How low can he go?

[hcap]

Poll: Approval Ratings Compared

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...n1005327.shtml

BUSH VS. OTHER PRESIDENTS: APPROVAL RATINGS DURING SCANDALS

Bush,
Now
Approve 35%
Disapprove 57%

Clinton
1/1998
Approve 58%
Disapprove 29%

2/1998
Approve 72%
Disapprove 22%

7/1998
Approve 64%
Disapprove 29%

10/1998
Approve 65%
Disapprove 30%

12/1998
Approve 66%
Disapprove 30%

Reagan
11/1986
Approve 46%
Disapprove 45%

1/1987
Approve 52%
Disapprove 38%

5/1987
Approve 46%
Disapprove 43%

9/1987
Approve 50%
Disapprove 40%

1/1988
Approve 58%
Disapprove 35%

Nixon(Gallup)
1/1973
Approve 51%
Disapprove 37%

6/1973
Approve 44%
Disapprove 45%

1/1974
Approve 27%
Disapprove 63%

8/1974
Approve 24%
Disapprove 66%

What more could Bush do to make matters so bad his approval ratings would fall to say 10%?

Answers....

1-Practice saying "I am not a crook"

2-Remain in office for his entire term.

[hcap]

Answer 3 Tell a joke without turd blossom vetting it...

At a roundtable with Latin American journalists, Bush proved that no matter how bad things get, it's important to keep your sense of humor:

Q Mr. President, in Argentina, you will have a bilateral meeting with President Kirchner. THE PRESIDENT: Si. Q What I want to know -- sources of the government told me that they would ask you about more cooperation on support for Argentina, you know, in the IMF fund -- THE PRESIDENT: IMF. Q Exactly. THE PRESIDENT: Please don't tell me that the government leaks secrets about conversations to the -- Q Well, I have my sources in the government.

THE PRESIDENT: You do? Okay, well I'm not going to ask you who they are, of course. (Laughter.) Q No, please. THE PRESIDENT: Inside joke here, for my team.

[Secretariat]

Originally Posted by hcap

What more could Bush do to make matters so bad his approval ratings would fall to say 10%?

Nah, HCap, they'll never fall that low. If they get close, he'll invade another country and appear with a lot of flag backdrops.

[Bobby]

Looking back, it's really amazing how Clinton weathered all those scandals, and kept his approval ratings fairly high. I guess it was the economy stupid.

This guy - BUSH II- has done everything WRONG. His only hope is Oreilly and Hannity on TV. What more could he have screwed up? Gas, hurricanes, indictments, war, and on and on and on- It's just amazing

[46zilzal]

Originally Posted by Secretariat

Nah, HCap, they'll never fall that low. If they get close, he'll invade another country and appear with a lot of flag backdrops.

Don't give him any ideas!!

[Lefty]

bobby says:
Location: OP
Posts: 756 Looking back, it's really amazing how Clinton weathered all those scandals, and kept his approval ratings fairly high. I guess it was the economy stupid.

This guy - BUSH II- has done everything WRONG. His only hope is Oreilly and Hannity on TV. What more could he have screwed up? Gas, hurricanes, indictments, war, and on and on and on- It's just amazing

Well, i'm just not gonna sit by and let this thread be a liberal lie center. You put forth the same old tired rhetoric and i'll answer with the same old facts.

He screwed up gas? How did he do that. Newsflash: it's the libs who won't let us drill the large deposits we have in this country and won't let us build any new refineries.
hurricanes? My I guess he whipped up the hurricanes because he didn't sign a treaty. And if you're talking about N.O. well it's the dems there who messed up royally but know you Bush haters don't wanna be reminded of that.
Indictments? One guy gets indicted in a witch hunt. Hmm, Clinton had more staffers, cronies and people who he knew indicted, convicted or plead guilty than any Pres in history.
And finally, the war: Under his direction we've rid the world of one of the most heinious dictators ever, and Bin ladin hiding in some hidey hole just like Saddam. Meanwhile Iraq has had elections and drafted a constitution.
So why is his approvals so low? well the mainstream media has blitzed him ever since he's been in office. They hate him and loved Clinton.
Keep on living your fantasy, libs and scuse me for interrupting.

[Figman]

Secretariat & Hcp missed this one.
It really wasn't Bush's fault about the hurricanes.
http://www.weatherwars.info/

[ljb]

Easy guys, I think there may be a correlation between Bush's rating and gas prices. May have to get formula 2002 to run the stats on this.

[schweitz]

http://newsbusters.org/node/2665

[46zilzal]

shop long enough out here and I guarantee you will find any answer you want TRUE or NOT.

[schweitz]

Originally Posted by 46zilzal

shop long enough out here and I guarantee you will find any answer you want TRUE or NOT.

That was my point since that was the poll hcap was all excited about---I would of thought after last Nov. exit polls that you guys would have figured out that polls are pretty much worthless regardless of whether they show what you want or don't want.

[Lefty]

lbj says: Easy guys, I think there may be a correlation between Bush's rating and gas prices. May have to get formula 2002 to run the stats on this

If so, shows how the lying media can influence Mr and Mrs. Joe Blow. It's not Bush who has stood in the way of using our natural resources. It's not Bush who stood against building new refineries.

[dav4463]

OK OK OK !!!!!!!!!!!! I GIVE UP !!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU GUYS WIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!

BUSH MUST BE THE ANTI-CHRIST OR SATAN HIMSELF ! LETS BLAME HIM FOR EVERYTHING WRONG WITH THE WORLD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[captvancouver]

As an outsiders point of view,I guess the thing I find most disturbing about
what is happening in America has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. Both partys have had fine presidents in the past. But this is a real new twist. We are aware, of course, that congress passed an Act in 2002, after the Florida voting situation, an "Act To Help Americans Vote",or similar.
They (both Republicans and Democrats, since no-one objected) privatized the voting in America, by having non-verifieable voting machines in certain key districts. Now no-one knows for certain how people voted in the last U.S.
election, since the votes cannot be verified. BUT!! there is a way to tell,just as if we had a video camera running. For many years there has been a litmus test for voting. The exit polls, of 3,000 or so voters have always been within 1 percent of the final result. A mathematics professor from Pennsylvania, using that principle and the exit poll/final voting results
calculated that there was about a 1 in 2 million chance that Bush won the election.In the several key states he needed, this percentage swung from 1% to 6 or 7 %. If the 1% rule was in effect, his opponent would have won by about 58% to 42% in division of votes, for those who voted for just those 2.
The point is , to me, that all this other flap is just about artificial issues..America is now a dictatorship..elections will be closely rigged and called..after all a 2 % win is not so blatant.The result is that many sincere, fine Americans, both Republican and Democrat, will ,in effect,lose their right to vote.


Althought there is a promise that the machines will become verifiable, I doubt, in view of past history,that will be the case.Only the manufacturers of the machines can count the votes. Locally, in the province where I live, B.C., our premier has been learning from Bush, and sends his cronys down to the U.S. to learn campaigning techniques. He uses push polls..it costs about $30 per vote, but he gets the few hundred thousand or so he needs, and then has "polls",
which point several terrible things about his opponenet which simply are not true..and then asks the future voter..who now who would you vote for.

I think similar things are happening in other countries, the ultimate in privatized voting is that the world be ruled by Corporations.

Stalin said it does not matter how people vote..just who counts the vote.

[hcap]

schweitz,

Can the crap. CBS is only one of many that show bush in major troubles.

Now you may argue that the ONLY poll that counts is who got elected, but contrary to the spin of a "clear mandate", and "political capital" to spend, there was a substantial opposition in 2004 and if election results are questionable as captvancouver points out it, was much closer than you would like to believe.

The exit polls, of 3,000 or so voters have always been within 1 percent of the final result. A mathematics professor from Pennsylvania, using that principle and the exit poll/final voting results
calculated that there was about a 1 in 2 million chance that Bush won the election.

Now I don't claim bush really lost, but closeness of the vote and even if the professor is only partialy correct, this country did not give bush a clear mandate. Why is it so difficult to believe in light of ALL the major f**k ups and scandals of this gang in office particularly since the election, the polls are not what they are.

Don't believe CBS, ok how'bout Gallup, much more conservative....
Here is a graphical illustration plotting Gallup

From
http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/000682.html


"Bush And Nixon Battle It Out

With the latest CBS poll putting Bush's approval rating at 35%, he's genuinely entered into Nixon territory. Since polling began, Nixon is the only two-term president with lower approval ratings at a comparable point in his presidency:


GALLUP
Johnson 66% (Oct. 1965)
Reagan 63% (Oct. 1985)
Clinton 57% (Oct. 1997)
Eisenhower 57% (Oct. 1957)
Truman 49% (Oct. 1949)
Bush 39% (Oct. 2005)
Nixon 29% (Oct. 1973)

"Bush still has about a year to go before he gets to the point in Nixon's presidency when Nixon resigned."

(All polls are Gallup.)