Why Isn't Bush Losing?

Opinion Journal ^ | 5/11/04 | James Taranto

[pookie18]

The latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll has lots of bad news for President Bush. His approval rating is down to 46%, the lowest ever; conventional wisdom has it that an incumbent with less than a majority is in trouble. Only 37% say they're "satisfied with the way things are going in the United States at this time," against 62% "dissatisfied." Fifty-six percent disapprove of the way Bush is handling the economy, and 58% disapprove of the way he's handling Iraq. Fifty-four percent think liberating Iraq was a mistake.

And yet. In a two-way presidential-preference match-up, Bush beats John Kerry, 48% to 47%--a slight (statistically insignificant) improvement from last week, when Kerry led 49% to 48%.

What is one to make of this? Clearly all the bad news out of Iraq is having an unfavorable effect on people's impressions of President Bush. So why can't Kerry seem to get ahead of him? Here's our speculation:

Bush's base is stronger. "Intensity of support among Bush voters is much stronger than support for Kerry," according to Investor's Business Daily. IBD's poll finds that "while 68% of Bush's supporters say they support him strongly, only 38% of Kerry's supporters say the same for him." (IBD's poll gives Bush a 47% to 44% lead in a two-man race.)

[Williams]

So many people are mindless boobs. They keep hearing that the economy is Bush's weak point, so despite the biggest boom in decades and hundreds of thousands of new jobs a month, they keep saying their dissatisfied with Bush's handling of the economy. I guess they want the boom, low interest rates, low inflation and new jobs to stop.

[Wolfstar]

So why can't Kerry seem to get ahead of him? Here's our speculation...

Here's Wolfstar's "speculation:" Polls are BS.

[Leroy S. Mort]

Its not Bush vs Kerry, it's Bush vs Not Bush. There's only a small percentage of the left who can get excited about that.

[mom-7]

Don't watch cnn or read usa today. Neither is worth my energy. Would not give credence to any poll coming from those sources.

[SunStar]

The Islamic extremists have been attacking the United States since the 1970's. Only one president has taken them on -- George W. Bush.

[dawn53]

LOL! I tend to agree.

Especially after reading that 80% don't want Rumsfield to resign. Now wouldn't that 80% somehow translate into support for the Bush administration.

Polls are so easily manipulated, you can just about get them to conclude whatever you want them to.

[RightthinkinAmerican]

Thankfully, many see through the leftist media blitz on the economy, Iraq "torture", war on terror, ect. The dims haven't realized it yet that it's not working. I get really down when I see what unfair propoganda Dubya's up against, but then I realize that most people are smarter that the networks and dims think.

[ShandaLear]

He's not losing because of John Kerry.

[HoustonTech]

The sad thing about this is that a tepid vote is as of much value as a committed vote. Kerry can win the election simply by garnering 51% of enough tepid votes in enough states to beat President Bush. It will not matter then how whether people voted for him or simply against Bush; the result will be the same.

Committed votes are only more valuable if they engender more votes. Dems do this by stuffing the ballots ;) but Republicans need to convince more people to be assured of victory in November.

Sign my petition to Stop Kerry

[W04Man]

THE ANSWER IS IN THE HUGS

http://W-04.com

[newsgatherer]

Why Isn't Bush Losing?

Cause he's runnin against a liberal from massachusetts?

Do I wil? Did I get it right? What did I win?

[LS]

True, and, as I keep saying, no matter who thinks they control the news, EVENTS control the news, and odds suggest that Bush is in for a much better time (transfer of power in Iraq; capture of Zawahiri/Zahqari/bin Laden/Mullah Omar; big victories over al-Sadr or in Fallujah; another terrorist attack---which, perversely, will remind Americans what a weenie Kerry is and how strong Bush is; and, of course, the continually growing economy). At some point, no "spin" is going to convince people that things are "going badly." They will look at their wallets; at the fact that the U.S. hasn't been attacked; at the tremendously negative "aura" that the Dems give off, and Bush will win convincingly.

[chainsaw]

Bush isn't losing because Kerry is the democrats version of Bob Dole.

[ChiMark]

Being critical of Pres. Bush is the same as criticising your favorite ball team .I may not give the White Sox big marks for last season and I'll be more critical of their shortcomings than a non Sox fan.
The polls are a snap shot in time. If the polls are saying the economy is a negative Bush factor I expect that news to change as the news of the economic recovery sustains itself for the next few months.

[freedom1st]

President Bush isn't losing because he is a real man with true integrity. JF'ngK is a phony gigolo.

[bilhosty]

Because he is running against the worst candidate nominated for the presidency in the last 100 years, if not the last 200 years.

[ex-snook]

"So why can't Kerry seem to get ahead of him?"

There is limited daylight. Kerry had agreed with Bush.

[TexasGreg]

"Clearly all the bad news out of Iraq is having an unfavorable effect on people's impressions of President Bush. So why can't Kerry seem to get ahead of him?"


Translation: WAAAAA WAAAAAAAA WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!

[Cyclops08]

Because Bush will FIGHT the terrorists.
Kerry will not.

Its an open and close case.