46 in Rasmussen
I'm certain that Bush has no chance of being re-elected in 2008.
Delusional Democrats (but I repeat myself) can't seem to get it through their brick heads that George Bush is NOT RUNNING IN 2008 AND DOESN'T HAVE TO GIVE TWO SQUATS ABOUT WHAT POLLS SAY!
This probably means that George Bush can't run for re-election and win. Maybe George McGovern still has a chance.
When is the MSM going to realize that Bush doesn't give a feces about polls?? These people are so delusional that they're probably smoking crack and injecting heroin simultaneously.
We all need to keep in mind. The reason Mr. Bush has been so carefull, not going into Iran, is because the Dems will try to impeach. That is expected as they are traitors to the Republic.
The key here is the damn gutless, clubby, approval from their peers RINO's.
They are the reason we cannot be more forcefull in Iraq and why We tip toe around the murder gang that is the ROP.
McCain being the ringleader, he likes being a spoiler.
Our worst enemy is our own team, nothing is worse then someone who says they are your friend then stabs you in the back
History shows that every President since Kennedy has had poll numbers below 40%. (And for JFK and earlier, polls were far less frequently taken and hardly comparable.)
These people have no clue! As far as I know Bush can't run again.
They've been quoting polls about Bush going "so low" for almost two months now yet we're still in Iraq, he's still signing bills into law, he's still flying around on Air Force One, he's still leading the world, and if you ask a legitimate poll of the american people who they want to lead them, Bush or Kerry? You would find out that Bush wins handily.
In fact, if I remember correctly, there was a poll on this about 12 months ago...can anyone confirm this? I think it was called "Election Day" or something really jazzy like that. I could be wrong.
Those nasty 'RATS and their "polls."
These are very challenging times, and President Bush is destined to have quite a legacy, unlike his predecessor. I think that's what has the libs little panties in a bunch.
Other than that, polls, schmolls, they mean NOTHING.
By the way.
How many more times do I have to hear 'unexpected' and 'surprising' being used as adjectives by pundits and anchors on election night when they describe GOP victories?
Non-fake polls are semi-important in that the President needs to be someone whose endorsement should be an asset, not the reverse, in the 2006 congressional elections. But MSM is so wrong to once again focus on Iraq. W's lower ratings are probably due to conservative distancing associated with continuing bloated federal spending, but not specifically the war in Iraq, where the President continues to have the support of the public (and on that "issue", the only important poll was the re-election results).
So what? President Bush has run his last election campaign. As we saw last week in the 403-to-3 vote, I think the public's negativity is vastly overstated. If the Pubbies get clobbered next November that's another thing, but it's still a year away.
So if none of those presidents with numbers below 40 were relected or didn't run for office Bush must really be nervous.
I mean he has to do something or he won't be relected in '08 right? /sarc off
Moronic press. Has it ever occurred to them that once '04 passed polls were no longer important for GWB ?