Zogby: Bush Job Approval Hits 41%—All Time Low; Would Lose to Every Modern

[sabra]

http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1020

Bush Job Approval Hits 41%—All Time Low; Would Lose to Every Modern President; Public Rates All Levels of Government Poorly in Katrina Handling; Red Cross Rated Higher Than Federal Government, 69%-17% —New Zogby America Poll



President Bush’s job approval rating took a hit in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, dropping to a historic low of 41%, a new Zogby America poll reveals. The same survey found the nation’s forty-third president would lose election contests against all of his predecessors since Jimmy Carter.

The Zogby America survey of 1157 likely voters, conducted from September 6 through 7, 2005, has a margin of error of +/-2.9 percentage points.

The public rates the performance of all levels of government in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina negatively, with 36% giving the President passing marks on his handling of the crisis—slightly higher than the 32% who give government in general good marks for its handling of the storm that devastated New Orleans and much of the Gulf coast.

...

President Bush’s Job Approval Hits All-Time Low

The 41% approval rating marks a precipitous drop in the President’s job rating, which has been slumping in a gradual trend that began in late February.

[OKthatsIT]

1. But he'd still win an election if it were held today

(being EXTREMELY SARCASTIC, yet honest to the core)

[ChowChowChow]

7. you mean because they own the voting machines?

OF COURSE

[buff2]

8. I have to disagree with you

He's not the "popular" president anymore. (I don't believe he really ever was).

[fudge stripe cookays]

49. It's not because of his popularity, friend.

It's because he and his minions own the voting machines.

They will ALWAYS win, until we regain control of our voting system. Get it?

FSC

[Nightjock]

84. You're damn right!

Polls mean nothing in an election year anymore. I never thought I'd live to see it in this country.

[buff2]

111. I know that already

That's my biggest fear.All I was saying is,if he could run again,and his poll numbers were down in the low 30's or 40's,how could they explain it away if they claimed he won? We are not as stupid as they like to think we are.Anyway,I don't have any hope of us regaining power in anything. They've got it all rigged and put into place for life.

[Impeach_Shrub]

127. it'd be no more unreasonable next time than last time, apparently

we are that stupid, because, the numbers themselves say he cheated, there is so much evidence, but nobody wants to see it. If he didn't cheat in 04, how do you get 666% voter turnout in some counties in Ohio? If he didn't cheat in 04, why would programmers come forth and say they wrote code to make Diebold count backwards for Kerry after achieving a certain percentage of the vote? Don't you call the voter suppression Shrub openly practiced in '00 cheating? Shrub's thugs threatened many Florida blacks trying to get to the polls. If he didn't cheat in '00, why did he send thugs to threaten the vote counters so that they suspended trying to count the votes before deadline. In a real democracy, everyone wants every vote counted, whether they win or lose. The counters cited as their reason for the suspension of their efforts as being fear for their lives and stress from threats. Google any of that, google the exit polls in counties that did not vote on DIEBOLD or EES machines and then google the exit polls on counties that used op scan or paper ballots, and you will see that the exit polls with op scan and paper ballots closely approximate the vote but the exit polls from electronic voting districts is way off. (Always in Bush's favor, of course) This stuff is suppresed by the media, some of whom, as we are recently finding out, are secretly on the White House payroll. The only thing more important than who we vote for is who counts the votes, because, Diebold/EES can't count. Until we have election reform, we don't live in a democracy anymore. Shrub has turned us into the third world dictatorship he always wanted us to be.

[tiptoe]

92. see election fraud link: "3 control 80% US Vote"

"Specific issues related to voting machine companies...Who's Involved With Who"             
                                                                               :bounce:  

:applause:View Clint Curtis KEY 1-Vote Theft 2-Who's TruthIsAll? 3-TIA Exit Poll Analyses 4-3 control 80% US Vote 5-MADNESS Ohio-Smoking Guns -Conyers
Spread the News

Also, a recent followup by Clint Curtis -- Clint Curtis Rebuilds Prototype!!This must get out!! -- who reveals the programming code he wrote for Tom Feeney. Around Oct 2000, when Feeney first approached programmer Clint Curtis, Feeney was the corporate lawyer for Yang Enterprises, the company lobbyist and the State Speaker of House-Fl. In 2004 Feeney "won election" to the U.S. Congresss...Oh, shouldn't forget this (since not mentioned in the video): In 1994 Tom Feeney was the running mate of Jeb Bush (who failed in his first race for governor).

(Ya think, Jeb Bush didn't know about Feeney's "work" with Clint Curtis?)

[geek tragedy]

12. The poll actually said that he'd still beat John Kerry, but lose to

every other president, including Poppy and Jimmy Carter.

[Wabbajack]

27. Well poppy or Reagan

would get 99% against him wouldn't they?

[Amonester]

45. (Sorry to repeat that.) He did not beat President John Kerry.

In reality, he got beaten by Kerry.

Who cares... /sarcasm

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Laurab]

123. But it doesn't say whether it means

with or without Diebold. I'm reading this thread and I just can't believe it became (yet again) a Kerry-bashing thread. Personally, I think Kerry won, but that doesn't even matter anymore. Chimpshit's ratings are in the toilet - why are we debating what type of candidate Kerry was?

Why aren't we focusing on the future and what we might be able to accomplish with the POS sinking more everyday? Does attacking Kerry (yet again) accomplish ANYTHING? There are really evil people we should be concentrating on - he's not one of them.

[sidwill]

15. Would h e lose?

If it was a weak ass Democratic like Kerry running against him he probably would win again.

True there would be a better chance of him losing but it would be by default, NOT because Kerry showed any nutsack at all.

Sorry, but I'm just calling it as I see it, in 2004 we had a golden opportunity to drive a stake in the heart of the BFEE, the war, corporate cronyism, etc..and we put forth a guy who could even give a clear answer on wether or not he would have supported the war if he knew there were no WMDs.

And for those who will throw out the "election was stolen" stuff, that may be so but it only explains the results in one narrowly divided swing state, we should have rolled. We should have won easily but instead we put out a guy who wasn't even honest with himself and it showed.

So as much as I'm pi@@ed at Bush I'm probably even more pi@@ed at a Democratic leadership that neither carries on democratic ideals or leads.

[napi21]

20. I agree with you on Kerry. I think he makes a decent Senator,

but was a poor candidate! I still don't know if it was his handlers or HIM, but I found myself constantly explaining to my TV what Kerry REALLY meant to say!!

God, I hope we chose a stronger, more open and honest candidate in 08!

[karynnj]

30. If you think he is a decent Senator, why criticize his integrity

He lost - it is fair to say you want a stronger candidate. There is a real question as to whether there was one last year. I think Kerry was the strongest of the group. I'm not really sure what it means to be more open - but that's subjective and it's fair for you to have an opinion.

It is not fair to say "more honest" as Kerry was painfully honest. There was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING he said that was a lie. He really is an extremely honest politician who clearly values his integrity. During last year's campaign, the Republicans slimed his service, his personality, his hobbies, his wife and his marriage, and his career - all using lies. Although he has been an elected official for 22 years, even the local paper that hates him hasn't found a real scandal to hit him with although they've looked for 22 years.

It is fair for you to have the opinion that he was a poor candidate, but it is wrong for a Democrat to cavalierly attack Kerry's character, especially after the Republicans spent millions last year not just to defeat him but to destroy him. He deserves respect for who he is and what he has done with his life. I hope he stays in public life because he is one of the best people we have.

[agincourt]

129. I really believe Kerry has more integrity,

than most Americans and that is why he couldn't beat shrub, besides the vote shenanigans. People for some unfortunate reason want someone who's like them, not someone smarter and more conscientious.

[second edition]

37. Excuse me , Kerry is honest and actually this poll has become

closer since January. I hope Kerry is our candidate in 2008. He is a good senator,but he would make a GREAT President!

[Prodemsouth]

98. Oh god I hope not Kerry does not know how to talk to the

average America. Stevenson, Humphrey, Dukasis, Mondale, how many names do we have to add to this list of losers.

[leesa]

118. Right. That's why he was drawing 35,000 or more people to his rallies

before the election. The media shut him down and fed you the image you have of him. Worked like a charm.

[Prodemsouth]

No I heard Kerry speak, I voted for Kerry. Kerry talks like a

Harvard pinhead sorry.

[Trevelyan]

103. Please sign this open letter/petition on Kerry's site

If enough people show support for Kerry in this there is a chance that the (relatively) good side of Bilderbergers will get rid of Bush/Cheney, they are the only ones with the power to do so. I have heard that they are in civil war mode, some of the filthy rich do not want the insanity of all out nuclear war, it is worth a try. Support Kerry in this!!

http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/taxcuts.php


President Bush, Majority Leader Frist and Speaker Hastert,

It is totally unbelievable to me that, at this time of pain and suffering for so many people in our nation, Republican leaders have yet to forego their plans to lavish more tax cuts on the wealthy and well-connected.

Such tax cuts at this time would be a total betrayal of American values – and a slap in the face of people in the Gulf Coast who have lost and suffered through so much and have so far to go on the road to recovery.

I demand that the leaders of the Republican Party act immediately to take the idea of tax cuts for the wealthy off the table. And I won’t stop working until you do.

Our message to those who would even contemplate bestowing more tax cuts on the wealthy at this time is clear and unambiguous: Don’t you dare!

Signed,

Your name here

[TankLV]

115. I do not share your OPINION. I would sit out the next election if it were

that wimp again!

I will not make the same mistake twice!

I will tell all of you one thing. Next time around, I will actively work hard AGAINST Kerry - we need a fighter, not a quitter.

[Amonester]

47. "I still don't know if it was his handlers or HIM" (Sorry to repeat...)

It was "sold and bought for" Die Bold & Co.

Sorry again... /sarcasm

[Ron Mexico]

25. If it picks you up any, I couldn't agree more. How is it possible to

kick the shit out of an incumbent in three debates and still lose? By being the worst candidate I've seen since I started following politics, that's how.

I didn't believe Kerry any more than I believed Bush. I voted for Kerry anyway, but I felt like a whore and hated that I voted for a stale piece of shit just because it didn't reek as much as the festering one I was trying to replace. That bullshit "hunting" photo-op of Kerry almost made me vote for Nader - if you insult the intelligence of voters, you pay for it. And as against the war as I am, even I laughed when I heard the phrase "more sensitive war on terror." Kerry got pounded for that one and rightly, so; when you say something like that you've got to think of how the AVERAGE voter will take it, not assume that they'll know what you mean. If he had explained himself well instead of spitting out a future punchline, he might have won. Instead, he rode the laurels of debate victories, not realizing that he didn't do anything special - anybody could beat Bush in a debate. "A-hyuk, it's hard work!"

Sorry, I know I'm rambling off topic, but your post really set me off because it's so in line with what I believe. We won't win until we put up someone to vote FOR; all I did last November was vote AGAINST Bush. Outside of Zell Miller, I'd have preferred almost any Democrat over Kerry.

[second edition]

40. You are repeating Repub bullsh*t! I don't share your assessment

at all. Kerry was the best choice to run against Bush. How long has you actually been following politics? Can't be very long!!! You know nothing!

[Ron Mexico]

43. Wow, that was convicing. What I admired most was the facts you included.

I'm telling you what I saw from my own perspective. I voted for him anyway, but I thought he was an ineffective turd. Saying "Kerry was the best choice" isn't very effective unless you can back it up, and looking back he doesn't look like he was, does he?

[second edition]

50. He was the clear winner in the primary race- what other proof

do you want? A majority of dems voted for him not the other candidates. They certainly had their pick. Effective, yes I think he was very effective.The debates were astounding. If the media would have given him half a chance, he would be our President now. His current popularity is still high and his e-mail list has grown since the election. I still run into people who respect him and his opinions. Since when is being "just one of the guys", the biggest mouth or a "good old boy" a prerequisite to being president? A perfect example of what happens when we place an inexperienced, arrogant,just like us kind of a guy in office and couple that with laziness and bullheadedness you get Bush.

[Ron Mexico]

61. If the media had given ANY of them half a chance,

ANY of them except could have drubbed * in the debates and won.

Dole won GOP the primary in 1996 and Bush in 2000, but it doesn't mean the party ran their best candidates. And although I agree that Kerry crushed * in the debates, can you honestly name a Democrat candidate that Bush could have beaten?

Look, I voted for Kerry. I just didn't like or believe the guy.

[DSperoRN]

100. WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THE PRIMARIES WEREN'T FIXED TOO?

With the exception of the Iowa caucuses, weren't the primary votes counted on the same machines, run by the same right-wing Republican corporations? What makes you think we're getting honest counts there?

There is precious little left of American democracy, I'm sorry to say.

[karynnj]

107. First off - Kerry won by some pretty hefty margins

The results were also pretty consistent with polls. Cspan broadcast 2 locations of the Iowa caucus - What was clear to me watching it was that not only were there more Kerry voters, but they seemed far more aware of why they were for him. (You could hear the conversations.) The same was true per a delegate to the Washington state conference. Kerry won the nomination fair and square. He essentially was running under the radar screen, until he won Iowa and NH. He was also the best in the Democratic primary debates - even per Chris Mathews, who seemed to dislike him.

If you look at his history - he never was "the golden Haired boy" in the party. He has always been very independent. (In BCCI he fought his own party as well as the Republicans - to close down a terorist bank. ) It would be easy to make the conjecture that Clinton dirty laundry (Indonesian Bankers) could have made him, not eager to have Kerry as the candidate. Clinton's comment that Clark and Hillary were the only stars the Democrats have, doesn't sound like a Kerry endorsement.

[karynnj]

52. Neither of your posts were fact filled either

That he lost does not mean he was not the best choice. Whic candidate did you prefer?
- all of the other candidates seemed far weaker - and none got the brunt of the Republican slime machine
- Many of the Democratic partisans were open that Kerry was not their choice. Begala and Carville were useless on their shows, never really defending or explaining Kerry, only making snarky comments about Bush. This would not have been important if the commentators were balanced overall - but they were among the few Democrats
- The local parties are in shambles - a decent Ohio local party might have helped thwart Blackwell - and Kerry would have won.
-Kerry's rallies were very exciting and passionate and did move people - but were not given the normal press.
-Kerry's positions were well articulated in the debates, the rallies, when he was interviewed and on his web site.

[Ron Mexico]

59. I preferred Clark, but I honestly think

any of them would have been better.

I have to disagree with your last statement, I heard Kerry mention his plan a lot but never really got a handle on what it was. I admit that anything is better than Bush but certainly didn't believe his tax cut lines and didn't get much detail out of the rest of it. Maybe because I had already decided to vote for him I wasn't paying a lot of attention, but I saw his proposed spending and didn't see how his plan would work.

Whatever. He got my votea anyway, but I sure would have liked to vote FOR someone instead of AGAINST.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TankLV]

119. Honey, what he stated was HIS BELIEF and OPINION, based on whet

HE experienced! YOU will have to convince HIM and US why we should bother to give him any more notice let alone a second chance to screw it up again!

WE have formed OUR OPINIONS of him based on OUR OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCES of his wanting candidacy.

No amount of bullshit or bullying by you will ever change that.

Get used to it.

[fudge stripe cookays]

128. Thanks Tank.

Agreed wholeheartedly here.

FSC

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blm]

72. I think you know nothing about Kerry and only listened to RW mediaspin.

Kerry was right about the war on terror and and he was one of the first lawmakers who ever even FOUGHT the real war on terror when he investigated BCCI and exposed the world's largest terror bank and the Bush cronies funding them.

You obviously never read his book, The New War. and only believed the dumbass media yakkers who probably never even HEARD of BCCI.

[Twist_U_Up]

102. sorry but Kerry won

http://www.electionfraud2004.org/presentation/index.html

[ToolTex]

31. I don't think =we= put Kerry out there.

I think the Iowa caucuses wanted anyone but *, and sadly bought the argument that they had to select someone that could win, (meaning in the establishment), and not selecting whom they actually preferred, (Dr. Dean).

[second edition]

41. I didn't want Dean- never thought he was Presidental! n/t

[karynnj]

57. Although I intially liked Dean and Kerry,

by the time of the Iowa convention, I preferred Kerry. After looking at their records (and finding that Dean was rewriting parts of his), Kerry was my choice. Dean's "I don't want to be a pincushion" remark after Gephart's attack suggests he would have had more trouble with the slime machine.

Even if you postulate that people picked Kerry to win, why did Edwards come in second. (Also why did Kerry sweep a poll of hotel and restaurant workers in Iowa asking who cared most about your opinions and who was the most polite?)

[ClintonTyree]

74. He was the DLC endorsed candidate........

and the DLC gets what it wants. They're the money behind any Democratic Presidential bid. Or at least, THEY WERE!
The times they are a changin'.

[karynnj]

85. That is why Kerry had no money in December

and risked his home - his only real asset - to get money for his canpaign. If his campaign failed, he would likely have had to leave the Senate to earn enough money to pay it off. Teresa would have been prevented from paying it off because that would have been considered an illegal contribution.

The establishment didn't want Kerry. Clinton, the ultimate DLCer, told a NY magazine in that time frame that the only Democratic stars were Hillary and Clark. Many Clinton people flocked to Clark. You could as easily make the case that first Gore (until he said he wouldn't run), then Lieberman, then Clark as being favored by the known Dlcers. Until Kerry won Iowa, the party gave him any favors. Other than the Rassman story - which was the type of event the media loves, Kerry got good press only after winning Iowa.

[saracat]

91. No. Lieberman was the DLC candidate. And you see how far

he got.

[saracat]

90. Baloney. Dean didn't even get the kids he so assiduously courted.

The university centers went almost 100% for Kerry in Iowa. They did NOT prefer Dean. Dean had the lead going into Iowa but when they actually listened to what he was saying they voted for Kerry . Many said Kerry personally convinced them. I find it interesting that you take it upon yourself to speak for the entire state of Iowa. Many Iowans I know would disagree with you.

[second edition]

38. Who says Kerry actually lost? He was ahead until the Bin Lauden tape.

I disagree totally with your assesment of weak. Kerry was a great choice and without the fear being put to people by the Rove machine he would be our President now.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

106. I think you're on the money per the OBL tape

Except Kerry could have turned it to his advantage if he used it to point out the fact that the * administration still hadn't got the man.

Still I wonder why so many on DU are fighting last years battle. "Oh we could have won if Dean, Kucinich, Sharpton...........had the nomination."

A large part why Bush won had to do with this petty assed in-fighting.

[eridani]

124. With all the speculation about election fraud--

--why doesn't anybody question whether or not the OBL tape was real? With modern audio engineering, it's perfectly possible to use an old visual back from when OBL was healthy and dub in a completely fabricated speech.

[Frances]

39. Do you mean that we should have rolled Ohio?

I don't think that's a logical statement given the fact that Ohio is so dominated by Republicans.

I read the poll and Clinton was ahead of Bush by only 2 points. What I see is that the Republican control of the media has been successful in marginializing anyone who stands up to the Republican philosophy of government.

I think Bush is in trouble because he has failed so miserably personally.

The poll shows that Reagan is the most popular by far of the presidents since Carter and we all know that Reagan and Bush have the same politics. The poll also shows that people trust the Red Cross more than the government which means that the Republicans have succeeded in making the people not want government to solve their problems.

Although I donated to the Red Cross for this crisis, I prefer the FDR model of Government. I think the Dems have a long way to go to get the public to accept that model again.

[lancdem]

58. I think the Reagan trouncing just shows

how much worse Bush is than he was. It's not really fair to compare polls of two Repub presidents against each other to polls of a Dem vs. a Repub. Hell, if I had to choose between Reagan and Chimpy, I'd take Reagan in a heartbeat.

[ClintonTyree]

76. Poor georgie........

he SO wanted to have a "legacy" like St. Ronnie's. Now, he'll be forever be referred to as "that mistake" or "worst president, ever".

[Frances]

80. But my point is that

Clinton leads by 2 points, Reagan by a landslide.

That shows that the public has bought into the MSM lies that Democratic political positions are not in their best interests.

I think that any objective criteria would show that the opposite is true. Dems have to find some way to get that message out into the public consciousness. Right now the internet is really the only way we can do it because the media is controlled by corporations whose best interests are served by the Republicans.

Even if the U.S. goes down, which it will if Repubs remain in control, the corporations will just move to another country and take over the government there, be it China or India or a European country. Right now corporations are the world's superpower, not the U.S. as a country.

[saracat]

42. Kerry WAS NOT a weak ass. Posts such as this make me wonder whether the

Dems actually deserve a good candidate. We are spectacularly ungrateful to those who sacrifice everything in their country's service! Kerry got more votes than any other presidential candidate in history , and it is still open to debate as to whether he won! His so called "loss' might better be explained by the Diebold machines and the corrupt election officials in Ohio, New Mexico , and Florida! This is a man, who campaigned through cancer treatment and put his own home in jeopardy to get the nomination! None of the other candidates on either side did such things and put themselves at personal risk AND No one since has been such an outspoken advocate for liberal issues. Kerry may not have been perfect. But no candidate is.Statements that degrade Kerry and his race are RW talking points that demoralize us and encourage us to eat our own. The Repukes NEVER demean their former candidates and often those people end up winning in a later race , such as Reagan! We could learn something from them on that point. If we don't respect ourselves, why should anyone else?

[napi21]

55. Here's the problems I had with Kerry.

"Voted for it before I voted against it". A plain There were many votes on the war. I voted for it when the bill included the $$ to pay for it. People would understand that!

What was his response when he was asked if he still would have voted for the war if he had known there weren't any WMD's? A simple NO would have done the trick, but he had to give a 5 sentence explaination.

I never said he lied! He didn't! But he doesn't seem capable of a short, understandable, and simple YES or NO. Sure some points need elaboration, AFTER the shorter answer that people can understand.

[sandnsea]

68. THAT was the ROVE CAMPAIGN

If people don't understand that stuff like that is nothing more than CAMPAIGNING, we will NEVER WIN. It's no different than the current "blame game" and the same Democrats who buy into ignorant shit like "voted for it bla bla" are buying into the Rovian bus nonsense too. What is it about PROPAGANDA that you don't understand!?!

[napi21]

77. I'm NOT% buying Rove's propaganda!

I anguished over those LONG answers from Kerry every time he was doing an interview! What makes a simple YES or NO Rove propaganda?

Most people lose interest and attention span when a response is more than a few words. I don't know why, but they do! Even reporters are shocked when a politician gives them a straight Yes or NO! Watch closely next time, only you're probably going to have to watch a long time because VERY FEW politicians ever are straight forward.

I agree with you on the "blame game" being a Rove plan, but it's NOT working! It's NOT working because too many people aren't buying it! They're pissed NOW and they want the answers NOW!

[karynnj]

83. If the press is working against you, there are NO questions

that can be answered yes or no. Think about it - both might be very bad. Kerry's answers were no longer than anyone else's in the primary debates.

[karynnj]

81. He did explain it simply many times - but the press continued asking and

The Republicans played the ad endlessly - The answer was simple and Kerry was right - he wanted it funded and he wanted oversight - 2 things in the first bill (which Bush threatened to veto) and not in the second. In fact, the comment that got Kerry in trouble came when he gave a nice detailed answer to a heckler, then when a few minutes later in the same event a 2nd heckler asked the same question, Kerry said in (regretable) shorthand - "I already answered that, I voted for ...."

It was the shorter answer that gave him the problem. He often gave good concise short answers. The press often took the worst Kerry response against the prepared best Bush reponse - not reporting much of what Kerry said and ignoring the constant inarticulateness of Bush

As to never saying he lied - you said you wanted someone more honest.

[Coastie for Truth]

104. Kerry had the same "problem" as Carter and Stevenson (1952, '56)

Too darn intelligent, too darn well informed, and too darn well read for the average voter, plus he assumed that the average voter really understands all of the myriad of votes taken on each and every amendment and report on each and every bill (especially an appropriations bill).

Let's face it - when you get past us bloggers and web site aficionados -- most voters neither know nor care about the policy wonk stuff and the minutiae of policy wonkism.

[Boomer]

65. He didn't win in the first place

I agree with much of your criticism of Kerry, but despite these drawbacks HE WON!

It wouldn't matter if we had a Democratic candidate blessed by God, unless God was willing to personally intervene on the next election day.

[fedupinBushcountry]

82. As you see it

One swing state Come on do you even know what went on , on election day in many states not just one.

Democratic ideals? Geez, I can't believe this crap, my God, Kerry has more Democratic ideals then you would ever know. To bad so many are quick to bash, but don't know a God damn thing about the man they are bashing.

Here is a post on Bush and it turns into a Kerry bashing. God when will people grow up and quit the bs, I've seen children get over losing better than some grown-ups on DU. Get over the damn primaries, and the pessimism. One big Democrat ideal is OPTIMISM, I see very little of it here from so called Democrats.

Screw the fucking polls, it is just a way to make people turn on Dems, all Dems not just a few. Fuck Zogby, fuck Gallup fuck all of them, for they do not speak for me, I don't have other people's opinions persuade me, I choose to think on my own, a very good Democrat ideal.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Griffy]

101. KERRY WON the election silly.. dont tell me you buy the lie?

it is amazing that people her on DU can still think bush won. Isnt it obvious yet? They rigged the system, and you cant prove bush won, and I cant PROVE Kerry won, yet somehow your default is to believe the official results! Electronic black-box paperless voting with closed source codes built by companies ALL supporting bush (Diebold builds ATM's yet the vote machines cant have paper... are you this guliable??) ... THIS is the number you default to... and it wasnt just Ohio, DO SOME READING.. EVERY precinct that had paperless voting had out of margin errors in favor of bush.. EVERY precinct!

Look.. I know its hard to understand.. no human wants to feel helpless, that we are in a dictatorship of sorts, no will of the people, since the coup of 2000 (remeber the supreme court selecting bush?!... then the HAVA that brought these companies in.. ) We are NOT helpless, we can and WILL stand up and stop this, ONCE ENOUGH PEOPLE KNOW!! the media keeps them sleeping and distracted (look.. Aruba) But word is spreading, truth is creeping in, and this disaster will only serve to wake up more Americans to the lies we are fed daily (like saddam attacked us on 911 and had WMDs, the war is going good, the economy is great...and bush won the election)

and BTW, Kerry was mealymouthed and too intellectual for most of the nation, but he won.
WAKE UP.. please...

[Trevelyan]

105. The Green Party Recount site still has the archives of the almost daily

attempt to do an audit by the Green Party. Rep. Conyers had asked people to urge Kerry to sign on to the next stage of the lawsuit over the obstruction of the vote and the obstruction of the recount.

New Mexico which was to be next in the recount started destroying their voting material though legally it is to be kept for 2 years after an election and I believe several other states did the same.

Bev Harris of Blackbox voting caught on video a trash bag filled with some type of tapes that would have helped to prove that Florida was fixed. There are some things that can be audited such as sign in sheets of the names of voters which are supposed to be in different handwriting. I think several states destroyed them though the Greens tried to prevent it and both Bev Harris and Theresa Kerry with her remarks about fixing the motherboard which got everyone's hopes up a few months ago that Kerry was still really fighting behind the scenes.

Bev Harris gives a more technical explanation of how the investigation can find vote rigging.

Iowa stopped counting on selection nite because their workers were exhausted, someone on Kerry's blog asked why they didn
t have a second shift on this night which only comes every four years. It took 3 days for Iowa to cook the black box and announce that bush had won. So many discrepancies, in 2000 also I think Greg Palast.com worked with Bev and uncovered quite a bit.

A number of newspapers like the (old Management) Washington Post and Wall Street Journal pooled their resouces and hired an independent firm to audit the vote and they proved beyond a doubt that even with the voter purging and ballots thrown away, that Al Gore won but by the time they were to announce it there was the atrocities of 911 and it got pushed to the background. The pdf file of this independent audit paid for by newspapers was on the Green Party Recount site when they were trying to audit Ohio (Conyers has either a free download or a bound book with foreword by Gore Vidal of his ad-hoc hearing on Ohio, 103 pages WHAT WENT WRONG IN OHIO) visit his website or Conyers Blog. Rep. Conyers is still pursuing the election fraud in Ohio and a number of the officials that helped disenfranchise voters are in court because of this and other fraud and embezzlement schemes in Ohio.)

[indepat]

95. No doubt he would: a 41% approval-rating says an awful lot about an

awful lot of people and 41% would make it close enough to again steal the election IMHO.

[terip64]

2. Thank you for posting this

[flakey_foont]

3. I find it hard to accept that it is even that high

his base will remain solid.....but 41 percent does seem a little high....

[MADem]

14. I never believed that 90 percent bullshit after 911, either

What, were we ten percenters all hiding out in Massachusetts????

[karynnj]

23. At least some of us were in NJ and NY

[Arugula Latte]

24. Well, most people I know here in Portland continued to despise him

through 9-11, because we knew the truth about that jackass.

[Bumblebee]

35. Their WH "internal" polls are apparently lower

but 30-35% is probably his base which he would lose only if he does not nominate another radical consevative for the Supreme Court.

[buff2]

4. But the whore media will continue to use the CNN/USA Gallup poll

where it props the idiot up.

[Mark E. Smith]

5. Mr. Popularity

Reduced to scuttling around disaster areas looking for someone to take the blame for his disasters.

One wretched fucking president.

[Coventina]

6. Still way too high in my opinion. 40% of us are idiots, apparently.

:eyes:

His approval rating should be 1%, because that's the proportion of the populace that actually benefit from his policies.

[alarcojon]

17. And even some of them would vote against him

because he is screwing everyone else.

[leveymg]

28. Statistically, 50% have IQs in the double-digits. Correlation perhaps?

[ClintonTyree]

78. And 90% of people surveyed........

believe that they are "of above average intelligence". :eyes: You can't make shit like this up.

[BlueJac]

9. Unreal........

that is lower than I thought........he is doing a heck of a job for us all, we should be damn proud!! He need a brownie

:puke::puke: :sarcasm::sarcasm::puke::puke:

[Kolesar]

10. Santorum is dead meat

Dewine--dead meat. Blackwell and Petro--dead meat.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

21. chertoff dead meat. brownie, dead meat

cheney-

man, just saw him on MSNBC, with his fangs sharpened as he heads down to NOLA. There is no aura of anything decent or honorable.

If there was anyone in office I feared, it would be he.

[ToolTex]

34. And Woodward says he will he the next rethug candidate.

Which with Diebold means he is going to be the next POTUS!

Run! Run away! Run away very fast! Run for your friggin life!

[bee]

11. "WOULD lose" Ha.. no kidding

he DID lose. TWICE.

[defiant1]

13. LoL...

:rofl:

Burn!

[DeepModem Mom]

16. Look at this! Disapproval on EVERY issue, except close on terror --

War on terror: 52% positive, 47 negative.
Taxes: 40 positive, 59 negative.
War in Iraq: 40 positive, 59 negative.
Foreign policy: 39 positive, 59 negative.
Jobs and the economy: 38 positive, 61 negative.
Hurricane Katrina: 36 positive, 60 negative.
Environment: 36 positive, 60 negative.
Education: 39 positive, 59 negative.
Social Security and Medicare: 31 positive, 67 negative.
Healthcare: 30 positive, 67 negative.
Gas prices: 21 positive, 73 negative.

[BrklynLiberal]

29. The only thing that seems to really get to people is GAS PRICES !!!!

How utterly disgusting!!!!!!!!
And even 21% is ridiculously higher than a sane nation should be willing to accept!

[sandnsea]

71. Take out terrorism, it's 31% positive

Which is probably much closer to the truth, at least it makes me feel better.

I still do not understand what it is people think Bush is doing about terrorism. Is it just because he's willing to use the military to kill people, any people? :shrug:

[iconoclastic cat]

18. It doesn't matter, because Bush is the Postmodern President.

[blm]

75. Because Bush is the Post - Diebold President.

.

[distantearlywarning]

19. Diebold = Mandate.

And even if that weren't true, we still have no Democratic leadership worth giving money to.

I think a sock puppet could win against almost any Republican right now, as long as said sock puppet actually stood for something. And many of the Democrats seem to be having trouble finding their manhood (womanhood). 1/2 the failure here is ours for not presenting any good alternative to the evil Bush empire. It's really damn sad, actually.

[Mz Pip]

22. So what?

He's in office. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks of him anymore. He gets to pick judges, go on vacation, pick some more judges, go on vacation, continue his dirty little war, go on vacation.

People had their chance - twice - to prevent this but there the moron sits.

Message to those who supported him: You asked for it, you got it. Bend over.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[progressoid]

26. Yeah, I keep coming back to that too.

[Autonomy]

33. Presidential approval is the best indicator of which way

the wind is blowing. As midterm elections approach, if Bush is still doing this poorly, the Republican Congress could very well jettison him. It's possible, maybe not probable.

[Dulcinea]

97. Agreed.

But I still think Katrina will be his undoing.

A calamity on a grand scale, plus high gas prices, that he is doing nothing about.

[Bumblebee]

32. a new CBS poll is out too

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/08/opinion/polls/main824591.shtml

bad numbers on Katrina but still at 42% overall

[lancdem]

60. His overall rating can still go lower

and I suspect it will. We have Plame indictments coming.

[Gregorian]

36. All this shows is there are a lot of stupid Americans still.

The I'd-rather-fight-than-switch mentality. Those who want a macho man. Even if it's phoney. Even Hitler had followers to the day of his death and after. It's almost meaningless except to show that we will never be one, as long as we are in our present form of life. What a shame. This poll only makes one realize that with the types of people who think the way they do, we will have more wars; The poor will be ignored; Preparation for the future will not be a priority.

[saigon68]

53. SHEEP THEY ARE ALL RUSTIC SHEEP

[Mass]

44. Idiotic poll - most polls have a lot of undecided

How can people be undecided between Bush and Clinton, Bush and Carter?

BTW, those bashing Kerry in this thread can see that his number is higher than Clinton, and that given the probable MOE of this poll, the results are clearly similar.

[second edition]

46. Kerry's polling # is actually better than Clinton's

and the gap between Bush and Kerry has been closing on every poll since January. Considering he is the only person on the list who is not a former or current President, I think this is positive and will get better.

[Mass]

48. This poll is meaningless anyway

It will be used on DU by the traditionnal Kerry bashers, and in the freeper's world, it will be used to show that BUsh does not fair that bad against recent Democrats. Except that, it has no value whatsoever.

And given the MOE, both Kerry and Clinton are in fact tied with Bush.

My only wonder: how can so many people not choose?

I missed that one: "likely voters" - How can there be likely voters on an election that does not exist. Ask real question and you will be answered.

In a recent FOX poll (pre Katrina) Kerry was beating Bush on economy and tied on Iraq.

[second edition]

51. Thanks for the information on the Fox poll! n/t

[karynnj]

70. These results are weird

The % of people choosing in some match ups is as low as 75%. The Kerry/Bush one is the highest response at 95%. The most fascinating thing to me is that CARTER does better than Clinton!

I would guess that Zogby used a question of who did you vote for in 2004 and then used it to get a stratified sample estimate for the reported resuts. Closer to the election (if nothing had happened yet - ie no Fallujah), this might be usefull to normalize the result. At this point, some of the Bush voters now having misgivings will self report themselves as Kerry voters. (This happened with McGovern/Nixon - with many people lying that they didn't vote for Tricky Dick).

[eridani]

126. No surprise about Carter

He's easily the best ex-president of the 20th century. People are thinking of all the post-presidential good deeds as well as his overly micromanaged presidency.

[karynnj]

63. Also, he is having to overcome a 26 + million dollar slime campaign

If he can continue to show people that he is who he said he is and that the Republicans lied, he will win back some people. Also, if there are people who voted just on abortion - this (sadly) won't be as much an issue as the SC will already be set.

There are also likely to be Bush voters who now realize that Bush was bad who are absolving themselves by saying Kerry was worse. As the first step was denial that Bush was bad, this is progress. A later step, for some will be claiming to have voted for Kerry. (If Zogby normalized to get these results - some of the real Bush voters who now would vote Kerry were likely placed in the Kerry population. This would mean Kerry is probably equal or ahead in reality. Zogby did normalize his sample in the regular polls.) With McGovern, as they continued to poll - like here- a pollster actually started to get results that if accurate would have given him several extra states.

[savemefromdumbya]

54. OK, who are these 41%?

Who do they ask to get 41%?

[savemefromdumbya]

56. OK, who are these 41%?

Who do they ask to get 41%?

[Lasher]

73. Likely voters

The Zogby article says they asked likely voters, which means their survey respondents would have been more conservative than the US population in general. See, we Democrats don't get out and vote like the Republicans do. Shame on us! Get out and vote next year!! :applause:

[Joe Chi Minh]

62. I don't understand why

so many of you seem unable to grasp that these polls are political tools, precisely for the purpose of a) shaping the opinons of the American public, and b) damage limitation.

They are certain to significantly understate Junior's unpopularity and act as a self-fulfilling prophecy; since unworldly people tend to want to follow the herd, and will say to themselves, "Gee, he's not that unpopular, whatever they say".

[420inTN]

64. Big Deal, It's not like he can run again, or like we can have a recall. nt

[marmar]

66. Who are these 41 percent...

that anyone would profess to approving of his performance right now is mind-boggling.

:shrug:

[UpInArms]

67. CBS Poll:

http://ca.today.reuters.com/PrinterFriendlyPopup.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=uri:2005-09-08T162743Z_01_BAU471101_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-KATRINA-COL.XML

excerpt:

A CBS News poll said 65 percent Americans thought Bush was too slow to respond to the disaster and 58 percent disapproved of his performance. Large majorities said federal, state and local officials all acted too slowly.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, scorched by criticism of its performance, had planned to hand out $2,000 debit cards -- $100 million worth in total -- to thousands of survivors, but they too were being delayed.

<snip>

The situation "amounts to a massive institutional failure," said Raymond Offenheiser, president of the Oxfam America affiliate of the international relief agency. Oxfam mounted the first domestic U.S. rescue in its 35-year history in Mississippi.

"Before Katrina, we reserved our emergency response for countries that lack the resources of the United States. If we've got this kind of failure at home, how can we expect poor countries to do better?" he asked.

There were signs of impatience from federal officials as well -- theirs was directed at news coverage of the disaster. FEMA has excluded journalists from recovery expeditions and asked them to not take pictures of the dead, drawing protests from press-freedom advocates.

...more...

[ClintonTyree]

69. My god, some people are stupid...........

The "war on terror" a positive response of 52%, 47% negative.
The "war in Iraq" a positive response of 40%, 59% negative.
"Foreign Policy" a positive response of 39%, 59% negative.

:wtf: The "war on terror" IS the "war in Iraq", it IS "foreign policy". How the hell can they say he's good at the "war on terror" when he SUCKS at the other two? Are these fucking people total morons or what?

Yeah, he's SO freaking good at the "war on terror" but he can't seem to handle any of the other components that MAKE UP the "war on terror". Sweet Jesus, Americans have their heads up their asses! :grr:

[demo dutch]

94. Some? I say the majority!

[The Animator]

79. I'd like to know how Bush would fair against less recent Presidents

G Washington 80% Bush 20%

T Jefferson 65% Bush 35% (Bush's 35% against Jefferson is due to smear campain, and push polling about the possibility of Jefferson having a black baby out of wedlock.)

A Lincholn 75% Bush 25%

FD Roosevelt 70% Bush 30%

JF Kennedy 85% Bush 15%

R Nixon 55% Bush 45% (Nixon being the lesser of two evils)

A Hitler 25% Bush 25% (Oddly enough, half of those polled in this survey would not vote for either candidate, Republicans however were split evenly.)

[kansasblue]

87. And just like Rasummsen it's easy to overlook the strong...

the strong negative ratings.


41% approve

ok... 37% say poor!

lump all the positives together and they just beat the lowest rating that Zogby offers.

[daydreamer]

88. 41% is too high for the criminal Bush

Time to arrest him.

[tom_paine]

96. Lucky for the Busheviks the Imperial Subjects of Amerika don't get a vote

At least not for National Leader (we may still get to choose our own dogcatchers).

Whoever the Busheviks select to keep the chair warm between Emperors George and Jeb, will BE Emperor.

[Nothing Without Hope]

99. That's close to the popularity of ADOLPH HITLER:

I always thought, reading the crummy and biased history books in school, that Hitler was wildly popular in Germany in his heyday. Not true. Despite massive campaigns, his popularity never rose above about 40%. If someone wants a link for this I'll get one, but it's common knowledge in Europe. It's historical fact.

[ignatius 2]

108. You know what is scary, 4.1 of every 10 people you see is

either totally brain dead or a callous son of a bitch.

[Tight_rope]

110. I give them credit for being "BOTH"

[Tight_rope]

109. I want to know who are the dumbasses who are still "Approving"?

Let's see you have the corrupt administration, most of Congress, and the top 1% who are rich (should include corporate america's CEO's, CFO's, COO's, Presidents' and VP....and a few secretaries that are screwing them. Oh...and the wives and children of them)....but I believe that would be maybe 12% - 18% of the US. So who are the rest.

[AtlantaGirlyGirl]

112. Those who won't admit they're wrong

[lakeguy]

113. how the F is he still above 40%

guess ANYONE can claim to be a leader these days and fool almost half the sheeple.

[TankLV]

114. Great news! Now kick him while he's down - hard!

And then drive a stake thru his heart and sever the head!

I don't ever want these creatures to come back to life ever again!

[ignatius 2]

120. And spread like a ton of garlic around just for good

measure..You know with these blood sucking ghouls you can never be too careful.

[laureloak]

117. It should be lower than that! Who are the 41% idiots?

[Iris]

122. I'd bet 20% are the folks who get all their news from talk radio.

And not from our side of the dial!

[high density]

121. But still tied with John Kerry

It's sad that the right-wing talking points have stuck to Kerry so badly.

[Meldread]

125. Need to hit him where he is strong: Terrorism.

Democrats need to hit him where he is strongest and erode him there. It isn't hard to draw a parallel between Katrina and what would happen during a terrorist attack. Connect the dots for the brain dead Americans. Get every Dem out there on that talking point and repeat it over and over again. Then say stuff like, "America has changed after Katrina."

Do whatever you can to erode images of 9/11 from American minds and replace it with poor children, dying of thirst and starvation, all because of one man - failure from the top down.

[killbotfactory]

130. worst. president. ever.

we can't survive three more years of this idiot...

[DawnneOBTS]

131. These 41% should be...

sent to live in the rubble of what was New Orleans. Permanently. Especially the Superdome and the Convention Center.