Posted on 04/12/2006 5:06:55 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
April 12, 2006
On a light news day, why not run a generic piece on President Bush's low poll numbers and his assertedly bleak prospects for reviving them? That was apparently the thinking at the Today show this morning.
Today themed the segment "Can Bush Save Presidency?", and NBC White House reporter Kelly O'Donnell seemed to answer the question in the negative, kicking things off with this gloomy assessment:
"For President Bush, low poll numbers have not just been a dip or temporary rough patch but appear now to be a sustained pattern that is different than his predecessors of both parties who went through their own tough times." She continued: "His . . presidency appears to have a chronic case of the below-40 percent blues."
After David Gergen was shown suggesting that "presidents have sometimes broken out of slumps when they've had big, bold initiatives and unexpected victories - that often shake things up" O'Donnell reappeared to dump cold water on the notion that W could have any such luck:
"Looking back, some second-term presidents have been able to rebound. President Reagan's approval fell to 34 percent with the arms-for-hostages scandal. Pres. Clinton hit 41 percent around impeachment. But both bounced back up to the 60s as they left office. Analysts say the prospects for Mr. Bush are not as good because of the weight of ongoing events: Iraq, gas prices, the CIA leak case and hurricane response."
Gergen popped back up to pessimistically proclaim: "After a while those negative feelings really do congeal, they crystallize, they become firm and then it's very hard to break out."
O'Donnell: "political observers claim big speeches and staff changes won't turn things around and suggest the president may have to wait to seize on any good news."
Commentator Stu Rothenberg then observed: "If there is something he can brag about he needs to quickly then be able to go to the American public and make his case and drive home the point. But for now he simply doesn't have much ammunition at his disposal."
Count on Today and its MSM cohorts to do their best to keep things that way.
Finally...an intelligent post!
The rally that drew 200 was on a Saturday.
Modern Politics hasn't become anything it hasn't always been.
So this whole Guest Worker talk is just a bunch of government lies about their true thoughts on the true effectiveness for such programs? I hope that everything the Government thinks or does is not just a conspiracy to you.
Folks who have jobs have to also do stuff on the weekends, dude.
And a more critical point is, the pro-illegal rallies did a fair amount of harm to their cause. It isn't just the size of the rally that matters, but also the message and the images.
Modern politicians mislead us about the effectiveness of their pet programs? Who wudda thunk?
No, here is the deal.
Right now, both illegals and businesses love the status quo. These rallies are about the gov't not upsetting the apple cart, not about reform.
The businesses love this because they get illegals who will work for less money, no regulations, not benefits, people who are less likely to file a claim if injured on the job. The businesses don't pay FICA or workers comp on these people.
The illegals love it because they work for cash and send the same home to Mexico for when they go back. On 5K, they can live like a king.
Without strict border enforcement, this plan will only encourage millions of more illegals to undermine the new "guests" who will now demand a pay increase since they will now have to pay taxes. The businesses who want cheap labor will just demand cheaper labor in the form of new illegals.
That is why I said that.
I just hope none of your business clients hire illegal aliens or undocumented workers because you as an attorney would have to represent them whether you agreed with them or not.
Nah, they would do just what you'd want 'em to do. Poll the public and crawl back into your shell, hope they don't harm you guys, just the conservatives. Right?
How do think I know so much about this stuff??????????
Yet, some of the people on here act like I know nothing.
I see this garbage every day.
Hi PhiKap. Long time since we communicated.
I agree with the tone issues you raise in your post. We're the good guys and W is partly on our side--way more than the dems. I would like to see respect for his accomplishments as well as more respectful criticism for his goofs.
As to sorting folks out. Gonna be hard to do. There are times when I am screamingly frustrated with W on issues like immigration, CFR, Prescription Drugs and spending--all of which clearly involved anti-conservative positions. Some of my frustration has probably comes out in posts.
OTOH, W has proved he will prosecute the WOT aggressively and proactively, even if it means the second guessers will be able to point to mistakes made in that process and say AHA@#! If necessary, I believe W will use nuclear bunker busters in Iran. His SC appointments (other than Miers) have been great. And, on most business issues, he has a good record--tax cuts, bankruptcy reform and tort reform. These are non-trivial points because no viable democrat has any agenda other than surrender to OBL and collectivize our nation as quickly as possible.
And I think that's true for a lot of good conservatives--we get frustrated and it comes out online. And sometimes we forget that trashing W advances the cause of surrender to OBL.
IMHO, the hardest issue to remember this balance on is illegals. That issue is as time-urgent and as crucial to the future of our nation as is the WOT and the Supreme Court--in my opinion, all other issues pale in importance beside these three. And on immigration, W is just plain wrong.
But even at that point, the balance still says that joining Katie Couric in bashing W is counterproductive. W may be wrong on immigration. But the dems are decisively wrong on all three issues. And, if we don't like W's immigration bill, imagine what Harry Reid's will look like--he'll be sending buses to Juarez with welcome signs.
How do you distinguish the legitimately frustrated folks from the ones who are deliberate DNC infiltrators, which I am sure abound here? I don't know. I know that when the Miers controversy was in full swing, I started punching abuse on posters (on both sides) who got nasty. And the moderators slapped ME down. So they don't want to hear from us on that subject.
Because I see this garbage from both the inside out and the outside in, I have a perspective that most do not.
Yet, I am derided for my views as some nut job.
This illegal immigration disaster undermines many many other areas in our lives. It definately undermines wages for legal people. There is no doubt about that.
If they seal the border, this problem will go away very quickly.
FOR THOSE WHO DON'T GO TO THE DOSE ON A REGULAR BASIS:
A Day in the Life of President Bush - (photos) - 4.11.06 ^
Posted by DrDeb to ohioWfan; snugs; MJY1288; mystery-ak; LUV W; ilovew; DollyCali; NordP; pollyannaish; onyx; ...
On News/Activism ^ 04/11/2006 7:23:03 PM PDT · 112 of 160 ^
Lot's of bogus polling data yesterday and today; the following is my take (as posted on another thread initially):
IT'S THE SAMPLE STUPID!
ABCNews/WashingtonPost
53% Democrat/Democrat-leaning Independents
42% Republican/Republican-leaning Independents
+11 Democrat . . . 'nuf said
[FYI: Even though this is one of the most skewed WP polls I've ever analyzed, they still only managed to reduce the President's JA rating by 1 point: from 38% to 37% . . . Of course, if an HONEST pollster were to re-weight the data, the President's JA rating would be in the mid-40s!]
AP/Ipsos-Reid, CBSNews/NYTimes and Gallup/USAToday also deliberately skew their samples to keep the President's JA rating below 40% . . . Bottomline: The MSM can skew the opinion polls for their preferred party/candidate but they can't win the only poll that counts -- the poll on election day!
IF YOU WANT TO VIEW THE RESULTS OF A MORE LEGITIMATE POLLSTER (who still oversamples Democrats, just not as absurdly as the MSM pollsters), visit the RASMUSSEN website:
Today, he puts the President's JA rating at 43% approve 55% disapprove [During the last 1 1/2 'controversial' weeks, the President's JA rating has remained steady at 42%-45%, i.e., there has been no decline in the President's ratings despite the 'immigration' hysteria and rising gas prices!]http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm
BTW: A President's job approval rating IS NOT a popularity rating.
A President's JA rating reflects the public's perception of the economy; a President's PERSONAL APPROVAL rating reflects the public's view of the man!
FYI: During Reagan and GHWB's era, Gallup, et al, always coupled their JA rating with a personal approval Rating ... Both Reagan and GHWB often scored very low on the former, but almost always scored quite high on the latter.
Conversely, Clinton only scored well with his JA rating (and only in his second term when the public thought the economy was doing well); however, he could never get his personal approval ratings above 40%. For this reason, the MSM pollsters dropped the personal approval rating and started promoting the JA rating as a 'popularity' rating -- anything to make Clinton look better!
Currently, The Battleground Poll is the only pollster still producing a personal approval rating for the President. According to Battleground, the President's PERSONAL APPROVAL RATING has never dipped below 60%!!!!
Bottomline: President George W Bush remains PERSONALLY POPULAR and he will continue to lead despite the MSM's unrelenting attempts to uncut his presidency with bogus opinion polls.
I agree and from the start of this issue I've wanted a tough border security first and then if they can get some sort of appropriate Guest Worker Program to attach it then fine. I expect them to have one by Summer but I guarantee with all the opinions out there it's only going to please 30% tops with or without a guest worker program.
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.