Bush's rating is falling faster than Clinton's pants!

[Muscletang]

Bush support rating falls to 29 percent

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Only 29 percent of Americans now believe President George W. Bush is doing a good job, according recent poll.

The poll, conducted by the Wall Street Journal, is the latest to indicate a slump in public support for the US leader as his Republican party heads into the campaign for mid-term elections in November.

In the poll, released in the newspaper's online edition, Bush has lost six percentage points in a month.

Iraq remains the main concern. Twenty-eight percent of Americans say it is one of the two most important topics, up from 23 percent in April, followed by immigration (16 percent) and the price of petrol (gasoline) (14 percent).

Only 24 percent of the 1,003 people asked between May 3-8 said they believed the United States was "heading in the right direction". According to the Journal, 69 percent said "things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track".

Bush is closing in on the unpopularity level of President Richard Nixon (24 percent) at the moment of his resignation in 1974 over the Watergate scandal.

I'm going to add a pole because I haven't done that for a while. Are things looking good for Bush?

I seriously think this guy can go below 20% if things keep going the way they are.

[carrrnuttt]

The leading response on a Ford site I visit every so often that is unsurprisingly pro-Bush, is: "but the other guy would have been worse".

[tenguzero]

Well, regardless of poll numbers, it doesn't seem like the president is really hitting it off with ANY large support groups. On a side note, who else here wonders what things might have been like under Gore? Would they have progressed differently? I think it's wholly likely that 9/11 would have happened regardless of WHO was president (and Gore, like many of us, generally supported the president and other leaders in the immediate aftermath of the disaster.) However, it's clear that where he (like many of us) parts ways with the administration is in the Iraq actions -- in particular how THEY were handled (clearly Afghanistan still wasn't taken care of -- and isn't to this day.)

Whatever your views on the Iraq war, I think it's safe to say there's definitely ONE thing I feel confident he would have lead us in the right direction on, and that is alternative fuels. Which is what got me started on this little muse. Wired magazine has a very interesting cover piece on Gore's eco-pursuits, and I've got to say I'm more than a little curious as to what that passion would have translated into if he had ended up with the presidency.

When it all comes down to it, I guess you have to consider the big picture: could Gore (or whatever politician you prefer) really have ended up doing a WORSE job? Do these polls have Bush officially beating Carter yet?

I realize that asking questions like this essentially means I'm pretty much "living in the past" so to speak (and therefore not much better than those people who insist on keeping their stupid Kerry/Edwards and Bush/Cheney '04 stickers stuck to their cars) but "Monday morning quarterback" is a role we all seem to be playing pretty well nowadays.

[KustmAce]

Originally Posted by carrrnuttt

The leading response on a Ford site I visit every so often that is unsurprisingly pro-Bush, is: "but the other guy would have been worse".

Thats the best he can come up with?

I don't think there is anything Bush can do to win over his once devoted zealots. He has burned just about every bridge, and pissed off everybody. Not to mention his administration really isnt helping his cause.

Personally, I think anyone who ran against Bush would have done a better job, not just because I cant stand Bush, but because he is a liar, a cheat and a scoundrel. Not to mention the fuckwits he appointed to office are just as retarded as he is. And not one person can play the "Kerry/Gore would have been worse" card, because there is no evidence to back up that statement.

[AlmostStock]

I don't see why his ratings wouldn't continue to drop. The three main concerns mentioned, Iraq, immigration and the price of oil, don't appear to be improving anytime soon, if ever.

I really wanted to see what Gore would have done as president, (some rumors say we may still get another chance) mainly because of his environmental stance. In 2000 we had one candidate who had written the book "Earth in the Balance" and another who openly admitted he didn't even read it! How could a candidate neglect to read ANYTHING of importance written by his main rival? I always had a hard time understanding how people could have voted for Bush... and his record isn't making it any easier.

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by tenguzero

Do these polls have Bush officially beating Carter yet?

I don't believe Jimmy Carter's rating were that low.

End-of Presidency Job Approval Ratings
Bill Clinton (2001) 65%
Ronald Reagan (1989) 64
Dwight Eisenhower (1961) 59
John F. Kennedy (1963) 63
George Bush (1993) 56
Gerald Ford (1977) 53
Lyndon Johnson (1969) 49
Jimmy Carter (1981) 34
Richard Nixon (1974) 24

G.W. has lost grass roots support from Conservatives primarily due to his position on illegal immigration and failure on domestic issues such as the high cost of gas. The highest increases we have seen were under his watch.

BTW - The last time I checked fuel costs are still going up and this will probably affect his job approval ratings more.

[YogsVR4]

After his speach on Monday, he'll either jump a bit higher in the polls or plummet more. The ludicrous stance our government is taking on illegal immigrants is going to cost a lot of incumbants (regardless of party) their seats in the fall.

[AlmostStock]

Originally Posted by YogsVR4

After his speach on Monday, he'll either jump a bit higher in the polls or plummet more.

I have to agree with Yogs on this one!

[jcsaleen]

Oh yes it is...

[fredjacksonsan]

I think the President is doing what he wants, not what the people want. Of course it's always that way, but since he's not up for reelection I'm sure he doesn't care.

[stone_mound_camaro]

and what sux is he still has more than half of his time left in office.... we still have 2 1/2 years left people!

[Muscletang]

Well I'm not going to start a new thread but add on to this one. What did everybody think of the speech last night? Was he on target or off target?

Personally, I think it's a good start but I think we should have a border like North and South Korea. We protect that thing very well, why not our own?

[tenguzero]

I've heard the consensus from many is that all Bush did with this speech was effectively paint himself even more of an illegal immigration wimp than he already was. I mean come on -- he had to call Vicente Fox and swear to him that there was no military motivation, etc. behind the intended placement of the National Guard. What the hell is THAT!? Why should we give a shit what Vicente Fox thinks -- last time I checked we could do whatever we wanted within our own borders and not have to worry about cozying up to other countries about it. Obviously we're not going to friggin' invade Mexico with 6,000 National Guardsmen. IT'S LIKE SUDDENLY WE'RE THE ONES BREAKING THE LAW BECAUSE WE WANT TO POLICE THE BORDER MORE EFFECTIVELY -- SHAME ON US FOR NOT LETTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS SNEAK THROUGH!!

Furthermore, I'm also concerned that all of this immigration confliction stuff is going to bring about a swing to the extreme in the opposite direction (we have a habit of doing that in this country.) By that I mean people are going to get so fed up that they'll start to blindly lash out against any immigrants/ethnic groups. It's like the censorship debate: over a period of years regulations and attitudes become more and more relaxed, until suddenly some newfound goody-goody morality crops up and interest groups, politicians, etc. manage to swing things to the opposite extreme, and suddenly we're faced with ridiculous crackdowns (see: FCC, RIAA, MPAA.) I just don't want to see the utter ineptitude of our current leaders force the people into some overzealous state of misplaced "nationalism". I can only hope rational ideas will prevail.

-The current laws are actually pretty serviceable if they just bothered to enforce them.
-The current application system needs a thorough overhaul to make it easier and more accessable, both for the feds AND for the immigrants.
-Immigration and the introduction of multicultural ideas are great for this country.
-Illegal immigration and the forcefeeding of multicultural agendas is not.
-FIRST secure the border and straighten out the law-breakers currently polluting the system, THEN work on fixing it. You wouldn't go about fixing broken plumbing or malfuntioning electrical appliances without first shutting off the water or electricity, right? Same damn idea.

Congratulations Bush -- you wasted half an hour of primetime TV.

[AlmostStock]

Originally Posted by tenguzero

-FIRST secure the border and straighten out the law-breakers currently polluting the system, THEN work on fixing it. You wouldn't go about fixing broken plumbing or malfuntioning electrical appliances without first shutting off the water or electricity, right? Same damn idea.

It sounds like Bush is trying to lay out a realistic and reasonable plan to lessen the problem. He said several times that he FIRST wants to secure the border. What part of motion detectors, high tech fences and more guys with guns on the border don't you like?

Congratulations Bush -- you wasted half an hour of primetime TV.

Well, it wouldn't be the first time.

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by Muscletang

Well I'm not going to start a new thread but add on to this one. What did everybody think of the speech last night? Was he on target or off target?

Sounds like his speech was targeting his conservative political base and all others opposed to illegal immigration to get his poll ratings back up.

The National Guard troops on the border sounds great along with the additional surveillance technology but I do not agree with his guest worker program and anything construed as amnesty.