24% approval rating for Bush

[truthmatters]

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1624620720071017?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews


Now that is low.

[hjmick]

Not as low as the Democratic controlled Congress.


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Deepening unhappiness with President George W. Bush and the U.S. Congress soured the mood of Americans and sent Bush's approval rating to another record low this month, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

The Reuters/Zogby Index, which measures the mood of the country, also fell from 98.8 to 96 -- the second consecutive month it has dropped. The number of Americans who believe the country is on the wrong track jumped four points to 66 percent.

Bush's job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month's record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low.

"There is a real question among Americans now about how relevant this government is to them," pollster John Zogby said. "They tell us they want action on health care, education, the war and immigration, but they don't believe they are going to get it."

The dismal assessment of the Republican president and the Democratic-controlled Congress follows another month of inconclusive political battles over a future path in Iraq and the recent Bush veto of an expansion of the program providing insurance for poor children.

Some could read this and draw the conclusion that the American people are happier with the President than they are with the Democratic controlled Congress.

[darin]

..and exactly inline with Congress. How nice for you! You get to Bash Bush yet again, yet avoid how badly congress sucks.

This is why you have no credibility on this site, TM - your incessant bias against ANYTHING bush. From the story you linked:


A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month's record low.

Yet you use this thread title to imply BUSH's numbers have fallen, yet NO mention of your Precious DEMOCRAT congressmen and women paltry performance :-/

[retiredman]

..and exactly inline with Congress. How nice for you! You get to Bash Bush yet again, yet avoid how badly congress sucks.

of course...the difference being that congress is made up of nearly equal groups of democrats and republicans. democrats do not hold anything but nominal majorities in either chamber and clearly not enough to override any presidential veto. The majority in the senate is so razor thin that the republicans can - and do - stop debate on numerous initiatives.

And.... what is also ignored in this discussion is the fact that, whenever the american people have been asked to rank the performance of the democrats IN congress versus the republicans IN congress, the democrats come out on top by a significant margin...and have done so in every single poll since before the last election.

The people are indeed upset that congress has not been able to get much done, but those who have even a modicum of intelligence are quite aware of what party is standing in the way of progress.... and they show that with the differential polls mentioned above.

[-Cp]

of course...the difference being that congress is made up of nearly equal groups of democrats and republicans. democrats do not hold anything but nominal majorities in either chamber and clearly not enough to override any presidential veto. The majority in the senate is so razor thin that the republicans can - and do - stop debate on numerous initiatives.

And.... what is also ignored in this discussion is the fact that, whenever the american people have been asked to rank the performance of the democrats IN congress versus the republicans IN congress, the democrats come out on top by a significant margin...and have done so in every single poll since before the last election.

The people are indeed upset that congress has not been able to get much done, but those who have even a modicum of intelligence are quite aware of what party is standing in the way of progress.... and they show that with the differential polls mentioned above.


Right.... but when the house was a Republican majority, its approval rating was much higher...

"The nine-point drop in Congress' job approval rating from last month to this month has come exclusively from Democrats and independents, with Democrats' ratings dropping 11 points (from 32% to 21%) and independents' ratings dropping 13 points (from 30% to 17%).

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=28456

[darin]

of course...the difference being that congress is made up of nearly equal groups of democrats and republicans. democrats do not hold anything but nominal majorities in either chamber and clearly not enough to override any presidential veto. The majority in the senate is so razor thin that the republicans can - and do - stop debate on numerous initiatives.

And.... what is also ignored in this discussion is the fact that, whenever the american people have been asked to rank the performance of the democrats IN congress versus the republicans IN congress, the democrats come out on top by a significant margin...and have done so in every single poll since before the last election.

The people are indeed upset that congress has not been able to get much done, but those who have even a modicum of intelligence are quite aware of what party is standing in the way of progress.... and they show that with the differential polls mentioned above.

So - 50% of the 24% who approve of what congress has done thinks Democrats are to blame for the successes? So - 12% of folk think he Dems are doing a better job than the Republicans?
The idea I want TM to take away from this is: Have the intellectual honest to at least tell the whole story. :)

[retiredman]

Right.... but when the house was a Republican majority, its approval rating was much higher...

because the congress and the president were the same party and could get things done together. It still does not change the fact that back when the republicans in congress WERE in the majority, the people still rated the democrat's performance in congress higher than the republicans....which is why your guys LOST the majority in both chambers.

When the democrats in congress have a democrat in the white house and actually are able to accomplish something, the congressional approval ratings will undoubtedly rise again.

[hjmick]

...House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pledged Friday that voters would see big results from the Democratic majority in Congress. "It's going to be wonderful for the American people," she said.

"I guess it hasn't really fully landed that I am the person who carries a great deal of responsibility," she acknowledged, "because we have always been a team effort."

New House Speaker Pelosi vows big results from Democratic Congress (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-05-pelosi_x.htm)

Yep...big results. Sends chills up my spine.

[retiredman]

So - 50% of the 24% who approve of what congress has done thinks Democrats are to blame for the successes? So - 12% of folk think he Dems are doing a better job than the Republicans?
The idea I want TM to take away from this is: Have the intellectual honest to at least tell the whole story. :)


your math is kinda goofy. congressional approval rating has to do with how all of congress works with the president to do their share of governance. It is low primarily because congress cannot get a lot done....and that is because we can't stop a filibuster in the senate and we can't override a veto. That rating is clearly one aimed at BOTH party's abilities to work together. The differential polling I spoke of clearly is aimed at how the people view the performance - or at least the efforts - of the democrats in congress versus the republicans in congress. On that measure, the republicans come out on the short end and have for over a year.

[darin]

your math is kinda goofy. congressional approval rating has to do with how all of congress works with the president to do their share of governance. It is low primarily because congress cannot get a lot done....and that is because we can't stop a filibuster in the senate and we can't override a veto. That rating is clearly one aimed at BOTH party's abilities to work together. The differential polling I spoke of clearly is aimed at how the people view the performance - or at least the efforts - of the democrats in congress versus the republicans in congress. On that measure, the republicans come out on the short end and have for over a year.

I was speculating. "So, of those who approve of Congress (24%), (x%) feel the dems are doing a better job.."

Like that.

[retiredman]

New House Speaker Pelosi vows big results from Democratic Congress (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-05-pelosi_x.htm)

Yep...big results. Sends chills up my spine.

were you somehow expecting that the speaker of the house would somehow be able to stop republican filibusters in the senate?

Pelosi set an agenda for the house and she passed all the legislation that she vowed she would. Her power ends at the back door of the House chamber. Or didn't they teach you that in civics class?:laugh2:

[retiredman]

I was speculating. "So, of those who approve of Congress (24%), (x%) feel the dems are doing a better job.."

Like that.

"so of those who like oranges (24%), (x%) also like apples"

[KarlMarx]

you know what? I'll bet if Congress took the next 6 months off, most of us wouldn't know the difference....

except the Turks wouldn't be as PO'ed at us

but then, who would there be to declare the 2nd Tuesday in November as "National Huckleberry Hound Day" and make long droning speeches on C-SPAN and important stuff like that?

[avatar4321]

why wouldnt Bush's approval be low? He has backstabbed most of his base. He has low approval ratings because he isnt governing as a conservative.

[April15]

I don't mean to be rude but, so what! He is out of politics in what a year? He could be negatives it won't make any difference except to those who have to ear his party name.

[avatar4321]

I don't mean to be rude but, so what! He is out of politics in what a year? He could be negatives it won't make any difference except to those who have to ear his party name.

i dont think you are being rude. its a fact. although some seem to have this crazy theory that he will prevent the next election and announce himself emperor or something. Those people are nuts.

Democrats need to understand they arent running against President Bush in 08.

[actsnoblemartin]

anybody know how many actual republicans and democrats are in the house and senate these days? :cool:

[bullypulpit]

Not as low as the Democratic controlled Congress.



Some could read this and draw the conclusion that the American people are happier with the President than they are with the Democratic controlled Congress.

Actually, if the Republicans would stop putting their loyalty to party and president ahead of their duties to their constituents and their office, Congress would be in pretty good shape. Unfortunately they continue to kowtow to the little toad and kiss his ass shamelessly. Pelosi is little better.

[bullypulpit]

i dont think you are being rude. its a fact. although some seem to have this crazy theory that he will prevent the next election and announce himself emperor or something. Those people are nuts.

Democrats need to understand they arent running against President Bush in 08.

No, just more of the same if a Republican winds up in the Oval Office. The same neo-con loons that helped formulate the disastrous invasion and occupation of Iraq <a href=http://www.newsweek.com/id/42460>are now working for Rudy Giuliani's campaign</a>.

[bullypulpit]

anybody know how many actual republicans and democrats are in the house and senate these days? :cool:

House:
Democrats: 232
Republicans: 200
Independents: 0
Vacancies: 3

Senate:
Democrats:49
Republicans: 49
Independents: 2

Source:

<a href=http://www.thecapitol.net/FAQ/cong_numbers.html>TheCapitol.Net</a>

[April15]

House:
Democrats: 232
Republicans: 200
Independents: 0
Vacancies: 3

Senate:
Democrats:49
Republicans: 49
Independents: 2

Source:

<a href=http://www.thecapitol.net/FAQ/cong_numbers.html>TheCapitol.Net</a>

I do believe Actsnoblemartin's question was a rhetorical one. As in, without going to a reference book or Google, who can you name off the top of your head. Or the rough numbers.

[retiredman]

Democrats need to understand they arent running against President Bush in 08.

no...YOU need to understand that that is EXACTLY what Dubya did in 2000....ran against Clinton..... all his speeches about restoring the dignity of the office...blah blah blah.

We will most certainly do our damnedest to make sure that Bush's skunk stench is ALL OVER whoever the hell the republicans nominate. We will superimpose Dubya onto everything your candidate tries to articulate. Bush will be an albatross around the republican candidate's neck.

you should just accept that.

[SpidermanTUba]

Not as low as the Democratic controlled Congress.


The disapproval you quote is a figure for Congress as a whole,. not the Democrats in Congress.

[hjmick]

The disapproval you quote is a figure for Congress as a whole,. not the Democrats in Congress.

Thus the term "Democratic controlled Congress," which is taken directly from the linked article. Believe men when I say that I am no more thrilled with the Republicans than I am with the Democrats. They both need to be replaced.

[SpidermanTUba]

Thus the term "Democratic controlled Congress," which is taken directly from the linked article. Believe men when I say that I am no more thrilled with the Republicans than I am with the Democrats. They both need to be replaced.


The Senate isn't 'controlled' by the Democrats, you need 60 votes to have a 'controlling' majority in the Senate. The failure of the Senate to pass key measures which the majority of Senators agree on is the core reason for the disapproval of Congress, and this is entirely the fault of Republicans who, in a show of utter hypocrisy, have prevented 'up or down' votes on numerous bills.

[avatar4321]

no...YOU need to understand that that is EXACTLY what Dubya did in 2000....ran against Clinton..... all his speeches about restoring the dignity of the office...blah blah blah.

We will most certainly do our damnedest to make sure that Bush's skunk stench is ALL OVER whoever the hell the republicans nominate. We will superimpose Dubya onto everything your candidate tries to articulate. Bush will be an albatross around the republican candidate's neck.

you should just accept that.

No. Bush ran against Al Gore as a continuation of the Clinton administration. There is no Republican running as a continuation of the Bush administration.

However, your attitude tells volumes about you. you care more about getting revenge against Bush then you care about the right person getting the job.

History wont be as unkind to Bush as youd like to think.

[PostmodernProphet]

The Senate isn't 'controlled' by the Democrats, you need 60 votes to have a 'controlling' majority in the Senate. The failure of the Senate to pass key measures which the majority of Senators agree on is the core reason for the disapproval of Congress, and this is entirely the fault of Republicans who, in a show of utter hypocrisy, have prevented 'up or down' votes on numerous bills.

omigorsh....deja' vu.......

[April15]

No. Bush ran against Al Gore as a continuation of the Clinton administration. There is no Republican running as a continuation of the Bush administration.

However, your attitude tells volumes about you. you care more about getting revenge against Bush then you care about the right person getting the job.

History wont be as unkind to Bush as youd like to think.You are absolutely right that no one is running on a platform of continuing Bush policies. In fact the republicans are running from Bush policies, except McCain. That in itself speaks volumes about what history may say.

[82Marine89]

were you somehow expecting that the speaker of the house would somehow be able to stop republican filibusters in the senate?

Pelosi set an agenda for the house and she passed all the legislation that she vowed she would. Her power ends at the back door of the House chamber. Or didn't they teach you that in civics class?:laugh2:

So it was ok for the dems to filibuster and act as obstructionists?

[April15]

So it was ok for the dems to filibuster and act as obstructionists?Dam right! them republitards had to be stopped and you can't get a gun into the halls of congress.

[manu1959]

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1624620720071017?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews


Now that is low.

not as low as your rating.....-42....LOL

[82Marine89]

no...YOU need to understand that that is EXACTLY what Dubya did in 2000....ran against Clinton..... all his speeches about restoring the dignity of the office...blah blah blah.

We will most certainly do our damnedest to make sure that Bush's skunk stench is ALL OVER whoever the hell the republicans nominate. We will superimpose Dubya onto everything your candidate tries to articulate. Bush will be an albatross around the republican candidate's neck.

you should just accept that.

And what if the pubbies nominate Ron Paul? Unlike all the democrat candidates, he didn't vote for or support the war in Iraq.

[82Marine89]

Dam right! them republitards had to be stopped and you can't get a gun into the halls of congress.

Republitards? Insults are always a democrats best friend. No substance, just more liberal tripe.

[stephanie]

Republitards? Insults are always a democrats best friend. No substance, just more liberal tripe.

And they call us hateful, divisive, stupid.....

We can tag them with the above and add....Childish...:laugh2:

[PostmodernProphet]

And what if the pubbies nominate Ron Paul? Unlike all the democrat candidates, he didn't vote for or support the war in Iraq.

which is why they won't nominate him....where does he currently stand by the way.....2%?.....lower?

[Sertes]

Bush is stable at about 30% approval rating

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

[glockmail]

I heard the Dem congress is into the single digits in some polls.:laugh2:

[retiredman]

actually, the democrats IN congress continue to do much better than the republicans IN congress...which would lead most intelligent folks to the conclusion that it was the performance of the republicans that was bringing the overall number down!

[truthmatters]

not as low as your rating.....-42....LOL

gee I wonder why I have a low rating here?

Do you really think it means anything more than you people here hate to hear anything that doesnt help you feel all warm and squishy about Bush. There are so many facts you people here have to ignore about the world that you hide in this little cave called debatepolicy (like you people debate anything) and spew hate and hand out little red squares to anyone who tells you the truth(like that you people are vastly in the minority).

Feel safe and ignore truth Ill be back in a couple of days.

[jimnyc]

Feel safe and ignore truth Ill be back in a couple of days.

Leave your threats at the door, but do come back with more of your rhetoric and lies though!

[darin]

gee I wonder why I have a low rating here?

Do you really think it means anything more than you people here hate to hear anything that doesnt help you feel all warm and squishy about Bush. There are so many facts you people here have to ignore about the world that you hide in this little cave called debatepolicy (like you people debate anything) and spew hate and hand out little red squares to anyone who tells you the truth(like that you people are vastly in the minority).

Feel safe and ignore truth Ill be back in a couple of days.

A break from your incessant whining??!!! WOOHOO!

[truthmatters]

You dont even understand what this country was founded on do you?

What you call "whining" is the only line still standing to save this country from the people you praise with mindless backing of completely failed policy.

[bullypulpit]

With Bush's popularity down around that of certain sexually transmitted diseases, he will stuggle to remain relevant. Of course as long as he has his finger on the button, and we know he actually is just squirrelly enough to push it, he will remain relevant as POTUS.

[jimnyc]

With Bush's popularity down around that of certain sexually transmitted diseases

Sorry, but Bush still has more support than the diseased queers.

[bullypulpit]

Sorry, but Bush still has more support than the diseased queers.

Awww...Jimmy! You disappoint me.