Survey: Anger Toward Bush Intensifying

2/23/04 | By NANCY BENAC

[DarthVader]

WASHINGTON (AP) - In Arizona, Judy Donovan says she feels desperate for a new president. In Tennessee, Robert Wilson says he finds the president revolting. In Washington state, Maria Yurasek says she'd vote for a dog if it could beat President Bush.

A subtext to this year's presidential campaign is the intense anger that many Democrats are directing toward Bush, an attitude that has been growing in recent months.

``I've never seen anything like it,'' says Ted Jelen, a political science professor at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas. ``There are people who just really, really hate this person.''

Fully a quarter of Americans - mostly Democrats - tell pollsters they have a very unfavorable opinion of the president, more than double the number from last April. When only Democrats are polled, more than half report they feel that way.

Further, in exit polls conducted during Democratic primaries, a sizable chunk of voters have been describing themselves as not just dissatisfied with Bush but outright angry - 51 percent in Delaware, 46 percent in Arizona and New Hampshire, 44 percent in Virginia and Wisconsin.

``They really have a head of steam up against Bush,'' said Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. He said the level of political polarization surrounding Bush, the division between Republicans who favor him and Democrats who don't, exceeds even that for President Clinton in September 1998 during the impeachment battle.

A substantial number of independents who voted in the Democratic primaries expressed anger at Bush as well, exit polls found. For example, almost half of independents in the Delaware primary said they were angry, and about four in 10 in Virginia, Arizona, Iowa and New Hampshire. In Wisconsin, one in 10 of the Republicans who voted in the primaries said they were angry at Bush, and more than twice that many said they were dissatisfied.

Plenty of presidents have generated intense feelings, of course, but Democrats - and even some Republicans - think the phenomenon is outsized this year.

``I've never seen a Democratic Party more unified and more focused, and the anger helps do just that,'' said GOP pollster Frank Luntz. ``The intensity level is just so high. They're using four-letter words to describe him.''

In a recent focus group that Luntz conducted for MSNBC, technicians had to adjust the volume levels because the Bush-haters were ``so gosh-darn loud'' they were drowning out the president's supporters, who were more numerous, Luntz said. ``It was a real problem.''

Bush was asked about the anger in a recent interview on NBC and said he found it perplexing and disappointing. ``When you ask hard things of people, it can create tensions. And heck, I don't know why people do it,'' he said.

His campaign spokesman, Terry Holt, dismisses the anger as something stoked by Democratic presidential candidates and confined to core party activists. He said it also reflects Democratic frustration at Bush's success in pushing through his agenda.

John McAdams, a political scientist at Marquette University, said resentment of Bush is particularly strong among liberals who already hold three things against him: ``First, he's a conservative. Second, he's a Christian. And third, he's a Texan. When you add all of those things up, that invokes pretty much every symbol of the cultural wars.''

``It's particularly galling when somebody who mangles his syntax and doesn't pronounce words extremely well and is from Texas beats you,'' McAdams added.

Some of the anger at Bush stretches back to his 2000 election, when the president lost the popular vote but took the majority of electoral votes after the Supreme Court stopped a recount in Florida.

``It's the long view of Bush in the minds of Democrats,'' said pollster Kohut. ``He came into office in a way that they felt was unfair. They gave him the benefit of the doubt and rallied to him after the 9-11 attacks for some time, and then he disappointed them in the way he dealt with Iraq'' and by pursuing a more conservative course than they expected.

A Bush opponent can vote against the president only once in November, no matter how intense the anger. So does it matter how much voters dislike him, if these are people who would have voted against him anyway?

Political analysts say the intensity of the anti-Bush sentiment could translate into higher turnout by mobilizing the Democratic base. The possible pitfall for Democrats, however, is that strident anti-Bush rhetoric could turn off swing and independent voters who like Bush personally but might be convinced through reasoned argument that his policies are wrongheaded.

``Anger is not necessarily a productive emotion when it comes to politics,'' Luntz said. ``The anger against Bill Clinton was so fierce and over the top that it helped him in 1996 and then again during the impeachment in 1998. People got more angry at those yelling at the president than at the president himself. You could easily see the same thing happening here.''

[Starve The Beast]

The Left hated Richard Nixon so passionately that libs I know now, far too young to even remember him, loath him. During the Reagen years (when I was in college), the Left hated the gipper so much that they were nearly inarticulate with rage. Now, when the Libs talk about W., they act like a bunch of people with rabies.

This is just something the Loony Left seems to do. It doesn't really have anything to do with W.

[pawdoggie]

Having watched "GOP pollster" Luntz at work on the variations of NBC over the last five years, I would say he deserted to the enemy a long time ago.

[DarthVader]

No the anger the left has in times of national crisis always seems to blow up in their faces. Consider the 2002 elections. This strategy failed then and it will fail now.

[You Dirty Rats]

The Left is angry at Dubya because he won in 2000 and he kicked their asses again in the 2002 midterms. They hate being out of power.

They will be even angrier after the election!

[novacation]

If Bush closed the border and started deporting illegals he'd win in a landslide. Fat chance

[Bikers4Bush]

I never said that it was liberals who changed.

[Starve The Beast]

Um...there is no possible way the left's feeling can be more intense against Bush than ours were against The Perjury Pres.

Not only isn't that true, but the anger we felt for Clinton was for things he actually did, not just because he was on the opposite side of the isle.

[writer33]

The anger is real and it shows. It shows who these people really are and the media laps it up as if they were lapping up a bowl of milk.

All this coverage of homosexual marriages, Dean screams, etc... You get the point. It only enhances President Bush's calm resume. In short, it's hurting them far more than helping their cause. The good thing is that the media, most of them, don't see it.

[Bikers4Bush]

Like I said, you don't have to believe it but it's accurate.

[MissAmericanPie]

If Gore had won in 2000, you would not hear a peep out of the media over Republican fury to oust Gore in the coming election. It's too bad that Bush has squandered his reputataion with a critical percentage of conservatives in his attempt to pander to everyone but them. It's puts the outcome of the coming election in some doubt, even though I suspect he will give the demonrats a sound drubbing if fraud is limited at the ballot box.

On the other hand there may be a lesson taught on the bad idea of attempting to be all things to all people to no ones satisfaction. Nader running is a real good deal if the election is as close as the one in 2000.

[Bikers4Bush]

Since I'm a conservative that's either a poorly phrased question or just plain stupid.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Conservatives haven't changed either. You are angry because conservatives don't see things as extreme as you do. But that still does not make your position any more sanctimonious than the majority, it only makes you self righteous.

[steve50]

I never said that it was liberals who changed.

There's a faction that refuses to see longtime republican voters getting fed up with Bush. It's easier to scream Moby than to face reality for them.

[Kerberos]

"Since I'm a conservative that's either a poorly phrased question or just plain stupid."

How so?

[Right_in_Virginia]

``I've never seen a Democratic Party more unified and more focused

Yeah..that explains the four plus Nader candidates tripping over each other.

[Bikers4Bush]

Where did I ever say I was angry psycho? The only folks sanctimonious are those who refuse to acknowledge that others may have a legitimate beef.

As for self-righteous, have a look in the mirror.

[DarthVader]

I was in MD last night and talked to some and the libs are seething but some of their anger is not as blind as you may think. I made some very good arguements concerning the issues and several of them conceded to me. Some were saying to me privately after our debate they thought Kerry was a buffoon and didn't think he has much of a chance of winning. They also said that as they were learning more about Kerry that they were having concerns about his character and weak stances on national defense and you may laugh but got some of them to concede that W is doing a good job with the war on terrorism.

[McGavin999]

The dems and the media (same thing) are doing whatever they can to stir this up. They might be a little sorry if something happens. Terrorists look for weakness and if we get hit again, the first place I'm going to turn is toward the media.

[PeteFromMontana]

``Anger is not necessarily a productive emotion when it comes to politics,'' Luntz said. ``The anger against Bill Clinton was so fierce and over the top that it helped him in 1996 and then again during the impeachment in 1998. People got more angry at those yelling at the president than at the president himself. You could easily see the same thing happening here.''

____________________________

I remember when Clinton won re-election I was just flabbergasted that anyone would vote for that guy. I believe the liberals will see the same thing happen to them in 2004. The American people have invested a lot of trust in Dubya and in the end they will choose him over any pessimistic loser the Dem's care to put up as their candidate.

[Bikers4Bush]

How so? Do you not know how conservatives and liberals differ or are you just being difficult?