Positive Ratings for the G.O.P., if Not Its Policy (Bush approval: 65%, Gore: 19%)

The New York Times ^ | 11/26/2002 | ADAM NAGOURNEY and JANET ELDER

[afuturegovernor]

What a stupid NYT article, sadly all my professors take it as the holy grail of American journalism. The approval ratings of Gore are very funny though.

[Pokey78]

Agree. It's your typical leftist slanted poll, but the Gore numbers are hysterical. That's probably why this is buried at the bottom of the website (and probably in tomorrow's paper).

[deport]

A spokesman for Mr. Gore, Jano Cabrera, said he was not concerned about the findings, saying it was still early in the race. "With two years to go, realistically speaking, none of these measurements mean much,"

And Gore was just telling someone the past few days that he'd make up his mind shortly as to whether he would seek the nomination or not... Maybe it was on the LKL show. They don't have a long time to get concerned about the findings.....

[Cicero]

There's some rebarbative spin in this, but they have a hard time doing it with these numbers.

In another follow-up interview, Wayne Denson, 75, a Democrat and retired optician from Kansas City, Mo., said: "I voted for him to start with but now that Bush got elected, I'd rather vote for Bush than Gore. Bush has got more intelligence."

Eat your heart out, Howell Raines!

[Libertina]

NYT Unbiased Poll:
1. Don't you HATE Bush's tax cuts for the rich
2. destruction of Social Security for helpless old people
3. And regressive environmental policies which KILL people?
...
...
I thought so! We hate them too! Thanks :)

[handy]

"I don't like what he's doing to the environment, really," said James Stranz, 57, a Republican unemployed laborer from Philadelphia. "I don't think we should be ruining the environment just because big business wants more oil."

Bet this guy sings a differnt tune when it costs $100 to fill up his pickup. It's always "big business" this and "big business" that. Business is what provides jobs for people so they can earn money. I work for "big business" and frankly am always happy to cash the check and I appreciate the job it provides me.

[handy]

In another follow-up interview, Wayne Denson, 75, a Democrat and retired optician from Kansas City, Mo., said: "I voted for him to start with but now that Bush got elected, I'd rather vote for Bush than Gore. Bush has got more intelligence."

I loved that quote also. Gee, maybe you do need to be a little smart to get an undergrad degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard.

[concerned about politics]

New York Times/CBS News poll.

In other words, they polled the Democrat base. Who else would pay attention to these two?
It looks better for Republicans than I thought!

[Sloth]

They are ambivalent about tax cuts, concerned about Republican plans for Social Security and strongly opposed to the administration's environmental policies.

I would bet real money that no more than three out of every ten people surveyed could coherently describe even one Republican (or DemonRat) policy on either Social Security or the environment.

[kylaka]

You are generous. I'd put it at 2 out of ten. I'd bet there are congress critters who could not name every Senator from every state currently serving. I'll start with Maxine Waters, and follow with Jerry Nadler.

[Republican Wildcat]

They oppose the administration's environmental policies, do they? That doesn't make any sense. Worthless, stupid article.

[Wphile]

The poll is full of inconsistencies. First it says that most people don't appear to approve of private accounts for Social Security but then it says that most people don't even expect to receive their Social Security!

People think we should protect the environment rather than produce energy. Yeah, right. Just wait until gas goes to $7/gallon or your electric bill triples. People are just idiots when it comes to environmental questions. I heard one congressman say something about not drilling in ANWR because we can drill in the Caspian Sea! Sheesh...drill anywhere but here, eh?

As for the tax cuts, the NYT says most people haven't noticed a change in their paychecks. Perhaps that could because most of the tax cut hasn't even gone into effect. Sheesh...THESE PEOPLE!

[Tex-Con-Man]

Just 19 percent said they held a favorable view of the former vice president...

At least Al can still count on the "dead democrat" vote.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

Yep. Typical NYT Pravda. What is truly laughable is that the leftists continue to say that the reason that they lost on Nov 5 is because they failed to get their "message" out. LOL. The fact is that they lost precisely because that DID get their message out. And people have rejected their message. Of course, for them, the truth is too horrible for them to comprehend. And so they spin away.

[WOSG]

Typical NYT spin. The "taxes versus deficit" questions are the moral equivalent of a push-poll. No surprise the respondents are evenly divided, because it is a false dichotomy. Ask the question instead as: $5 billion less in foreign aid to egypt, welfare of illegal immigrants, corporate welfare, and funding of leftwing special interests vs. $5 billion in tax cuts for the middle class ... which would people prefer?

Also, I find the comment that 'some Republicans' dont want the GOP to push the Republican agenda humorous. Fascinating they could find the 2 or 3 Republicans who actually think this.

[Fifth Business]

Times to Republicans: Don't do anything we wouldn't do!

[RobbyS]

The Grey Old Lady needs to sit dowm and have a cup of tea. She is sounding a bit shrill.

[WOSG]

Energy vs. environment is another NYT/Liberal false dichotomy.
That most will choose environment shows the question was poor of people were not thinking clearly.

It's a matter of degree in these things. To destroy thousands of species for slightly cheaper energy would be foolish, but that is not the tradeoff.
Drilling in ANWR will do less to harm the environment than the average suburban subdivision. We can have nuclear energy and both improve the environment and reduce energy costs, but that requires opening people's closed minds on the subject.

The real choice is "reason and cost-based economic tradeoffs in policy", or emotionally-charged eco-extremism that disregards balance.

[Fifth Business]

About the only thing they forgot was that the populace actually wants Bush to nominate Democrat judges. /sarcasm