Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush Job Approval at 47% (Rasmussen)
Rasmussen Reports ^

Posted on 12/04/2005 6:44:30 AM PST by slowhand520

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last
To: slowhand520; All

While this is Ras, it also is supported by the Fox News poll. Bush is back above 40 percent approval in their poll, with disapproval only slightly higher than the approval percentage.

It is amazing what just simply trying to talk to the American people a little bit will do.

Hopefully, the president will not crawl back into his shell and let the Dems beat him senseless for the next few months.


41 posted on 12/04/2005 11:45:49 AM PST by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
I popped over at DU to see their reaction.  Strange, but there is not one thread about it.  I remember there being dozens of them when his ratings went down.
42 posted on 12/04/2005 11:46:40 AM PST by softwarecreator (Facts are to liberals as holy water is to vampires.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520

And remarkably, this is just of adults.

No doubt he would close to 50 percent among likely voters.


43 posted on 12/04/2005 11:47:06 AM PST by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Hopefully, the president will not crawl back into his shell and let the Dems beat him senseless for the next few months.

Funny how his approval ratings jumped when the White House fought back.  Fox news also has helped ... they've been running some pretty anti-left stories lately.  Things like approval ratings can change when the REAL truth is told.

44 posted on 12/04/2005 11:48:46 AM PST by softwarecreator (Facts are to liberals as holy water is to vampires.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: softwarecreator

I bet the WH was scared to have Bush speak because they thought it could have backfired in the media if he made major gaffes etc.

And, it certainly could have. But, the risk of not speaking out is much greater, and I think they finally have realized that.


45 posted on 12/04/2005 12:03:17 PM PST by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DrDeb
Statistically, the President's JA rating is where it was on election day 2004. To think otherwise, one must blindly accept manufactured MSM polling data that grossly OVERSAMPLES Democrats/Democrat-leaning Independents among the 'adult only' population.

Actually, this can be analyzed with statistical probabilities. If the poll value was 50%, and the standard deviation was 3%, then there is still a 25% probability that a perfectly random poll could have achieved a value of 52% or higher (there is a 68% probability that a poll will be within one standard deviation of the mean, and this value was a difference of 0.67 of a SDM). This all assumes that the poll was independent and random and that that the systematic error of under-counting likely voters could be directly added.

In reality there is no well defined way to account for the correction of a systematic error in a final calculation, but it seems reasonable to do it with typical statistical equations (i.e. quadrature). In this case it wouldn't have affected the result, there would still be a ~29% probability of polling 52% or higher. Unless that probability is less than 5% or so, it is not unreasonable to conclude that there is a possibility that it is the correct value. So in conclusion, there is a 25-29% probability from this poll that the presidents approval rating is 52% or higher. Now if you believe that the poll was biased, you have to do another reevaluation.

46 posted on 12/04/2005 12:48:48 PM PST by burzum (Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.-Adm H Rickover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520

I bet if President Bush would come and speak to the American people every week, talking about our successes in Iraq and the economy, his approval numbers would go way up.

A good article makes this point:

Larry Kudlow: Sales-in-Chief

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1533176/posts

Could it be that George W. Bush, our first MBA president, is adopting a new strategy to aggressively market and merchandise his policies and successes? Finally? Following the Friday morning arrival of a strong jobs report -- one that came in well over the monthly average for the past year -- Bush actually appeared on the South Lawn of the White House to make a statement on the success of the economy and his tax-cut policies. This is what President Clinton used to do in the 1990s with each piece of good news, and it’s what President Reagan did through numerous televised speeches from the White House in the 1980s. This is exactly what Bush needs to do.

Message repetition. Without it the mainstream media will fill the void with their usual brand of pessimism. But the reality is that the economic story is an optimistic one.

The same holds true for the Iraq war. Things are going far better in the Middle East than the mainstream media would have us believe. Bush did himself a lot of good with his Iraq speech at Annapolis this past Wednesday. It was filled with facts and figures and made the case that Iraqi-ization is moving forward.


47 posted on 12/04/2005 1:13:47 PM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520

And just think how the Rats and the MSM are gonna feel in a decade or so when Dubya is thought of by Americans in the same light as the Gipper is today!

I Love it!


48 posted on 12/04/2005 1:21:06 PM PST by TeddyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Exactly.  I think a lot of conservative groups and news resources were waiting for any kind of fight from the White House.  I think President Bush may have been waiting for the dems to come out with all of their ammo before attacking.  The dems proved that anything they had was weak or outright lies.  Everyone now sees CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NY Times, Newsweek etc for what they really are ... leftwing, anti-American, pro-democrat, anti-christian, jew-hating propaganda machines.
49 posted on 12/04/2005 1:46:13 PM PST by softwarecreator (Facts are to liberals as holy water is to vampires.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
I bet the WH was scared to have Bush speak because they thought it could have backfired in the media if he made major gaffes etc. And, it certainly could have. But, the risk of not speaking out is much greater, and I think they finally have realized that.

Wow...think you might be a little overly confident in GW's ability?sar/

50 posted on 12/04/2005 1:52:28 PM PST by top 2 toe red
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: top 2 toe red

I did not say that because I lack confidence in our president. He is fully capable of articulating his positions.

I say this for everybody...any president takes a risk by going out in public. They all can screw something up and take a hit for it. But, you have to take that risk and go to the public if you want your polls to stay up.


51 posted on 12/04/2005 1:55:10 PM PST by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: quantim

BTW, who are Granholm's likely opponents?


52 posted on 12/04/2005 2:06:07 PM PST by hispanichoosier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas

He doesn't have to refute each and every lie personally....Set up one of those Clinton war rooms and get ahead of things and fight! That's part of the job description these days.


53 posted on 12/04/2005 2:12:17 PM PST by Wristpin ( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520

Bush tried the "compassionate conservative" for 5 years and the MSM beat him up at every turn, not giving him any credit for anything. Sure glad he is finally patting himself and others on the back. 2006 is looking better and only with 2 weeks of finally talking.


54 posted on 12/04/2005 2:36:09 PM PST by trooprally (Never Give Up - Never Give In - Remember Our Troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jodi

I'm sure the Michigan Dems are already hard at work on blaming that high unemployment rate on the President instead of the state government.


55 posted on 12/04/2005 3:08:01 PM PST by Gordongekko909 (I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: adorno
Imagine if the country were to be governed based on weekly polls.

Were you keeping tabs on politics, like, ten years ago?

56 posted on 12/04/2005 3:09:30 PM PST by Gordongekko909 (I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jodi

Rich DeVos is a great guy. What is the founder of Amway's campaign?


57 posted on 12/04/2005 3:10:23 PM PST by Lexinom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lexinom
Please forgive my error, Dick De Vos is running for MI governor, not Rich (who is Dick's father). I just hope the state party can gotv like the national party did in '04.
58 posted on 12/04/2005 3:29:30 PM PST by Jodi (Big Media sucks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Jodi
I sure hope he wins, and gets some Republican support at the nat. level.

FWIW My mother has been in Amway since I was a little kid the late 70's. She (and now my wife and I) buy a lot of our goods from Quixtar.

59 posted on 12/04/2005 3:39:01 PM PST by Lexinom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: DrDeb

Well, if he's doing so well among likely voters, surely...

Wait a minute. Wasn't he already reelected?


60 posted on 12/04/2005 3:43:45 PM PST by MC Miker G
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson