Back by unpopular demand

President Bush has gone from first to worst in the polls, although the
press has ignored the tumble. Blame it on the less than stellar election
results in Iraq, as well as what looks to be a losing argument in the
Social Security "crisis" debate.

According to the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, conducted from Feb.
7-10, Bush's approval rating stands at 49 percent, which is dismal for a
just-reelected president. By comparison, during the first February of
their second term, the most recently re-elected presidents all boasted
approval ratings in the 60s'; Richard Nixon (67), Ronald Reagan (60),
and Bill Clinton (60).

What's even more shocking is that just days earlier, riding the crest of
supposedly good news surrounding the election in Iraq, Bush -- as
measured by the very same CNN/USA Today/Gallup polling unit -- posted
his best approval ratings in 13 months. For the survey conducted Feb.
4-6, his approval rating shot up to 57 percent; heights Bush hadn't
reached since January 2004, and hadn't consistently hit,
month-after-month, since the spring of 2003.

Yet the most recent results show Bush's approval ratings cratering eight
points to 49 percent and his disapproval ratings spiking 8 points to 48
percent. That's a 16-point swing in less than one week. What happened?
It's possible the realization about the vote in Iraq began to set in
among voters who grasped that with the overwhelming Shiite coalition
victory there's now a distinct possibility of an Iran-friendly Islamic
state being established in Baghdad. Hardly the reason why U.S. troops
were deployed. Domestically, the hot issue behind Bush's decline was
likely Social Security reform, which the president sold hard during his
Feb. 2 State of the Union address. Despite that primetime push, and a
subsequent White House road show designed to build support, a plurality
of Americans, by a margin of 48 to 42 percent, still disapprove of
Bush's handling on the issue. That, according to CNN/USA Today/Gallup.

Perhaps a better explanation is that the poll last week that showed Bush
earning a 57 percent approval rating -- the poll that generated all
sorts of glowing press for the White House -- was a fluke. No other
polling outfit that regularly checks the public's pulse on the White
House detected that sort of post-inauguration jump for Bush. For
instance, according to Newsweek, Bush's approval rating in late December
was 49 and in early February was 50. Fox News uncovered the same apathy
towards Bush; in early January 52 percent of Americans approved, while
today the number has edged down to 51 percent.

Bottom line: Three months after earning his self-proclaimed Election Day
mandate, Bush remains an historically unpopular two term president.

Eric Boehlert Salon

Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.

JimH wrote:
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.

What does that have to do with the above article, other than what YOU
posted to me about taking the bait? ZING goes the drag, eh?

On 16 Feb 2005 07:10:55 -0800, "basskisser" wrote:


JimH wrote:
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.

What does that have to do with the above article, other than what YOU
posted to me about taking the bait? ZING goes the drag, eh?

I suppose you're correct. Jim, posts are nothing more than bait.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned with
Iran.

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative to say.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned
with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative to
say.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to
resolve it."
Rene Descartes

Kanter is in my bozo bin. His reply to my post proves he belongs there.

John H wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in
Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically
aligned with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative
to say.

John H

Nope, certainly not, because the similarities between you and Kerry end
at your religion. For instance, Kerry is intelligent....

On 16 Feb 2005 09:18:54 -0800, "basskisser" wrote:


John H wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in
Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically
aligned with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative
to say.

John H

Nope, certainly not, because the similarities between you and Kerry end
at your religion. For instance, Kerry is intelligent....

BTW, you forgot to answer the question:

It seems as though you have a very hard time stating what you believe.

Could you show me where I said I worshipped anything?

When you say, "It's the narrow minded mentality of the God fearing!" Do you
really mean, "It's the narrow minded mentality of *some of* the God fearing"?
Are there *any* God-fearing Democrats who are 'narrow minded'? Is 'narrow
mindedness' purely an affliction of God fearing Republicans?

And this one:

Let's see. Are you saying you are not responsible for your posts? Who is? No
one? If no one is responsible for his posts, than anyone should be able to say
whatever they wish without any accountability. True? If no accountability is to
exist, then why do you continuously ask for proof?

If you find these too difficult to answer, I will understand your just leaving
them unanswered. Or, you could just call some names...

And here I complimented you on your writing abilities!


John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:27:02 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
...
Get over it Jim....Bush won...your guy lost.


Hey knucklehead...your president got the democracy he wanted in Iraq, but
not the election results. Get it? The winners are ideologically aligned
with
Iran.


John Kerry and I are both Roman Catholics. Does that mean we agree on
everything?

What rash assumptions you make, just to be seeking something negative to
say.

Which assumptions? Have you read much about the people who won in the Iraqi
election?