Bush Averages 60% Job Approval in Year Three (Gallup: Bush approval slips to 53%)

Gallup ^

[DrDeb]

"Rasmussen blew it big time in 2000. So at this stage I don't trust his polling... Scott has made corrections and time will tell how accurate they were"


3 points:

1.) Actually, Rasmussen's predictions could have been 'right on'; however, we'll never know because the alphabet networks called Florida before the polls closed in Florida/the SouthWest/West [NOTE: This early call cost the President votes not only in Florida, but also in the Southwest and West -- as Guilliani stated earlier this week, the early call cost the President the popular vote and at least 3 states!]

2.) Zogby, the only pollster who supposedly called the 2000
elections correctly (read #1) completely blew 2002, e.g., he called Florida a 'toss-up' the morning of the election and Gov Bush won by double digits!

3.) ALL tracking polls (particularly those of LIKELY VOTERS) are more accurate/reliable than one-shot polls of the general public. Rasmussen's current tracking poll is consistent with others that I watch but can't mention because they aren't meant for public consumption (if you get my meaning)!

ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVE: PRESIDENT GEORGE W BUSH IS THE ONLY PRESIDENT IN THE MODERN ERA TO AVOID POLLING BELOW 50% IN A GALLUP POLL -- During their first terms, both Presidents Reagan and Clinton earned 'Gallup' job approval ratings in the 30s/40s OVER 50% of the time!

[BTW: I really enjoy reading your insightful posts! Keep up the GREAT work!]

[DrDeb]

To what list are you referring? [I couldn't stomach reading 500 'bashing' posts!]

Let me know -- I'm off to enjoy my life [something far too many on this forum seem to lack!!]

[ohioWfan]

The list is a compilation of President Bush's CONSERVATIVE accomplishments since he took office.

It's an impressive list, and several on this thread suggested using it immediately to counter the absurd, emotionally charged (and mostly stupid) rhetoric of the Bush haters on this forum.

You are SO right. They are angry people who do NOT have lives, and who live to complain, exaggerate, and distort the very real conservative accomplishments of our fine President...

[nopardons]

Oh,so do the reccomend bit?:-)

[nopardons]

No, this forum is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo far out of reality,but the fringers/doom&gloomers delusionally imagine that because they make such a todo here, that they " count ", when they don't. OTOH, it is also true that ALL of us, pay faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more attention to things than the general public does. LOL

[deport]

PRESIDENTIAL POLL PERFORMANCE 2000

IMO, Rasmussen was never right on as if he was then the other 10 polling firms were way off.... I rather think Scott Rasmussen was wrong and I think he so states afterwards.....

[My2Cents]

You're added. BTW, love your comments on your "About" page.

[Wolfstar]

Outstanding commentary in your Post 653. The only thing I would tack on is that it's fine to disagree with the President on an issue as difficult as, say, immigration. We Californians understand the impact of illegal immigration far better than most Americans in other states. But I hope to encourage people to remember how our government works — the President proposes; the Congress disposes. I am most troubled by those who go off the deep end in their disagreement, entirely lose perspective, and start throwing all sorts of nonsense around. Such folks may only be around 9% or less of the Republican electorate, but if it's a razor close election like 2000, that slice can make a big difference. So our budding effort to counterbalance the worst of the naysaying will matter.

[WOSG]

"It does not permit or encourage a single additional illegal immigrant."

Not true. Under the Bush proposal, a legal guest worker will not by law be permitted to bring a family except under certain conditions ... but if immigration law is not enforced anyway, expect the wife and kids to be showing up in America ... and in a taxpayer funded school room and emergency room near you.

It is why it will be imperative to improve immigration law enforcement or his proposal will only make illegal immigration WORSE.
JMHO.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1059957/posts

[WOSG]

"I just talked to rank and file agents in the San Diego Sector who said illegal entries SOARED on the day Bush announced the proposal."

Word gets around fast ... 1st lady on "TELEMUNDO" letting em all know! ... LOL.

http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/immigdaily/exec_branch/2004,0114-firstladybush.shtm

[WOSG]

The BIG LIE on Iraq is the lie the Democrats propound that it didnt make us safer and didnt have anything to do with the War on Terror. It was and is GROUND ZERO on terrorism and has done much to make America much safer long-term.

Already the impact on Libya alone - giving up WMDs - is a telling sign of things to come.

[WOSG]

Brilliant, I agree. Let's not vote for Bush. If enough conservative folks do this we will luckily get a Democrat to make our national security decisions. I am sure that Dean, Clark or Kerrey will greatly increase the security of our country, just like Clinton did. /Sarcasm off

----

Obviously, it is more productive to send a real message - verbal, written, whatever to the President.

[WOSG]

"Education is a major plank of his platform. Got a problem with a president who follows through with his campaign promises? "

When it involves a 48% increase in the Dept of Education spending with NO REAL PROGRESS ON EDUCATION VOUCHERS - why, yes I do!!!

It is not much different from a DLC/Clinton-lite policy.

I'm not suggesting dont vote Bush - see the tagline - but lets get real, his domestic policies are *not* Conservative!

[WOSG]

You are absolutely correct.

The one thing that comforted me about Bush as Texas Gov then as President was the thought that
1. AT LEAST HE CAN BEAT GORE -- and a few bones to the right ("Thinks Scalia is his favorite Justice", etc.)
2. He was politically smart enough to create Republican dominance (and hence conservative dominance) in Texas.
This is not an easy thing.

If Bush can do that for America, it would be great.

[Texasforever]

Look, I posted that to all of those that are ready to dump Bush. The only thing was, that was a 1983 article about Ronald Reagan. I just substituted Bush for Regan and Texas for California. The point I was trying to make is that the same type of people screaming about Bush now comes from that same far-right group that never saw a republican they could like even Ronal Reagan.

[WOSG]

Well, FWIW, it could be and was said about Bush in 1998.
I for one was saying it!

I recall some discussions in 1996 about how Bush and Co were "dissing Tom Pauken" and the Christian Right side of the party. It struck me for most of Bush's time as Governor that he *really* tried to place distance so he wasnt leaning too far right on anything. He even was ready to go for a tax hike for education but was saved by a collapse of support for the plan in the Texas Senate ...

Bush has artfully played the "triangulation" game that Clinton played for a while. The problem is this: Bush has a GOP Congress. If he pushes conservative policies, he will gain in the polls. He doesnt need to triangulate!

[Texasforever]

No so far he is doing everything he campaigned on. He campaigned for a CFR bill and had one almost identical to the one that passed with the exception of the 60 day ad ban. He campaigned on a prescription drug plan exactly like the one that just passed the only thing left out was the privatization plan for SS which he will call for on Tuesday, and he has lobbied for the immigration plan he just proposed ever since his first run at public office. Now, conservatives may rightly hate those things but they cannot with any honesty say they were lied to and have in any way been betrayed. There has been no broken pledge from this president on anything under his control.

[My2Cents]

Actually, I think 9% of Republicans may be high. I posted on another thread, in response to someone who said that immigration would "hurt the Bush base," that anyone who is actually losing sleep over the immigration proposal, or will allow that one issue to affect how they vote in November, were likely never part of the Bush base. The Buchanan base, maybe, but that's not much to worry about. At least I hope I'm right.

[jim35]

"...NOT necessarily Dubya or the GOP -- so stay on your knees, and stick the term "Bush-bashing liberal enablers" up your arse..."

A liberal enabler is what you are, if you throw away a vote that could help re-elect GW. If the shoe fits, shove it up your arse, and stop whining like a little girl who was raised by a village.

"...ONE person calling Dubya a "liar" out of 700 posts..."

Hmmm... seems to me there was MORE than just one person calling GW a liar. Maybe you should read some of them. Liar was one of the nicest terms you Bush-bashing liberal enablers are using. And I'm pretty sure that you and your ilk are the ones acting like victims.

[ohioWfan]

President Bush still has the support of 90% of Republicans..........HIS BASE!!!!