Bush approval sinks to 52%

[Jobber of the Week 0]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...l-results_x.htm

 

WASHINGTON — President Bush's public standing, on a downward trend all summer, has slid to its lowest point since the Sept. 11 attacks two years ago, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows.

 

Due in large part to an economy that continues to lose jobs and a situation in Iraq that is messier and more costly than the administration predicted, Bush is taking a hit.

 

A thin majority, 52%, approve of the overall job he is doing, down from this year's high of 71% in mid-April, when the war in Iraq still had a glow of victory.

 

It's even further from his 90% job approval rating in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks.

 

Bush gets his lowest marks on the economy; fewer than half approve of his stewardship. The president got further bad news Thursday with a report that claims for unemployment benefits increased last week.

 

Bush says often that other economic indicators suggest the outlook is bright and that his tax cuts will soon create more jobs. "When Americans have more take-home pay to spend people are more likely to find a job," he said Tuesday in Fort Lauderdale.

 

Democratic pollster Mark Mellman says Bush "has benefited from circumstances beyond his control. Now reality is setting in."

 

Bush's slippage suggests that if the election were held today, he would be in a tough fight. Among registered voters, he holds a slim 4-percentage point lead over an unnamed Democrat. He had a double-digit lead two weeks ago.

 

"Taking a fall was inevitable, but he is increasingly vulnerable now," says Jaime Regalado, a political scientist at California State University at Los Angeles.

 

On Iraq, where the news has been dominated by continued attacks on U.S. troops, 51% approve of Bush's management. Public satisfaction with the way things are going there has fallen below 50% for the first time, to 47%.

 

"The war in Iraq is showing escalating costs in money and human life, and the American public is showing escalating doubts," Regalado says.

 

After a nationally televised speech Sunday night in which Bush called Iraq the "central front" in the war on terrorism, more than half say his administration does not have a clear plan for handling the situation there.

 

Most still say Iraq was worth going to war over, but that support has dwindled, too, in the five months since a statue of Saddam Hussein fell in Baghdad.

 

Still, two in three give Bush high marks for his leadership in the overall war on terrorism.

 

Americans continue to have more confidence in Republicans than Democrats to keep the nation safe from terrorism and other military threats, by 51%-36%.

 

" With all that anti-war rhetoric, the Democrats are appealing only to their core voters," Republican pollster Bill McInturff says.

 

Here are the poll results with all the questions, and the changes over the past few times it's been conducted:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/tables/...oll-results.htm

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

But these polls don't matter! Look at the FoxNews poll, that one has him higher, so this one is irrelevant!

[Jobber of the Week 0]

You mean the one that shows him at 49%???

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97174,00.html

 

 

In the latest FOX News national poll of registered voters, those believing President Bush will win in 2004 stands at 49 percent, down from 61 percent in May 2003 and 60 percent in April 2002. The decline was not only among Democrats, but also Republicans. Four months ago, 85 percent of Republicans thought Bush would be reelected, while 72 percent believe so now.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Nah, the job approval rating taken by Faux, which shows him at an astronomical 59% as compared to every other poll.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Oh, well this is the new one. That article is right underneath the Al-Jazeera stuff on their front page.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

 

I was wrong, it's 58%. Regardless.

[Vyce 0]

FAUX NEWS LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL!!!!!

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Great... Uh..... Contribution.

[Firestarter 0]

It's all right, I'll take him away. <takes Vyce by the elbow and leads him out> Sorry he interrupted your left-wing circlejerk. Carry on.

[Perfxion 0]

Unless these polls get down to like 40% and below, they don't mean shit. He still has enough of a strong backing that he just might win the election. And this is coming from someone who is willing to vote for anyone BUT Bush.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Sorry he interrupted your left-wing circlejerk. Carry on.

Well, it's good to see you finally adopted this attitude.

 

Unless these polls get down to like 40% and below, they don't mean shit.

Don't have that far to go.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Where are the polls that have President Bush against an actual canidate.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

There haven't been any for about a month, so they should be coming out soon.

[Justice 0]

Do you mean the generic "Democratic Candidate", or specific ones?

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I assumed he meant specific ones, in which case, they haven't come out in a while.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Acutal canidates. I think the results would be different. With the President holding a comfortable lead.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Of course, considering their name recognition figures -- even amongst democrats -- is less than 30% on average.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Can't we draw some kind of idea on the mindset of the voting public with approval ratings though? After all, people vote for things they approve of, in theory.

[Firestarter 0]

What charming naivete.

[Red Hot Thumbtack In The Eye 0]

Damn, I'm glad Kotz beat me to that question*slinks back to CE lurking*

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

What charming naivete.

It's going to be a sweet day in November, that's all I have to say.

[Justice 0]

What charming naivete.

It's going to be a sweet day in November, that's all I have to say.

Indeed. Watching the Dems tear each other apart in the primaries and fall right under the guns of an incumbant whose been waiting for them the entire time, yeah, it'll be beautiful to watch them go down in flames. Oh wait, that's not what you were thinking of, right ?

[Guest SideFXs]

The article sited an increase in claims for unemployment benefits, a lagging indicator. Historically it's the last market indicator to change. The stock market has been in recovery since March 2003 and broke through new yearly high, in June. It has moved from a low of 7200 to 9471, in 6 months. Believe me by November of 2004, this whole bad economy angle the Libs in the media are mind washing Americans with, will be a bad memory.

 

I have yet to hear it EVER EVER mentioned by any of the media out there that the fucking 19 terrorist started this ball rolling when WTC 1,2, and 7 came crashing down. That was there goal. But , NO!! let's blame Bush.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I have yet to hear it EVER EVER mentioned by any of the media out there that the fucking 19 terrorist started this ball rolling when WTC 1,2, and 7 came crashing down. That was there goal. But , NO!! let's blame Bush

 

That's because no economists agree that's the primary cause of the recession. Do your own research.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

fall right under the guns of an incumbant whose been waiting for them the entire time, yeah, it'll be beautiful to watch them go down in flames.

Money don't mean anything if people are sick of the guy, and it's slowly happening.

 

Even if people don't think he's a disaster as Prez, he has done so many TV appearances and speeches about absolutely nothing like the recent one that people may be reacting negatively.

 

Give Bill Clinton some credit, unless it revolved around sex or scandal, you only occasionally saw him on TV. Problem was that Clinton's scandals went on FOREVER, and the right's point-and-laugh routines over crap like Hillary's psychic was stupid and giving them needless attention. Even recently, I saw The Media Whore interview a dietician in his "No-Spin Zone" just to talk about the Clintons' diets. Geesh.

 

And Tyler's right about the economy part. Blame Clinton if you want to (it did start spiraling out of control around the time he became a lame duck) but 9/11? No. We were already at The Bad Times. At least those of us who's livelyhoods depended on Silicon Valley.

[Firestarter 0]

Tyler and JotW are correct. The 9/11 attacks had little lasting impact on our economy, and the marginal recession had begun before they occurred.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

52%.

 

Hmm...

 

Still better than the percent of the popular vote he got.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

FAUX NEWS LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL!!!!!

No, no, no. You're doing it all wrong.

 

It's OMG (optional) FAUX NEWS LOL 2003!

 

Oh, and Tyler, what's up with Mr. Dick trying to put Howie in the same boat as Newt Gingrich? I saw a story on this tonight while watching FAUX NEWS LOL 2003!

 

I'll tell you what -- I was wrong all along. I'm taking Howie seriously now, considering all the other Dems seem to be playing a political King of the Hill with your boy on top.

 

Oh, this will be a fun Democrat primary season -- almost as fun as watching a pseudo-hippie rally on C-Span and trying to spot the "Free Mumia" crowd, which is as close to playing a real-life game of "Where's Waldo?" as you can get...

Edited September 13, 2003 by kkktookmybabyaway

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Oh, and Tyler, what's up with Mr. Dick trying to put Howie in the same boat as Newt Gingrich? I saw a story on this tonight while watching FAUX NEWS LOL 2003!

 

It's actually kinda funny, Gep feels threatened after the last debate I think.

[Firestarter 0]

He should. His performance was, well, a miserable failure.

 

 

 

Oh dear, is that phrase trademarked?