Nearly half of Americans wouldn't vote for Bush again

AFP ^ | 08-23-03

[Brian S]

Sunday August 24, 6:48 AM

A growing number of Americans don't want to see US President George W. Bush re-elected next year, and fear US troops will be drawn into a long, costly occupation of Iraq, according to a Newsweek poll.

For the first time the poll has found that more registered voters -- 49 percent -- would not want Bush to return for a second term in office if the elections were now, compared with 44 percent who would.

Only 23 percent said terrorism and homeland security would be the most important issues for them in the November 2004 election, compared with 48 percent who said deciding factors for them now would be the economy and jobs.

Meanwhile, 69 percent are now convinced the United States will become bogged down in Iraq, without achieving ostensible goals in getting the country back on its feet.

Some 40 percent of them are now "very concerned" US troops will be there for the long-haul.

A majority also fears that US forces will be overextended in the event of a security threat elsewhere, according to the poll in the latest edition of Newsweek -- 29 percent very concerned and 30 percent somewhat concerned.

Americans also think that reconstruction costs in Iraq are too high at one billion dollars per week -- 66 percent said they do not support such spending, compared with 34 percent who said they support current spending levels.

And 53 percent said they would oppose an increase to the figure being spent, with only seven percent not opposed to an increase.

Almost half of people polled -- 47 percent -- said they were very concerned that maintaining troops in Iraq is too expensive and will cause a higher budget deficit, seriously damaging the US economy.

Despite some indications the US president's popularity is on the wane, a majority still approves of the way Bush is handling his job. Some 53 percent supported him compared with 36 who did not, with 11 unsure.

In a Newsweek poll released a month ago, 49 percent said they would like to see Bush re-elected compared with 43 percent who would not.

Voters said they prefered Republican President Bush's stance for dealing with terrorists than what they have seen so far from leading figures among the Democrats.

Some 57 percent said they prefered Bush's position on terrorism to 21 who prefered the Democrats. But 45 percent felt the Democrats had more to offer on stimulating the economy, compared with 36 percent who thought Bush had a better approach.

The survey was taken between August 21-22 on some 1,011 adults aged 18 and above. The poll has a plus or minus three percent error margin.

[Brian S]

I know. Polls are only as good as their results...

I only hope that the White House is not dismissing the bad ones and hanging on to only the good ones.

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

This is a classic polling/reporting trick.

Exactly. Many of those would "rather" have Ronald Reagan, or George Washington, or me. Mostly me.

[Timesink]

But what about Nader? Is he running again?

Not as of yet. But he hasn't ruled it out, and the Green Party is on record as saying it hates the Democratic Party so much (for not being left-wing enough) that they would be ecstatic to run Nader again, or anyone at all, who would draw enough votes to destroy the RAT candidates's chances in 2004.

And make no mistake: If Nader gets back into the race, or the Greens can find anyone with the slightest bit of political persuasiveness, the RATS' chances of recapturing the White House in 2004 will be zero.

[Bill Davis FR]

jobs, iraq and taxes

[Burkeman1]

Roy Moore? Who is he? I have never heard of him?

[aimhigh]

49 percent -- would not want Bush

Well,.. then, ..There is no change from the first vote that put Bush in office.

[Timesink]

Exactly -- and Republicans need to hammer the Dims on that question over and over again. "What's your plan to stimulate the economy, if you hate our ideals so much? Let's see it!"

Which is precisely what the Bush campaign will do next year (assuming it's even necessary; personally, I think the economy will be in full recovery mode by then). Then, the moment the Anointed RAT has his Walter Mondale moment ("Mr. Bush will raise taxes, and so will I. He won't tell you. I just did."), that'll pretty much wrap things up, and Karl Rove can take an early vacation in October.

[Brian S]

Disclaimer: I did not place nor bump this thread up into "Breaking News". I hold that category sacred for true "Breaking" news.

[Paleo Conservative]

But when you pair the same elected official against the actual human beings that are fighting to challenge said politician in the next election, the percentage of people choosing that specific Somebody Else drops sharply.

That's quite an assumption. I thought Mondale and Dukakis were robots.

[concerned about politics]

Nearly half of Americans wouldn't vote for Bush again

So? Nearly half didn't vote for him before.
Keep the more than half, and he's in.

[deport]

Well,.. then, ..There is no change from the first vote that put Bush in office.

---

Correct.....

George Walker Bush
Richard Bruce Cheney

Party: REPUBLICAN
Home State: PR: TX; VP: WY
Electoral Votes: 271
Pop. Vote: 50,461,092 (47.9%)

Albert Arnold Gore, Jr.
Joseph Isador Lieberman

Party: DEMOCRATIC
Home State: PR: TN; VP: CT
Electoral Votes: 266
Pop. Vote: 50,994,086 (48.4%

[arete]

""I like it. It's beautiful. There is so much information I can get," Abdullah said, surrounded by U.S. soldiers and commanders who crammed the one-room Internet cafe they had helped set up with $24,000 from the 4th Infantry Division's budget."

Unfettered Internet Access Comes to Tikrit

Richard W.

[woofie]

Should be under Weak News from Newsweek

[Once-Ler]

This is a dumb poll. It is not registered voters. It is not likely voters it is just Americans. It does not show how Dubya would do against a democrat candidate. This is a poll of Dubya against the nameless faceless dream candidate of the great unwashed American masses and Dubya almosts beats their dream candidate.

[ruoflaw]

Newsweek has no credibility with me....I remember their polls used to always show lower numbers when the question was about President Bush....they were consistently lower than anyone else when Bush became our President...usually by several points.

[Burkeman1]

As an aside. Does anyone else think that the Perot put up was a Clinton black bag operation both times? The guy had no clear platform other than "reform" and wasn't his company rewarded both times with nice government contracts by Clinton?

[Timesink]

That's quite an assumption. I thought Mondale and Dukakis were robots.

I used to think that too. Then I met Al Gore.

[Once-Ler]

My bad it was registered voters.

[thinktwice]

Some 57 percent said they prefered Bush's position on terrorism to 21 who prefered the Democrats.

Two mispellings of the same word tells me we have a suspect foreign -- and biased -- source.

[edchambers]

When 3,000,000 more people are out of work, it's hard to tell them in the midst of another layoff of 1,300 at HP, and 1,400 at Boeing, that technically the economy is growing,

As the idiotic unemployment extensions expire more people will go back to work rather than starve waiting for a "good" job.But will it be in time for "W" to get reelected?