Posted on 01/29/2006 6:36:34 AM PST by madprof98
War Fatigue, Ethics Concerns Impact Approval Rating
Jan. 29, 2006 - A weakened George W. Bush faces the nation in his 5th State of the Union address beset by war fatigue, persistent discontent on the economy and other domestic issues, ethics concerns and rising interest in Democratic alternatives in this midterm election year.
Bush's bottom-line job rating -- 42 percent of Americans approve of his work, 56 percent disapprove -- is the worst for a president entering his sixth year in office since Watergate hammered Richard Nixon. And Bush's is not a single-issue problem: More than half disapprove of his work in eight out of nine areas tested in this ABC News/Washington Post poll, from Iraq to immigration to health care.
Sampling, data collection and tabulation for this poll were done by TNS.
Some views look better for Bush. Nearly two-thirds of Americans say the country's safer now than it was before Sept. 11, 2001, in many ways the fundamental demand of his presidency. Fifty-three percent still believe the war in Iraq has improved long-term U.S. security, its most basic rationale. And the president has won himself some daylight on the issue of warrantless wiretaps; 56 percent now call them justified.
But his challenges are many. Bush's overall approval rating has failed to sustain a slight gain last month from his career lows last fall -- it's 10 points lower than a year ago, on the eve of his second inauguration.
Start of Sixth-Year Approval Ratings
Job Approval Rating
President:
Bush 42%
Clinton: 60%
Reagan 65%
Nixon 26%
Eisenhower 58%
Truman 45%
On Iraq, 55 percent say the war was not worth fighting and 60 percent disapprove of how Bush is handling it. On the deficit, 64 percent disapprove of his work; on health care 60 percent; on immigration 57 percent; on ethics 56 percent (see separate Jan. 27 analysis on ethics). Six in 10 say the economy's hurting. Six in 10 don't think Bush understands their problems. Fifty-three percent don't see him as honest and trustworthy.
OPPOSITION -- Bush's problems clearly benefit the opposition: Americans -- by a 16-point margin, 51 to 35 percent -- now say the country should go in the direction in which the Democrats want to lead, rather than follow Bush. That's a 10-point drop for the president from a year ago, and the Democrats' first head-to-head majority of his presidency.
The Republican Party is feeling the pinch as well. The Democrats lead them by 14 points, 51 to 37 percent, in trust to handle the nation's main problems, the first Democratic majority on this question since 1992. And the Democrats hold a 16-point lead in 2006 congressional election preferences, 54 to 38 percent among registered voters, their best since 1984.
Independents -- quintessential swing voters -- prefer the Democrats' direction over Bush's by 51 to 27 percent, and favor the Democrat over the Republican in congressional races by 54 to 31 percent (the latter result is among independents who're registered to vote.).
Whether this shifts many seats in the elections 10 months off is far from assured. Not only are the powers of incumbency immense, there's also no broad anti-incumbency sentiment in the country; indeed 64 percent approve of their own representative's work.
Still, some underlying shifts may give the Republicans pause, perhaps less for 2006 than for 2008 (admittedly a political lifetime away). The Democrats have narrowed the gap as the party with stronger leaders, now trailing by six points versus 16 points last fall. They lead by 16 points as the party with "better ideas." And they've held or improved their advantage over the Republicans in public trust to handle issues as disparate as the economy (now an 18-point Democratic lead), Iraq and lobbying reform.
Handling the nation's response to terrorism is still the Republicans' best issue -- both Bush's and his party's -- albeit by far less of a margin than in the past: Fifty-two percent now approve of Bush's work on terrorism (pale compared with his career-average 68 percent) and the Republicans hold a scant five-point lead over the Democrats in trust to handle it (down from a peak 36-point lead three years ago).
Even with these weaker assessments, dealing with terrorism remains the wellspring of the president's support (and it's clearly the issue that got him re-elected). When he addresses the nation Tuesday night -- and when his party goes to the people in November -- it's certain to be central to their message.
ISSUES -- It helps Bush and his party that terrorism continues to be one of the top items on the public's agenda; 59 percent say it should be one of the highest priorities for Bush and Congress, putting it alongside the situation in Iraq, cited by 60 percent. There are vast partisan differences in those two top issue choices: Seventy-nine percent of Republicans call terrorism a "highest priority" issue; that falls to about half of independents and Democrats alike (53 and 49 percent, respectively). And 70 percent of Republicans call Iraq top priority, compared with 51 percent of Democrats.
Rated the Highest Priority
All Dems. Ind. Repub.
Iraq 60% 51% 63% 70%
Terrorism 59% 49% 53% 79%
Health care 53% 58% 57% 43
Economy 52% 54% 54% 44%
Education 47% 53% 47% 38%
Less govt. spending 43% 41% 48% 41%
Social Security 41% 50% 41% 31%
Budget deficit 38% 42% 40% 32%
Disaster Prep. 36% 41% 35% 30%
Rx for elderly 32% 39% 34% 18%
Immigration 27% 22% 27% 34%
Taxes 27% 32% 28% 19%
Global Warming 26% 36% 30% 10%
Lobbying Reform 16% 17% 18% 13%
Democrats, by contrast, are much more likely than Republicans to give top-priority mention to domestic issues such as social security, education, health care and prescription drug benefits. Lobbying reform, it's worth noting, comes out last on the list. That doesn't mean it's unimportant, just not a "highest" priority, probably because people are less apt to see it as impacting them directly.
IRAQ -- In one notable change, approval of Bush's performance on Iraq has dropped back after a short-lived gain following the recent elections there. His approval rating went from 36 percent before the mid-December elections to 46 percent immediately afterward; now it's back down to 39 percent. The change came mainly among Republicans; their approval of Bush's handling of Iraq is down 11 points in this poll.
NSA -- A better result for Bush, noted above, is the apparent lack of traction for critics of the warrantless NSA wiretaps. A clear majority now says such wiretaps are acceptable, 56 percent, compared with 43 percent who call them unacceptable. That compares with a closer 51 to 47 percent split earlier this month.
In what may be a related result, there's also been an advance, albeit just to 50 percent, in the number of Americans who express confidence in the government's ability to prevent future terrorist attacks. This confidence is far higher among Republicans (71 percent) than it is among either independents or Democrats (45 and 40 percent, respectively.)
Still, the change on NSA wiretaps came equally among Republicans and independents; both now are eight points more likely to call such wiretaps acceptable. It's a small gain for Bush and his party -- but one of the few they have cause to celebrate.
Methodology
This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by telephone Jan. 23-26, 2006, among a random national sample of 1,002 adults. The results have a three-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, Penn.
Strong approval ratings after the SOTU will be summarily dismissed as a blip.
What's more, the poll doesn't say anything about likely voters. For all we know, they could be polling the same people you see interviewed during Jay Leno's "Jay Walking" segments. And we didn't see the exact wording of the questions, did we? They're probably doing the same push-polling nonsense that the New York Times likes to do.
They must have missed the latest Rasmussen poll.
I don't believe this is true. There's something seriously wrong with the poll.
"I don't know very many people who say that the Democrats have better ideas about where the country should be going. I wonder what they think those ideas are???"
Exactly. I'm trying, but I can't think of a single recent Dem "idea"-except maybe Murtha's cut and run one.
And 18% think the Dems will do a better job with the economy? What kind of people could possibly believe that?Thank goodness they weren't in office during 9/11, the crash of the tech bubble and Katrina-we'd probably be in a Depression right now.
Now, I wouldn't want to indicate that I would relish Justice Stevens, or say, Justice Ginsburg any speedy trip to the nether world, so I won't. And those vultures, hanging about their respective residences, are in no way connected with me, or my family.
BTW, if someone can't be bothered to vote, who the heck cares what they think? And what difference does it make? Other than for purposes of cooking a poll I mean.
This is an absurd statement. What about the extremely low unemployment rate, the housing boom? These are not factors associated with an ailing economy. ABC & the WP have virtually zero credibility.
We're at war, and the MSM acts as if it's all just a game. Drooling over bogus poll numbers, gleefully blaming President Bush for Hamas' victory. (What will he do now that his democracy doctrine just blew up in his face!!) They're out of their minds.
These MSM polls sound like Baghdad Bob while our Army and Marines were wiping out the standing Iraqi army like cannon fodder.
Yeah, right. That is a Democrat talking point with no substance behind it. If you were to ask people what their concerns were, without prompting them, how many (who were not Democrat activists or cheerleaders) would actually say that 'Republican culture of corruption' or 'Bush administration ethics problems' even register on their radar screen.
Any poll such as this one that suggests various issues and then tabulates responses is inherently biased. Think of all of the issues that somehow did not make the list for the pollster to ask about, because they did not mesh with the pollster's preconceptions and biases, yet could legitimately stand shoulder to shoulder with those items that are listed (hints: abortion, appointment of conservative judges, drilling in ANWR, government vs. religion, flag burning/ten commandments/pledge of allegiance wording, Democrat corruption and obstructionism, traffic congestion, to name a few).
I saw a poll on F&F weekend that Time magazine has conducted and it says that only 39% believe the economy is being handled well by Bush. Who are these people and which economy do they live in?
This is part of offensive designed to damage Bush as much as possible in the run up to his SOTU speech Tuesday. Part of ABC's plan has been disrupted with Woodruff being injured by an IED in Iraq today ... he (Woodruff) and co-anchor Vargas were planning a hit piece on Bush/Iraq the same evening as the SOTU.
ABC News/Washington Post poll <----- oh.. this is legit :/
Exactly what direction is that?
What do polls matter now that he's a 2-year lame duck?
"The Americans are not there. They're not in Baghdad. There are no troops there. Never. They're not at all." ... April 7, 2003
Everyone here has already written everything I'd of contributed otherwise, so won't try repeating these excellent points, this thread, other than to comment to that issue (Gore2000 voters and support turned instead and since to President Bush): 09/11 forced eyes open and minds to alert for many moderates who had become otherwise lulled into the liberal mantras that the Dems, with Gore especially, use to motivate voters (the "environment," the false 'righteousness' of being liberal, media as ruler and truth, glorification of socilism as solution rather than personal responsibility and production, and so much more).
I truly shudder at the thought of Al Gore in the White House during 09/11 and since, or at any time in the future. Unfortunately, for many moderates who were abhorred by Clinton, Gore appeared as a solution of "acceptability" (that I know him as not being, just saying, this is what I think was occuring in 1999/2000 that had some bordervoters leaning toward Gore, if not voting for him in 2000) while the reason to vote Republican at that time wasn't clearly identifiable for those new to politics, or voting with responsibility to issues beyond the "big tent" things of economy, healthcare, education.
Defense and national security were shown to be so needy after 09/11 that it opened the eyes for many, jolted them into examining closely how they voted and the consequences of for whom they did. A lot of voters, also, were not in touch with those consequences or if had been at one point, had accepted that their votes were meaningless...
That all changed when President Bush arrived and I am so grateful that he did and it did. Not for 09/11 but for the awakening of many Americans to responsibility of voting and as to the priorities to include our defense and military. The media had done a number on demeaning military capability for a long time prior to 09/11. And Bill Clinton also did his best to diminish our defense industry and military, even as to confidence. 09/11 whopped many people awake from the Clinton-esque sqandor of moral responsibility, I believe. Gore managed to squeak along on the "it wasn't me" rebuttal only so long before 09/11 made it clear as to his contributions to a failed America.
LOL. They are in such denial!!
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.