Bush's approval rating hits new low

[RunInRed 16,488]

McCain continuing Bush's policy on Iraq and the Economy...yeah, great idea.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/19/bush.poll/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Just 31 percent of Americans approve of how President Bush is handling his job, according to a poll released Wednesday, the fifth anniversary of the start of the Iraq war.

Sixty-seven percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey disapprove of the president's performance.

The 31 percent approval number is a new low for Bush in CNN polling, and 40 points lower than the president's number at the start of the Iraq war.

"Bush's approval rating five years ago, at the start of the Iraq war, was 71 percent, and that 40-point drop is almost identical to the drop President Lyndon Johnson faced during the Vietnam War," said CNN polling director Keating Holland.

"Johnson's approval rating was 74 percent just before Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1964, which effectively authorized the Vietnam War. Four years later, his approval was down to 35 percent, a 39-point drop that is statistically identical to what Bush has faced so far over the length of the Iraq war," he said.

Predictably, Democrats and Republicans don't see eye to eye when it comes to Bush: 64 percent of Republicans approve of Bush's job performance, while just 9 percent of Democrats do.

The president's approval rating has been below 35 percent since October and has not cracked 40 percent since September 2006.

Still, Bush's approval number is still better than the lowest number for his father, George H.W. Bush, who bottomed out at 29 percent in July 1992; Jimmy Carter, who fell to 28 percent in June 1979; Richard Nixon, at 24 percent in July and August of 1974; and Harry Truman, who dipped to 22 percent in 1952.

"Lame-duck presidents presiding over unpopular wars or struggling economies have gotten low approval ratings in the past." Holland said.

"By contrast, lame ducks like Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower and Bill Clinton had robust approval ratings in their final years in office, but each one was presiding over good economic times and a country at peace."

The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted by telephone with 1,019 adult Americans from Friday through Sunday.

The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points

[Auburn85 432]

rir,

what could he do to improve his ratings? i know i'm about to throw alot of what ifs' out, but do you think his approval ratings would go up if he began the troop withdrawal tomorrow? raised taxes on the rich? expand SCHIP to children who's families of four make $60k or less?

and also, if it wasn't for the war and strictly war spending, would democrats and liberals appreciate the increased spending in government and how big the government has gotten under him?

[TexasTiger 13,026]

rir,

what could he do to improve his ratings? i know i'm about to throw alot of what ifs' out, but do you think his approval ratings would go up if he began the troop withdrawal tomorrow? raised taxes on the rich? expand SCHIP to children who's families of four make $60k or less?

and also, if it wasn't for the war and strictly war spending, would democrats and liberals appreciate the increased spending in government and how big the government has gotten under him?

Perhaps if he only showed he had a clue:

"I must say, I'm a little envious," Bush said. "If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed."

"It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks," Bush said.

http://in.reuters.com/article/topNews/idIN...-32473520080313

[autigeremt 6,714]

I love these threads. Trying to tie McCain to Bush is like trying to tie Bin Laden to the Pope.

Never mind the fact that the Democratic Controlled Congress is at 21% and falling like a rock.

[RunInRed 16,488]

rir,

what could he do to improve his ratings? i know i'm about to throw alot of what ifs' out, but do you think his approval ratings would go up if he began the troop withdrawal tomorrow? raised taxes on the rich? expand SCHIP to children who's families of four make $60k or less?

and also, if it wasn't for the war and strictly war spending, would democrats and liberals appreciate the increased spending in government and how big the government has gotten under him?

When only 30% of the country approves of what you are doing, it's not just the democrats and liberals.

As for what he can do to improve - nothing. He has a 7 year track record of bad judgments, polarization, apathy to real problems, and failed policies. In many ways he has taken this country backward and we are all worse off for having him in office. He will no doubt go down as one of the worst Presidents in history.

[otterinbham 0]

I think his approval rating is so abysmal chiefly because we are grappling with titanic issues, and yet the man appears clueless. It's almost as if the guy is a marionette or something, mouthing the same platitudes over and over again. Not three days ago, the guy is stating that we're not in a recession when a survey of economists shows that 78% think we're in a recession and Alan Greenspan thinks we're in a recession (Mind you, as much as I like what he did for the economy, keeping interest rates as low as he did in his last year in office really was a terrible legacy).

No matter whether or not our invasion of Iraq was valid, the subsequent occupation was a total disaster, ill-planned both on a military and political level. Further, the administration slogged on in complete denial of a deteriorating situation in Iraq as the country slipped further and further into chaos. Only after four years of missed benchmarks did the administration finally understand that a complete change of strategy to asymmetrical warfare were required--essentially a longer period of time than it took the United States to conquer both Germany and Japan.

Oh, and on the home front, Bush completely and utterly betrayed conservative economic principles by ratcheting up spending to unbelievable levels, creating an entirely new entitlement program and not reining in his own party on spending. Heck, if he had just increased federal spending by the equivalent of the inflation rate, he would have had HUGE budget surpluses by now, even with the lower taxation levels (One of the few positive legacies of his presidency), rather than pilling a few trillion onto the national debt. Remember that he could have checked a Republican congress at any point during his administration, but he failed to do so. So the giveaway culture infected Congress on a scale not seen since the Johnson administration.

The list goes on and on. He is an embarrassment to the country and his party. I, like all but the most blind Bushbots, crave competence in the Oval Office. I personally cannot wait for January.

That being said, it will be a mistake to assume that the general contempt for Bush will translate into a Democratic victory. Quite frankly, McCain did an adept job of separating himself from the administration on many key issues, something that voters seem to understand. Meanwhile, Clinton has basically ruined her hopes of a political future and seems determined to take Obama down with her. And, quite frankly, don't be surprised to see a bloodletting in Congress in the fall elections, both Democrats and Republicans alike.

[autigeremt 6,714]

I don't think GWB will go down as one of the worst in history. Jimmy Carter has that tag. He's confronted the enemy head on after having hell reign down on him 18 months into his first term after the "great one" finished his teardown of the U.S. Military.

Yes, he may not have used the best judgement in appointing D. Rumsfeld, but I agree with the offensive mindset. This country has played along with the world too often and yet finds itself bailing the world out in the end, time after time. The world owes us....not the other way around. Germany would be the Superpower right now if it were not for the U.S. France, the UK, and the like would be a "state" in the German Empire if not for the U.S.

[TexasTiger 13,026]

I love these threads. Trying to tie McCain to Bush is like trying to tie Bin Laden to the Pope.

[autigeremt 6,714]

I knew you would like that one, Texas

But we all know that McCain and GWB never meet at the "ranch" for breakfast. There's no love loss after 2000.

[otterinbham 0]

I don't think GWB will go down as one of the worst in history. Jimmy Carter has that tag. He's confronted the enemy head on after having hell reign down on him 18 months into his first term after the "great one" finished his teardown of the U.S. Military.

Yes, he may not have used the best judgement in appointing D. Rumsfeld, but I agree with the offensive mindset. This country has played along with the world too often and yet finds itself bailing the world out in the end, time after time. The world owes us....not the other way around. Germany would be the Superpower right now if it were not for the U.S. France, the UK, and the like would be a "state" in the German Empire if not for the U.S.

Oh, the statute of limitations on world gratitude is about 15 minutes. At the same time, since the United States has been the world's pre-eminent economic, political, and military power for more than 60 years, I hardly think we've been pushed around. In fact, I would argue that the period from the fall of the Berlin Wall to 2003, no nation in history ever stood at such a glittering pinnacle. It says a lot that, five years later, this country has fallen so far.

[TexasTiger 13,026]

I knew you would like that one, Texas

But we all know that McCain and GWB never meet at the "ranch" for breakfast. There's no love loss after 2000.

If they were just breakfast buddies he'd have nothing to worry about. McCain is tied to Bush's war and Bush's immigration plan that many on the right hate. No other Senator is more identified with these policies.

[autiger4life 3]

Oh, and on the home front, Bush completely and utterly betrayed conservative economic principles by ratcheting up spending to unbelievable levels, creating an entirely new entitlement program and not reining in his own party on spending.

This is the part that I don't understand. I thought conservatives want a small government but with his spending and security programs it seems like the opposite.

[Auburn85 432]

I think his approval rating is so abysmal chiefly because we are grappling with titanic issues, and yet the man appears clueless. It's almost as if the guy is a marionette or something, mouthing the same platitudes over and over again. Not three days ago, the guy is stating that we're not in a recession when a survey of economists shows that 78% think we're in a recession and Alan Greenspan thinks we're in a recession (Mind you, as much as I like what he did for the economy, keeping interest rates as low as he did in his last year in office really was a terrible legacy).

No matter whether or not our invasion of Iraq was valid, the subsequent occupation was a total disaster, ill-planned both on a military and political level. Further, the administration slogged on in complete denial of a deteriorating situation in Iraq as the country slipped further and further into chaos. Only after four years of missed benchmarks did the administration finally understand that a complete change of strategy to asymmetrical warfare were required--essentially a longer period of time than it took the United States to conquer both Germany and Japan.

Oh, and on the home front, Bush completely and utterly betrayed conservative economic principles by ratcheting up spending to unbelievable levels, creating an entirely new entitlement program and not reining in his own party on spending. Heck, if he had just increased federal spending by the equivalent of the inflation rate, he would have had HUGE budget surpluses by now, even with the lower taxation levels (One of the few positive legacies of his presidency), rather than pilling a few trillion onto the national debt. Remember that he could have checked a Republican congress at any point during his administration, but he failed to do so. So the giveaway culture infected Congress on a scale not seen since the Johnson administration.

The list goes on and on. He is an embarrassment to the country and his party. I, like all but the most blind Bushbots, crave competence in the Oval Office. I personally cannot wait for January.

That being said, it will be a mistake to assume that the general contempt for Bush will translate into a Democratic victory. Quite frankly, McCain did an adept job of separating himself from the administration on many key issues, something that voters seem to understand. Meanwhile, Clinton has basically ruined her hopes of a political future and seems determined to take Obama down with her. And, quite frankly, don't be surprised to see a bloodletting in Congress in the fall elections, both Democrats and Republicans alike.

i know for the most part we agree that he has betrayed several conservatives. especially, fiscal conservatives on spending and hypocricy on national security in relation to illegal immigration. i was not for the cut of the interest rate. heck, i wasn't for the previous cuts several months back either.

i'm just trying to figure out if it wasn't for the war, would liberals and democrats be happy with how big government has gotten? plus, at this point, why are his approval ratings continuing to drop if he's a lame duck president and nothing can be done?

and i'm confused on the actual meaning of a recession. is it 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth or is it two consecutive quaters in which the two months are both lower than 3 months ago?

it doesn't matter if we technically are or aren't in a recession. if people feel we are already in one then, we are in one.

our dollar does suck and the interest cut doesn't do it any favors.

we currently have around 5% unemployment. yet, it seemed like a little more than a decade ago, people were bragging about an economy that was hovering around 6% unemployment.

is this housing market mess going on soley because of people losing their jobs, health problems, or a head of household being sent overseas?

or are the vast majority of foreclosures because people bought more house than they could afford?

has anyone seen the pictures of the houses they show on CNN when discussing the mortgage stuff? they're not 1500 sq ft houses. You would think CNN would at least make a little effort to show smaller houses, but in clips, they like to show these big one story houses along with 2-story houses. Not everyone can be a doctor or lawyer can they?

the fundamental no-no bush did was cut taxes while increasing the size of government to record levels.

and to rir,

what economic policies is mccain mirroring of bush? did mccain say he wants next year's federal budget to be $3.5-4 trillion next year.

if you mean keeping taxes low, what's wrong with that as long as spending is under control?

if we keep lowering the rates and continue to give the mentaility that we have a "right" to healthcare or have a right to be bailed out of foreclosure, we'll end up like rome only at a 21st century pace.

[AUman43 5]

Texas Tiger, your Republicanism is showing. How in the Hell do you think you'd live in New York City or Los Angeles or San Francisco with a family of four making 60 grand a year? Not very well I imagine! Hey, let them eat cake I suppose! Sorry, lazy things! No incentitive! Looking for handouts! GeeeeeeZ!

[arnaldoabru 11]

rir,

what could he do to improve his ratings? i know i'm about to throw alot of what ifs' out, but do you think his approval ratings would go up if he began the troop withdrawal tomorrow? raised taxes on the rich? expand SCHIP to children who's families of four make $60k or less?

and also, if it wasn't for the war and strictly war spending, would democrats and liberals appreciate the increased spending in government and how big the government has gotten under him?

When only 30% of the country approves of what you are doing, it's not just the democrats and liberals.

As for what he can do to improve - nothing. He has a 7 year track record of bad judgments, polarization, apathy to real problems, and failed policies. In many ways he has taken this country backward and we are all worse off for having him in office. He will no doubt go down as one of the worst Presidents in history.

You forgot a lying,inept Attny. Gen. and his minons and vice president out a CIA agent.

[TexasTiger 13,026]

Texas Tiger, your Republicanism is showing. How in the Hell do you think you'd live in New York City or Los Angeles or San Francisco with a family of four making 60 grand a year? Not very well I imagine! Hey, let them eat cake I suppose! Sorry, lazy things! No incentitive! Looking for handouts! GeeeeeeZ!

At least one of us is confused, since I'm not sure what you are talking about.

[arnaldoabru 11]

I don't think GWB will go down as one of the worst in history. Jimmy Carter has that tag. He's confronted the enemy head on after having hell reign down on him 18 months into his first term after the "great one" finished his teardown of the U.S. Military.

Yes, he may not have used the best judgement in appointing D. Rumsfeld, but I agree with the offensive mindset. This country has played along with the world too often and yet finds itself bailing the world out in the end, time after time. The world owes us....not the other way around. Germany would be the Superpower right now if it were not for the U.S. France, the UK, and the like would be a "state" in the German Empire if not for the U.S.

"Offensive Mindset? this is a war they tried to fight on the cheap.Remember we were going to pay for it with Iraqi oil,sacrificing our troops with improper equipment,poor medical care when they returned home,excessive time on the front.Even when we pull out this war will cost of millions upon millions of dollar. And for what?Bush's speech yesterday said we are now fighting in Iraq to save the world's economy.First we were invading to get rid of WMD'S,then nuclear weapons,terrorist ties to 9/11,al-qeada,bringing democracy to the region,removing an evil tyrant,and now SAVING THE WORLD'S ECONOMY.

[DKW 86 7,441]

I love these threads. Trying to tie McCain to Bush is like trying to tie Bin Laden to the Pope.

Never mind the fact that the Democratic Controlled Congress is at 21% and falling like a rock.

These types of threads stick out for just that reason. "Bush Approval is bad...." Yeah his is and deservedly so. BUT Congress' is even demonstrably worse! How did that not get said in the original post is the real question.

[WinCrimson 61]

Though I'm not happy with the action (or lack thereof) by the Democrats, Congress' approval rating is always going to be lower than the President's.

The mantra of "Hate Congress as a whole but love your own Congressperson" will keep them in control. In fact, there will be several more seats that flip from red to blue in both Houses. Dems need not worry about Congress for a while.

[Tigermike 3,054]

I love these threads. Trying to tie McCain to Bush is like trying to tie Bin Laden to the Pope.

Never mind the fact that the Democratic Controlled Congress is at 21% and falling like a rock.

These types of threads stick out for just that reason. "Bush Approval is bad...." Yeah his is and deservedly so. BUT Congress' is even demonstrably worse! How did that not get said in the original post is the real question.

ObamaBoy was only staying on the "high ground".

[autigeremt 6,714]

Though I'm not happy with the action (or lack thereof) by the Democrats, Congress' approval rating is always going to be lower than the President's.

The mantra of "Hate Congress as a whole but love your own Congressperson" will keep them in control. In fact, there will be several more seats that flip from red to blue in both Houses. Dems need not worry about Congress for a while.

There's no real change with the Democrats because deep down, they LOVE Bush and his spend, spend, spend metality. The democrats on the far left want a socialist state in America. All they want is for us to sing around a camp fire with flowers in our hair and tell the world to stomp all over us while we enjoy peace and quiet.

I am not happy with Bush on a lot of issues. I do, however, see his nature and how he was changed after 9-11. The Bush prior to 9-11 is not the same one afterward. I'm sure I would not be either. Of course, I would have paved a glass road through the mountains of Afganistan and northern Pakistan before going to Iraq, but I truly think Bush was snowed by Rumsfeld and the poor information. We must not cut and run like we did in Vietnam, though. This area of the world, whether you like it or not, is very important to the overall stability of the globe. This new enemy wants to clear the earth.

McCain is a maverick, an independent with conservative tone and mindset. I think we can have government support WITH fiscal restraint. Tax dollars are WASTED every year with pork barrel, back room initiatives to the likes of the unions, the major corporations, and other groups on both sides of the isle. Obama will be like Hillary....in the pocket of some radical, liberal group who he/she owes favors to. McCain has a track record of not dealing with those people.

[WinCrimson 61]

We love Bush. Oh yeah, you've outed us now. Please, for the love of God and all things Holy, correct that oh so incorrect statement. It reeks of stupidity and I can honestly say that's one of the more ignorant statements I've ever heard. How could Democrats "love" someone that they have rallied against for 7 years and donated millions upon millions to defeat at every turn in the road?

It's also undeniable that McCain is a pawn for special interests. 99% of Obama's donations have come from private donations. McBush, or whatever his name is, has taken well over $400,000 from PACs to Obama's $15,000. Yet, he doesn't deal with "those people." Bullhockey. Try not to throw around broad generalizations that have no attachment to facts.

[CCTAU 3,346]

We love Bush. Oh yeah, you've outed us now. Please, for the love of God and all things Holy, correct that oh so incorrect statement. It reeks of stupidity and I can honestly say that's one of the more ignorant statements I've ever heard. How could Democrats "love" someone that they have rallied against for 7 years and donated millions upon millions to defeat at every turn in the road?

It's also undeniable that McCain is a pawn for special interests. 99% of Obama's donations have come from private donations. McBush, or whatever his name is, has taken well over $400,000 from PACs to Obama's $15,000. Yet, he doesn't deal with "those people." Bullhockey. Try not to throw around broad generalizations that have no attachment to facts.

When you look at the record, the only thing different from a dimocrat (besides the war) is abortion and gay marriage. Other than that, he could pass for a tax and spend dimocrat. Shows how ignorant dims are spending all that money defending gays and dead babies.

[RunInRed 16,488]

Fox News chimes in....and adds an interesting tidbit:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,340014,00.html

Three in 10 Americans (30 percent) now approve of the job Bush is doing as the nation’s leader, with 6 in 10 disapproving.

While disapproval of the president has been higher (for example, 61 percent in both July and March of 2007), his approval rating has never sunk this low before.

Majorities in every major sub-group except Republicans, conservatives and born-again Christians give a negative rating to Bush’s performance in the White House. Nearly two-thirds of Republicans (65 percent) approve of Bush.

This bad news for Bush comes at a time when the gap between those identifying themselves as Democrats and those identifying as Republicans has reached 13 percentage points (43 percent versus 30 percent), which is the largest difference ever measured in a FOX News poll.

[Tigermike 3,054]

Fox News chimes in....and adds an interesting tidbit:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,340014,00.html

Three in 10 Americans (30 percent) now approve of the job Bush is doing as the nation’s leader, with 6 in 10 disapproving.

While disapproval of the president has been higher (for example, 61 percent in both July and March of 2007), his approval rating has never sunk this low before.

Majorities in every major sub-group except Republicans, conservatives and born-again Christians give a negative rating to Bush’s performance in the White House. Nearly two-thirds of Republicans (65 percent) approve of Bush.

This bad news for Bush comes at a time when the gap between those identifying themselves as Democrats and those identifying as Republicans has reached 13 percentage points (43 percent versus 30 percent), which is the largest difference ever measured in a FOX News poll.

I forget, what office is Bush running for?

Do you have any of the latest poll data for Obama?