|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Oct 14, 2005 15:27:03 GMT -5
President's 'terrible' rating better than last 7 Worst approval marks from LBJ to Clinton all lower than Bush's
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: October 13, 2005 11:59 p.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Despite the fact President Bush's job approval ratings have dropped to the lowest point of his presidency, they still remain higher than the low-point ratings of the last seven presidents, including his predecessor Bill Clinton.
A new survey from the Pew Research Center shows Bush's job approval at 38 percent.
"President George W. Bush's poll numbers are going from bad to worse," said the Pew report. "His job approval rating has fallen to another new low, as has public satisfaction with national conditions, which now stands at just 29 percent. And for the first time since taking office in 2001, a plurality of Americans believe that George W. Bush will be viewed as an unsuccessful president."
Data from six polling organizations in October show an average of 39.5 percent job approval for Bush.
But according to the Gallup Organization, that's a higher mark than the low points for all commanders in chief dating back to Lyndon Johnson in the mid 1960s.
The low points for recent commanders in chief are as follows:
Bill Clinton: 37 percent
George H. W. Bush: 29 percent
Ronald Reagan: 35 percent
Jimmy Carter: 28 percent
Gerald Ford: 37 percent
Richard Nixon: 24 percent
Lyndon Johnson: 35 percent To find presidents with higher low-point approval ratings than Bush, one has to go back to John Kennedy at 56 percent, and Dwight Eisenhower at 48 percent.
The Power Line blog notes: "The reality is that the Republican base is holding remarkably firm, in the face of a media onslaught against the Bush administration that has no parallel in modern history, and following months of little but bad news: gas prices, hurricanes, and casualties in Iraq (the only news most people hear from that part of the world)."
|
|
|
Post by giggergrl on Oct 14, 2005 19:16:11 GMT -5
TAM TYPING... yer avatar m8...
ratings will continue to drop tho... esply when gas stays at $ 3.00 a gallon for good (I got no problem with it cos i can afford it luckily..) my rant once again about how ppl soon wont be able to afford their beer, cable TV and nascar tics.. (just an example of entertainment.. ) then the ratings will reeeeeaaly drop... the military is falling apart, just ask them... the middle east will get more unstable... the world will dislike us and our policies more and more.. the writing is on the wall.. this president will be known for destroying the country.. ratings weill drop.. just ask anyone in intelligence, the military, the gov't, and in the world of finance.. about the current direction we are headed.. BUT THEN AGAIN, democracy is not what it used to be in the usa, the rating polls will probly not be allowed to drop too low... you must get tired of me saying this.. there is a 1% chance I am wrong.. let's hope i am... ciao....
|
|
|
Post by masterplan200 on Oct 14, 2005 22:38:23 GMT -5
Just another fruit loop imo ( fool )
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2005 6:48:52 GMT -5
I pity anyone that rates George Bush. It is only his use of religion that convince some people to follow him regardless of policy.
|
|
|
Post by Superguiller. on Oct 15, 2005 8:26:41 GMT -5
I pity anyone that rates George Bush. It is only his use of religion that convince some people to follow him regardless of policy. I agree totally.
|
|
|
Post by giggergrl on Oct 15, 2005 19:54:11 GMT -5
I pity anyone that rates George Bush. It is only his use of religion that convince some people to follow him regardless of policy. now that is a true statement...(above) yeah and hopefully as the economy gets worse religion will only get him/"them" so far... and ppl will be less concerned about the 'wedge issues" when electing the next guy such as gay marriage and abortion... BTW, I am a Christian and trust me the DubYa wld not know God if he was standing in the oval office next to his desk.. IMO... using God/religion as an excuse for war and LYING about it is wrong and just plain "evil.."
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Oct 15, 2005 21:09:01 GMT -5
i'm not religious at all...never been to church or anything...just wasnt the way i was raised even tho both my parents were religious when they are growing up...
anywho...
the point i was trying to make with the article was that Bush is no different then anyother president....anyway, all presidents have atleast 1 controversial issue...for Mr. Bush, its the Iraq War (Regean--iran contra, Nixon--watergate, clinton--monica lol etc)
Bush is an easy target, that explains some of the hatred...of course he's made mistakes, every president has...Clinton sunk so low in what he did that he was impeached, but Bush cant be impeached bc you disagree....and for the last bloody time, he DID NOT LIE!!!! it WAS false intel....that's the FBI's fault
but the war can be justified on this level: The U.N stated that if Saddam ever defied a U.N Mandate, then they would support military action against him...well Mr. Saddam DID defy a U.N mandate, and thus a war...might not be a reason that was publicized alot, but its still a justification that was mentioned before hand
Just as i said many times before, WMD was mentioned so much bc it would get the attention of the U.S public...a mushroom cloud over D.C is a more significant image then Saddam defying a mandate....but that reason alone is justification
(but then you have his crimes against humanity and the mass graves, basically genocide, possible terrorist connections-not neccessarily al-qaeda etc etc...the guy needed to be taken out, im sorry)
**ALSO**
this gives a message to the rest of the world, just like the atom bombs did in WWII....N. Korea, Iran, and Syria and the rest now know to take the U.S seriously....and thats what we see happening...N. Korea keep vaccillationg on their option, Iran is stubborn but will come around, and Syria--well i dont know too much about them...
so if wee didnt do anything with Iraq...Iran and N Korea would def have many nuclear weapons right now...
WMD will end the world...thats why we need to keep them out of terrorists hands....
and i still believe Saddam had WMD SOMETIME in his reign...
and no, i dont have this view cos Saddam was a dictator, cos so is Castro, but i have an indifferent view about him...Saddam had to go, for the sake of Iraqi's, the bordering countries that Saddam started wars with, for the U.S if he did have ties to alqaede (doubt that tho)...
THE RISKS WERE TO GREAT!!!
just like the terror alert to NYC last weekend, if there is a threat, its better to be safe than sorry, and the world is safer now than before, even with the insurgents...it can only get better, and it will...
(sigh, attack my views again...i'm waiting...(am i the only republican on here??))
|
|
|
Post by giggergrl on Oct 15, 2005 22:54:20 GMT -5
Tam typing...
if you are a republican then you now support the religious right, like it or not..
ur statement about false intell - wow you are really naive mate.. I guess you either buy into it or not.... Nothing personal... I mean is intell your profession ? so how wld you know ?
there was NO CLEAR and present danger to the US cos of Iraq... there was not even any registered terrorist organizations there with the state dept. it did not have to be handled the way it was.. period.. again.. Go tell yer shpeil to a 19 year old that got his legs blown off..
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Oct 16, 2005 0:22:13 GMT -5
its sad and unfortunate that people are dying and becoming injured and all...
but
there is no draft
when one joins the army, it is ones choice, thus one acknowledges that theres a chance of going to war at any time....
if there was a draft, then the story is completly different bc ppl would be forced to fight against their own will...ppl who join now, understand the risk of their actions...thats what i dont get about Sheehan...whom, btw, many ppl hate (but thats niether here nor there)...
we need to support our troops. we need to appreciate what they are doing, despite objections to the war in general. people are allowed to have their own opinions, but in this situation i believe it is better that the media doesnt get involved (too late), cos they only report the negative:
Negative stories yield controversy, controversy yields debate, debate yields interest, interest yields profit for the media--see where im going?
but that negativity splits the country, lowering morale of american citizens, but boosting hopes and confidence of our oponents (as seen in my other article)
i've learned that everything you do comes down to your mentality: if you go into a test thinking you're going to fail, you will prob do poorly, start a soccer game believing that your going to have a bad game, you're prob wont do well...
same goes with this...go into and fight thinking that the war is foolish and we cant defeat the insurgents...well guess what, we will FAIL with that attitude cos we give the upperhand to those insurgents...
STAY POSITIVE...CRITICIZE AFTER THE WAR (you're not going to change anything now)....SEE HOW IT ALL PANS OUT...why isnt Sheehan in congress? why isnt Sharpton president? bc they don't know what they are talking about, and basically noone would vote for either...Bush is our leader, we need to trust him....we cant ignore everything bc then he becomes too powerful, but we need to have confidence in him....in 5 yrs under him, the U.S has not crumbled...despite what you all think
-9/11 and other terrorist attacks occuring around the world -terrorists acts prevented -natural disasters (US and around the world) -domestic issue blah blah blah
Bush has had alot to deal with....imagine Clinton, Gore, Kerry...what would they do? would the country REALLY be better? i dont think so...different maybe, but not better... ****
It's easy to say Bush is wrong, he shouldn't have done this and that....well, then how would you deal with all these events in the last 5 yrs? Thats where the Dems failed in the election, they had no plan, but they could criticize bush....hmmm....everything in life is a risk, some bigger than others, some more successful than others, but EVERYTHING is a risk....if we don't do anything at all, that too is a risk...think about this....Bush is not a great president, but nor is he even close to being as bad as most percieve him to be....
He won a second term...that means the country was in decent shape that it was not worth the RISK to change "horses" as the cliche goes...
3 more years...then we have another pres.
may be b/w Hillary and Condi...if its b/w those 2, Condi will win hands down...altho, after Bush, i believe a dem will be the next pres...we shall see
but how did this topic get to Iraq anyway? lol
|
|
|
Post by castlecraver on Oct 16, 2005 12:56:07 GMT -5
W hasn't seen his "low point" yet... if it wasn't for 9-11 it would have been well below where it is now, but suddenly, 8 months after his inaugeration, it became massively unpopular and unamerican to dissent or dislike the president. We're still recovering from that unfortunate lapse in brain function but it appears more people every day are beginning to see the writing on the wall.
|
|
|
Post by Moorish on Oct 17, 2005 4:29:30 GMT -5
Bush is an easy target, that explains some of the hatred...of course he's made mistakes, every president has...Clinton sunk so low in what he did that he was impeached, but Bush cant be impeached bc you disagree....and for the last bloody time, he DID NOT LIE!!!! it WAS false intel....that's the FBI's fault
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2005 18:23:16 GMT -5
Correct, the fact that Clinton was a dick dosen't make George Bush less of a dick.
|
|
|
Post by Superguiller. on Oct 18, 2005 12:29:28 GMT -5
Clinton may indeed have sunk low, but at the end of the day, a couple off thousand US kids didn't have to die just because the man got a blowjob. True. You can't compare murder to adultery.
|
|
|
Post by Poshbird05 on Oct 21, 2005 16:10:18 GMT -5
Bush what a bitch
|
|
|
Post by britishlove on Oct 27, 2005 14:37:59 GMT -5
Statistically you would think that his approval rating would be higher since half the nation voted for him...obviously about 11 percent of the nation who voted for him now think he's doing a shite job. I know that for the last however many years the approval ratings have sucked...but I just don't understand how so many people who voted for him, now believe that he's not up to par.
|
|