Poll Woes For Bush (CBS Poll) Kerry/Edwards 50% - W/Cheney 42%--W Approval@ 47%

cbsnews.com ^ | 02/28/04 | CBS/AP

[KQQL]

The four Democrats still officially seeking their party's presidential nod will debate Sunday for the last time before Super Tuesday, even as a new CBS News poll shows President Bush's approval rating slipping below 50 percent for the first time in that survey.

Some 47% of Americans now approve of the way the President is handling his job, while 44% disapprove.

The same poll shows a John Kerry/John Edwards ticket beating one headed by Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney in the fall election, by a margin of 50 percent to 42 percent.

Whether that difference is due more to the appeal of Kerry and Edwards together or suggests weak voter support for Cheney couldn't be determined in this poll.

In addition, it shows both Kerry and Edwards running about even with Mr. Bush in the fall if they ran without the other on their ticket.

Americans continue to express doubts about the situation in Iraq, and point to the economy and jobs as the issues they are most concerned about.

Still, voters said they expect a Bush win in November, although that view is less pervasive than it was in early January. Now, 48% expect Mr. Bush to win, and 42% see a Democrat winning the presidency. In January, 55% expected the president to be re-elected, and just 31% thought the Democratic candidate could prevail.

Kerry holds a wide lead over Edwards in the poll as the choice of Democratic voters both nationwide and in the ten states that vote on Tuesday.

That lead for the nomination is especially strong among those Democrats who say beating the president is more important than agreeing on the issues.

Both Kerry and Edwards have gained public favor since the Democratic campaign began. More Americans hold favorable views of both men than have unfavorable ones.

And in a sign of how much the Democratic race has changed since the first weeks of the year, one-third of Super Tuesday voters say they are former Howard Dean supporters. Today, most of those voters back John Kerry.

"Countdown to Super Tuesday: The Democrats Debate," sponsored by CBS News, WCBS-TV and The New York Times, will bring together Kerry, Edwards, Al Sharpton and Dennis Kucinich in the CBS Broadcast Center in New York.

[DoughtyOne]

To: DoughtyOne

You are a fine chap, sir, but where I suspect we differ the most, is that I'm bullish on America, and you are in an angst mode.

Granted, there is a 40 trillion dollar actuarial deficit in the social security and medicare programs, hot off the press from the Cleveland Federal Reserve Bank. Most of that is from medicare. To close it, payroll tax rates would have to double from 16% or so, to 32% or so, and that won't happen. Nor can it be financed by a soak the rich income tax regime. We are going to a single payer socialized medical system within the next generation (20 years). The box is simply getting too tight to squeeze out of.

40 posted on 02/28/2004 7:54:51 PM PST by Torie

Thanks for the comments Torie.  I believe angst is an accurate description.  I would urge you to consider what our courts, schools, media and now the family are each facing.  Each are under assault.  Most are in danger of completely breaking down, or if not, strengthening to the detriment of a healthy moral situation.

In California the left can intercede at will at the judicial level on a whole host of issues.  Activist judges defeat justice with regard to capital murder cases, unpopular 'with the left' initiatives and other matters.  The moral code that sprang forth from a healthy active religious society, has been replaced by moral relativism at the judicial level and in our schools.  There is no right or wrong in schools, and our courts are making great strides in that direction.  The media piped into our homes, the schools that help formulate our nation's youth belief system, are both out of control, pushing what can only be classified as morally vacant anything goes activity, going so far as to remove parents from important life decisions in their children's behalf whenever possible.  Schools know best and parent's belief systems are destroyed by activists that work there.  Now there is an attempt to move homosexuality mainstream.  When that happens, and it will, churches, parents, in fact whole religions will be placed in danger of UN and even US civil rights prosecutions or attempted dissolution's.  Children will be indoctrinated at a level we never thought possible.  Through sensitivity training, bi-sexuality is normal, homosexuality is as normal as heterosexuality and must be recognized as such, we will see our kids encouraged to experiment and test boundaries that would make a sailor blush up until about ten years ago, in order to find themselves, and their proper path in life.

Perhaps you think I'm misstating the state of affairs.  I don't.

I would agree with your comment about health care.  We are going to head one way or another.  Either we are going to move Social Security, Medicare and healthier into privatization completely, or we will have socialized medicine and our nation will completely cease to exist in any meaningful way that relates to what our founding fathers envisioned.  Every citizen will spend their time trying to move some other nose away, so they can suck at the government bosom.  We then enter the long dark night of the Poll(er), read that, 'Pander' Bear.

Yeah, I think angst about sums it up.  Heh heh heh...

You are a fine chap, sir, but where I suspect we differ the most, is that I'm bullish on America, and you are in an angst mode.

Granted, there is a 40 trillion dollar actuarial deficit in the social security and medicare programs, hot off the press from the Cleveland Federal Reserve Bank. Most of that is from medicare. To close it, payroll tax rates would have to double from 16% or so, to 32% or so, and that won't happen. Nor can it be financed by a soak the rich income tax regime. We are going to a single payer socialized medical system within the next generation (20 years). The box is simply getting too tight to squeeze out of.

[DoughtyOne]

I think it's important to point out that after eight years of Clinton, his wife and his thugs, that 40% was only able by the skin of it's teeth to get Bush in. Gore actually got more votes. Thank heaven for our founding father's foresight and the electoral college. Now, after four years of Bush essentially abandoning general conservative policy on a number of issues, do you honestly think he will have shored up even more support from the right? The war on terrorism not-withstanding, I'm not convinced of that.

Only by driving conservative policy through to success, could that 40% have been shored up, in fact expanded on. As much as I like some of Bush's war on terrorism, there are a lot of folks out there on our side who are amazed by his lapses in solid anti-terrorist policies. Yasser Arafat and our southern border being two extremely glaring missteps IMO.

[DoughtyOne]

In all honesty, this is a fact that causes very little comfort for me these days. This is a time when we should be consolidating behind a man who will champion our cause. Nope, instead we can only pray that such a man arrises in the next four years, or it will be at least another eight before one will.

In short we are at least four and possibly twelve years away from a reasoned conservative taking office. Until that time we will see capitulation on our side and consolidation on the left. Things will slide for at least another four years. Lordy!

[Torie]

Yep, the base has been reassured about Bush's capacity to lead, and make reasoned judgments, and hire good people. The votes he loses from the right, except those whose livelihoods are in stress from the global economy, are small. Most folks understand, that the range of options of a president are limited in the political world. The president must form a coalition from a host of groups that disagree about much (you name it, immigration, presciption drugs, tax cuts for the wealthy, deficits, supply side, no child left behind, a robust interventionist foreign policy, free trade, faith based charity, religion in the public square, gay marriage (23% of Republicans in California support it), etc. As I said, Bush might lose, but it won't be primarily a base problem.

[reformedliberal]

We have a winner!

This is a geat analysis. These are, IMO, polls designed to sway those who go w/the flow and follow the crowd.

I follow Rassmussen these days and the daily shift since Thursday has been in W's favor, in favor of the economy and shows an uptick in investor sentiment.

It is February and it is close. Still, in all the polls that ask the question, a slim to significant majority think W will win. As more and more of Kerry's warts are examined, I think the spread will increase, favoring W.

Also, I am suspicious of this poll, as it seems designed to show that Cheney is a liability. I have seen several man-in-the-street segments over the past couple of years and most people cannot identify a picture of Cheney. Cheney's name has been linked constantly w/"greedy war-profiteering Halliburton" and "bad heart". I will bet you most voters have no further idea of who he is, what he does or the content of his CV.

Also, was this one of those 2-day wonders?

[epow]

Not time to panic yet folks, polls are meaningless at this time.

If I remember correctly, and that isn't guaranteed, Dud-kakis was leading Bush the 1st at about this point in the campaign season, and Walter Mondull was ahead of Ronaldo Magnus at one point early on. You do remember President Mondull and President Dud-kakis don't you?

The poll they take the 1st Tuesday in November is the one that counts, and a lot of water has to go under the proverbial bridge before then.

[DoughtyOne]

Once again, thanks for the comments Torie. Can't tell you how many times I've read on this forum someone's statement that they voted for Bush last time, but won't be able to this time. Conversely, some people like myself may in fact vote for him this time when we didn't the last. We'll see.

[Betaille]

I agree... it is not necessarily good to be the Front-Runner at this point, and Bush has closed his gap with kerry without spending one dollar on campaign ads.
Cbs polling generally gives dems 10-15% more than they actually get come election day. Unemployed people and Senior Citizens are overwhelmingly over-represented in telephone polling naturally. Since most conservatives actually WORK for a living, it is very hard to get an adequate sample including enough conservatives unless you make an effort to do so. I seriously doubt CBS makes such an effort.

[Choose Ye This Day]

They're most concerned about the economy and jobs? Well, they had better start paying attention. Here's the truth that the lamestream media won't tell, and for some reason, the Bush campaign hasn't yet:

During Clinton's "Great Economy" back in 1996:
Unemployment was at 5.6%
Average wage was $11.82/hr.
Inflation was 3.3%

During George W. Bush's "miserable failure" economy of 2004:
Unemployment is at 5.6%
Average wage is $15.40/hr.
Inflation is 1.9%

Find out the rest, in CNN's own words, at this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1087145/posts

[JohnnyZ]

He has essentially taken a dump on the California electoral vote by ignoring major problems the state is having to deal with.

Frankly, California has been soiling itself for quite a while now.

[NCPAC]

The terrorists thank you for your support.

[Alas Babylon!]

As does Moby!

[JohnnyZ]

You are a fine chap, sir

WHAT COUNTRY ARE WE IN, LAD????!?!!?

[Schattie]

*snicker*

[Torie]

Uncomfortable with my trans-Atlanticisms? That's OK. We all are who we are.

I think last time you decided to tweak me in a friendly fashion, you were unhappy with my French stuff. But you forget, the Normans were Anglo Saxon too, and they spoke French. And the Normans did a French language dump into the Enlish language, and made it a somewhat close question whether English is a Teutonic or Romance language (in the law, the French terminology rules, and we even have both a Norman and a Parisian variant in some cases (guaranty versus guarantee). And so it goes.

[KQQL]

What's up with you and these polls? Do you want to see a creep like Kerry in the White House? You sure appear gleeful predicting the ousting of our wonderful, courageous President. Do you want to bow down before the UN? Do you want our freedoms or lack dictated by the French?

I post these polls...if you don't like them ....don't read..These polls are posted here to keep everyone informed

... I don't make these numbers,,,,,I post poll numbers, whether they are good /bad or ugly..

...but stop accusing me of being a RAT

Bottom line ...I don't suport Kerry , so your CHEAP SHOTS AT me are PATEHTIC !

[LdSentinal]

Another poll that leaves one confused.

Bush had a 50% approval rating in the 2/12-2/15 poll, but was trailing Kerry by 5% among registered voters (48%-43%).

Now, Bush has a 47% approval rating (2/24-2/27), but trails Kerry by just 1% (47%-46%) among registered voters.

And if Bush/Cheney is leading Kerry/Edwards among independent voters, there is no way Bush/Cheney is trailing Kerry/Edwards by 8%.

[DoughtyOne]

Around 1995 the LAUSD had close to a $9 billion dollar budget. Even at that time over one third of it's students were the children of illegal immigrants. This means that $3 billion dollars was only the education price tag for the children of illegal immigrants in just one town.

It's 2004, nine years later. Since 1995 we have spent around $30 billion dollars to educate the children of illegal immigrants in just Los Angeles.

The citizens of California voted to quit spending money on illegal immigrants and their children. As you may recall, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that election. Gray Davis never appealed it to the Spreme Court.

Now you can blame California all you like, but Californians do not appoint the members of the 9th Circuit Court. Today the state is around $40 billion in debt. As I have shown you, $30 billion of that is the cost of educating the children of parents from another nation. California does not set immigration policy, or have the authority to manage the borders of this nation, even it's own.

This doesn't even address the issues of the schools outside of Los Angeles in the state. It doesn't address the healthcare costs for illegals across the state. It doesn't address additional police, courts and prison costs.

Yep, remind me of how California's problems are all of it's own devising. You say that California has been messing itself. No my friend, it's been messed on, and we're sick of it. Federal government policy and appointments have almost singlehandedly destroyed it.