exactly where did I flip-flop?? I probably won't vote, the only reason why I would is if I have nothing better to do and get a hair up my ass. Which most likely won't happen, but I'm not going to dismiss the possibility. I have always said I don't vote, and I haven't said a damn thing to imply that I've changed my mind.

                            Originally posted by brakada
                            I am almost positive that if Clinton stayed in office, the 9/11 would have probably never occured. I disagree that the threats have gathered because of Clinton's peaceful policies and I am definitely sure, that world is NOT a safer place since W came to office.


                            Congratulations.

                            You just beat out Galapidate for the most hysterical statement made this week. And just when you think it isn't possible.

                            Anyone care to step up to the challenge and come up with something even more hilarious then this??
                            "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus (55-117 A.D.)
                            "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."
                            - Thomas Jefferson

                            Comment

                            • cosmo
                              Gold Gabber
                              • Jun 2004
                              • 583

                              #15
                              Congratulations.

                              You just beat out Galapidate for the most hysterical statement made this week. And just when you think it isn't possible.

                              Anyone care to step up to the challenge and come up with something even more hilarious then this??

                              This can't be topped. No way...

                              Comment

                              Working...