The President's Recent Approval Ratings

vanity ^ | January 23, 2003 | vanity

[DrDeb]

My thoughts as posted on the DOSE last evening:

POLLS

I agree with some polling pundits (e.g., Charlie Cook): We should IGNORE all polls concerning our COURAGEOUS president until late summer/early fall of 2004. WHY?

1.) Most Americans suffer from severe 'Attention Deficit Disorder' -- they simply will not focus on the 2004 elections until a few months before Election day. Approval ratings prior to this time will merely track 'real time' perceptions of current economic conditions! [Any way, in today's world these 'real time perceptions' can change in an instant -- a 'state of the union' address here an Iraq war 'over there'!]

2.) After studying the poll numbers for previous presidents at similar and later points in their presidencies, I (and some very smart pundits) have discovered that there appears to be an INVERSE relationship between a president's approval ratings at the mid-point of his presidency and his re-electablity.

For example, Presidents Reagan and Clinton had approval ratings in the low 40s at their mid-term (Clinton's ratings were just a couple of points higher than Reagan's) and President H W Bush had approval ratings close to 70% (the Gulf War had just begun). And what happened two years later for each of the presidents? The president with the lowest approval rating at his midterm -- Reagan -- won re-election in a landslide! The president with the 2nd lowest rating won re-election but with a margin substantially lower than Reagan's! And the president with the best approval rating at the mid-term lost his re-election attempt. Hmmmmmmmmmm?!

So, if a biased "NBC/WJ" poll (developed by Al Hunt)wants to give GWB a 54% approval rating at his mid-term (when another biased liberal rag the "Washington Post" gave him a 59% for the same time frame) I say fine -- this only INCREASES GWB's chances for re-election! [NOTE: Despite biased 'push poll' questioning, both liberal rags/pollsters still had to admit that a majority of Americans support a war with Iraq)]

ANY WAY, IGNORE THE POLLS (I won't post them any more!)-- at this point, what matters is that well over 90% of REPUBLICANS support the president -- the rest will vascillate until election time!

HEADS UP: The only polling organizations who have not yet published their recent 'below 60%' polls are CBS News/NY Times (this ought to be a HOOT!), Ipsos-Reid, and Zogby -- expect a lot of liberal hysteria when these polls get released some time this week or next. Just breathe deep and remember the lessons of Ronald Reagan!!

ACTION PLAN: IGNORE the polls and focus on praying for the President; calling or writing the President with words of support; and calling or writing liberal congress critters with your opinions about their OBSTRUCTIONISTIC behavior !!!!

FINAL THOUGHT: Clinton sold his soul for ratings points and what did it get him? According to a recent Zogby Poll asking respondents to rate the last 12 presidents, Clinton placed near the bottom with 'failure' ratings 2nd only to Nixon. Additionally, a recent Pew Research Poll discovered that Clinton has a NEGATIVE favorability rating -- making him the only president, other than Nixon, to have his favorability/approval ratings DECREASE after leaving office!! LESSON: Polls are fleeting (Reagan rarely got approval ratings over 55%); however, principled decisions (and the presidents who make them) are lasting!

[PhiKapMom]

Thank you for this timely thread! Want to second everything you have said!

[Support Free Republic]

We Replaced Patrick Leahy's Brains With Folger's Crystals. Let's See If Anyone Notices!
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[DrDeb]

Thanks!

Context and perspective is EVERYTHING when dealing with polls -- particularly left-leaning polls designed specifically to advance a particular agenda/world view!

[Utah Girl]

I also think the reason we're seeing the polls so much in the news lately is because the left figures if it can keep bringing down President Bush's polls, support for the war will drop off. And he won't be reelected. We'll see.

[Dionysius]

A good start for a rap: "When the first cruise missile hits the ground, Dubya's numbers will rebound."

[lawgirl]

This is a great post. Please don't stop posting polling info, because when his numbers do go down, it's a good bump to say "don't forget to pray"! When things are going really well for Bush, it's easier to forget to pray for him. When it's crunch time, we all get on our knees regularly.

[azGOPgal]

It's disheartening to look at these poll numbers, especially since we know that they are false and tweaked so the liberal media gets the answers they want. But it's important to see these numbers so we can pass it on to our friends and family the truth about these numbers. Even though the numbers are low now, wait a couple of days and I think we will see some big improvements.

[BSunday]

The action is very slow at the anti drug war thread, and I can very well hold an argument both there and here, so here goes:

Major premise - It is bad to start fights, instigate violence against another country

Minor premise - If we start bombing Iraq we will be guilty of instigating violence against another country.

Conclusion - When we start bombing, we become the bad guys.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

I used to be able to partially tolerate NBC. But,Brokaw has become worse than Rather and Jennings in the anti Bush brigade. Last night,Brokaw breathlessly led off with the "bad news" for the president-poll numbers plummeting, blah,blah.Then he went to Campbell Brown, who never misses a chance to stick in the knife-never. Bush could end world hunger and Campbell would say," President Bush ended world hunger today,but...,he didn't cure baldness,millions of Americans are still suffering." I'd hate to be the man trying to keep her happy! I become apoplectic, when the media takes 500 "adults" and extrapolates it out to 270 million Americans.When the pollsters actually talk to millions of citizens,I'll pay attention.

[cmak9]

I, for once in my life, was polled over the weekend (it may have been the WSJ poll out, though they wouldn't say who commissioned it). The first 2 "questions" began with the statement, "Many people were unable to vote in the last election". The first time I was called, I told them everybody had the opportunity to vote, and this was a "push poll" and that they should stick it. They called back a day later, and gave me the same poll. I went off on the caller about it being paid for by the Democrats, which they denied. ALL of these polls are biased.

[philosofy123]

We have to recognize 1) the media is leftist pro-Democrats, 2) the high approval rating was basically because the media was hands off W after the 9/11 public outrage.

Now, after the DemonRats had their a$$ handed to them in the last election, they got together with the media, and decided to oppose the president. If you follow the comedy/talk shows, you would see a distinct reversal of position. All gloves are off now, and all the race bating, class envy, making fun of how stupid W is, is back at full throttle.