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.
""Seriously, I campaigned for him in 2000 and 2004""
you mean you worked for him...i am pretty sure that you didnt appear with him at events encouraging your constituents to support GWB
I agree. And it's one of the reasons I spend less time on FR as well.
Reagan`s low JA rating came in Gallup polling, 35% for Jan 28-31, 1983. You're right about Reagan being at 43% March 6-9 1987 during Iran-Contra. The highest unemployment rate under Reagan came in 1982 when it hit 9.7%. Dropping to 5.3% by 1989.
unemployment hit 10.9% in Dec 1982. 9.7% was for the full year 1982.
Actually I'll do both. I'll voice my dissatisfaction effectively by writing the WH, faxing the RNC or my congressman whatever the case may be,...rather than engaging in Bush-bashing on FR.
The Bush bashing serves the purposes of the left all too well and I won't engage in it. Period.
Very good -- hijacking is a much better word. I have seen some of the same posters on thread after thread with their snide remarks that have nothing to do with the subject.
This is the first I have been back on since I posted and came on read what rationale people have to say like you! :)
I am staying too -- in fact, I am so disgusted with what I am seeing thread after thread, feel it is time to roll up the sleeves and fight back against some of these obnoxious posts I keep reading on thread after thread.
I have been a member since 2000 and a conservative from the cradle.I don't understand the problem with loading up 11 million illegals and sending them packing when we have just struck a deal with China to send back 39,000 illegal Chinese in our country.
Deporting them doesn't have to happen in one day, but their future citizenship is a threat at the voters booth given the hair thin election wins we are experiencing now without their citizenship.
It has been proven that illegals vote illegally, their presence here runs in the billions in costs and will run into the stratusphere if they are made citizens.
If these are given amnesty, so will the next 20 million, and the next 20 million and the next 20 million, and so on until they are the majority and vote for the end of the nation state in favor of just being a trade zone. Is this what you want for your grandkids?
I'm so glad to hear that :0)
Not likely, not long lasting, and ultimately, not very important. The important thing is that Bush has kept us free from terrorism for almost 5 years. We were under attack, we are still under attack, but we are safe with minimal disruption to our way of life and liberty. So who gives a crap about poll numbers? As this today show points out, no news is always bad news for the MSM.
Frankly, most posters on FR are sick of it; vacuous little people who add nothing, just tear down everything.
Yep!
Where do you come up with the number 15 million? When did he say he was giving amnesty? Do you hate farmers too??
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
When the dems win the next round of congressional elections they'll move to impeach GW. I'm gonna laugh when they do, becaue he'll deserve it."
I haven't voted for a democrat in 25 years. I'm not going to start now.
Then why make such an outlandish comment? I can't believe that you would really want our President impeached. That is about as low a comment as you can get IMHO. Especially coming from a supposed conservative. You are going to laugh about this...really? Or was this some sort of joke that I don't get.
15 million is the probably closer than 12 or 11 million because the gov't is trying to keep this number lower than it really is for obvious reasons. 15 million represents the number estimated by the center for immigration studies.
If you don't believe this is amnesty, you are a an idiot.
If they get to stay, work, and keep going on like nothing happened, what do you call that?
15 million is the high end of the spectrum and only an estimate to support your hatred. I call it a guest worker program that is needed by labor intensive industry.
We are at full employment now with the illegals, how do you suppose we do the menial work after we execute the 15 million like you want? How do we cover those jobs after we kill 10% of the workforce with a 4.7% unemployment rate??
As for calling me an idiot, I have a degree in Acctg and Finance and am in the top 5% of wage earners how bout you?
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Isn't that a quote from Michael Moore?
Or was it George Soros?
Or maybe JohnFKerry?
Ted Kennedy?
Sorry, check my homepage, I typically eat people like you for lunch and have much left over for desert.
As far as your "execution" comment, that's just silly. Until people in your field startt getting outsourced to illegals and those situated in India, you will not care about the cost of having people clean toilets for $6.00 an hour cash.
What I say is that we should have a guest worker plan, but also shut down the border so that we don't get a whole new tidal wave of illegals to undermine the new "guests" who will now have to pay taxes and who will now get a pay cut because of FICA deductions.
Last time I checked, GWB supported McCain/Kennedy bill in the Senate.
I wondered why I have spotted you, even though your screen name, is invoked alot on the bash-Bush threads. :)
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.