Dems boost [President]Bush's sagging approval ratings

Newsday ^ | April 17, 2007 | Jim Pinkerton

[2ndDivisionVet]

The pundits seem to agree: George W. Bush is toast, kaput. So how come the president's holding steady, even rising, in the polls? And what does that mean for 2008?

Let's consider the weight of the punditical pile-on: Joe Klein, writing in Time magazine, sees "An Epic Collapse" - specifically, the Iraq war, the Walter Reed hospital mess, the flap over the fired U.S. attorneys. Concludes Klein: "It is increasingly difficult to imagine yet another two years of slow bleed with a leader so clearly unfit to lead."

David Ignatius, writing in The Washington Post, opines, "Simply put, the White House is losing its ability to shape events." And Georgie Anne Geyer, appearing in The Chicago Tribune, gets personal: "George W. is the man who isn't there this spring in Washington. ... It is becoming increasingly clear that no one pays attention to the Texan with the destructive ambitions anymore . . ."

So here's a question: If Bush is falling apart so dramatically that he is in danger of simply vanishing, how come he's hanging in there in the polls?

But don't take my word for it. According to pollingreport.com, a nonpartisan compendium of polls, Bush's average approval rating for April 2007 is 34.6. And what was his approval exactly a year ago, for all of April 2006? It was 35.6. Neither number is impressive, but what's clear is that Bush is hanging in there, approval-wise - no "epic collapse."

So what gives? The answer would seem to be that Bush is not being evaluated in isolation: Instead, in the public mind, he is being compared and contrasted to the rest of Washington, D.C. - specifically, the Democrats who now control Congress.

[ODC-GIRL]

Thank you!

[princess leah]

Notice that since the WaPo even criticized Nanni Putzi, she’s no where to be seen...guess even her handlers told her to lie low until the criticism dies down! There are times when I really have to bite my tongue and stop my fingers from printing what I’d like to say about the democrats.

[CFC__VRWC]

Notice that since the WaPo even criticized Nanni Putzi, she’s no where to be seen...

I was out camping for a week when Imus was canned and didn't get much news about it. However, the first thought I had when I heard about it was that the reason the left went so overboard on Imus was that they needed something to take Nancy's treason trip off the front pages and stop the bleeding, and Imus just happened along with his ignorant mouth at the right time.

I'm also convinced that the media is positively delighted about the Va. Tech shooting for exactly the same reasons - it gives them an excuse not to cover the democrats as they make complete asses of themselves, besides giving them the chance to scream for disarming us again.