Poll: Bush approval rating hits all-time low in New York (29% approval)

[sabra]

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--bush-newyork1005oct05,0,1440881,print.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork


Poll: Bush approval rating hits all-time low in New York

ALBANY, N.Y. -- President Bush's job approval rating has hit an all-time low in New York with just 29 percent of New York voters giving him favorable marks, a statewide poll reported Wednesday.

Sixty-seven percent of those polled by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute disapproved of how the Republican president was handling his job.

Bush's approval rating was at 35 percent among New York voters in an August poll from the Hamden, Conn.-based polling institute and was at 39 percent in December of last year just after he had won a second term. The president's all-time high approval rating in heavily Democratic New York state _ 82 percent _ came in November of 2001, just two months after the terrorist attacks that brought down the World Trade Center towers in Manhattan.

Another statewide poll out last week from Marist College's Institute for Public Opinion also pegged Bush's job approval rating at a new low _ 33 percent _ among New York voters.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

1. It's only NY, but,

you just made my day.

Thank you.

[0007]

17. I'll second that.

Usually New York sets the tone for the nation after first getting a taste from London. 29% is still a tad high. But that is with out the 7.5% fudge factor.

[Mad_Dem_X]

26. New York RULES! nt

[napi21]

2. That's funny! It is however NY! There should be some national

polls soon too. I'll be interested to see the avg. of those!

[Smarmie Doofus]

3. Truly a paradox, since Mayor Bloomberg....

republican, war supporter and HUGE $$$$ supporter of Bush is heavily favored to win reelection.

If DEMS were smart, they'd exploit Bush's unpopularity more energetically and effectively.

Believe me, if the situation were reversed that's exactly what the GOP would be doing.

[EFerrari]

5. So, that that mean that these New Yorkers are

Yankuglicans?!

[Smarmie Doofus]

6. Well, I think it means that if NYC DEMS....

don't get real soon... and ditch the silly campaign they are running so far... good things are going to continue to happen to bad people.

And vice versa.

[alcibiades_mystery]

8. Bloomberg is benefitting from a lowered crime rate

(although there is an uptick since the Clinton/Giuliani years) and from the fact that nothing major has happened during his first term.

You have to understand the NYC memory: the last three mayors all had major issues during their tenures - corruption and outrageous crime sprees during the Koch years, race riots and crime during the Dinkin's years (fueled not in small part by the crack epidemic which has subsided as territories and markets stabilized) and police brutality scandals and racist administration during the Giuliani years. In comparison, the Bloomberg years have been pretty mild. Nothing. Really. Happened. There's hesitancy to throw someone new in the mix (especially a machine boss and political opportunist like Ferrer) when things seem to be rolling at low intensity. Bloomberg may be a self-serving and puritanical prick, but he's almost harmless.

[Smarmie Doofus]

16. You again! Curse you . I replied this AM to your...

post yesterday on the same subject.

I don't get the "machine boss" part. See my morning post.

They are ALL opportunists. Especially Bloomberg.

Bloomberg's tenure has been mild? Well, not really. The *perception* of it is that it is mild.

Harmless? Don't tell that to that to the people beaten up by B's cops at the UN, are looking for a decent place to live on an income below 80,000 dollars per year, use the public schools (they suck... and they suck MORE than they did before, all the incessant propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding.) or want to get a permit to exercise their freedom of assembly and speech... even if it involves expressing opinions B doesn't share.

You are correct: things "seem to be rolling along at a low intensity". *Seem* to be. 5 billion dollars can buy that sort of press. Especially since the commercial media is comfy with him anyway.

[alcibiades_mystery]

20. Yeah, minor issues on protests are really gonna shape city politics

Weird stuff.

The income stuff is of course quite real, as is gentrification in general. Firefighters can't afford the Brooklyn neighborhoods they grew up in. True. And Ferrer is gonna change this how?

The very fact that you have to pull out obscure protest news as you major assault on Bloomberg shows just how bankrupt the current Dem campaign in NYC really is. Here's a clue: few people care. People do care about gentrification and the public schools, but you've yet to demonstrate the problem, much less a solution. This is why Bloomberg will win easily. You have no case of of brokenness (except the protest stuff, which again, nobody cares about), and if it ain't broke...

I'm telling you how most New Yorkers will react, and why Bloomberg is a shoe in at this point. Not that I'd vote for the fucker.

[Smarmie Doofus]

23. What a pessimist. Of course the likelihood is that....

Bloomberg will win a second term. However it is somewhat short of inevitable. And to the extent that it is inevitable, we can credit a misperception of reality, as opposed to the reality itself.

Ferrer can *begin* to change the now historic ( under Bloomberg) housing crunch by acknowledging that there *is* one. Bloomberg has yet to do even this.

Other points:

Re. "protest news"... getting knocked out of your wheelchair or trampled by cops on horses may seem minor to you and the NY POST but it surely is more than minor to people who are knocked and trampled. The fact that the media didn't blow up these and other examples of police abuse during the Bloomberg era ( similar to the way the Crown Heights riot and Diallo was used to sensationalize police misconduct during the Dinkens and Giuliani eras) does NOT mean they were less significant. It means only that the media... for whatever reason... chose to backburner them. In fact, they were MORE significant, in that they hinted at the totalitarian instincts of the police department and its supervisor.

Re. Brokeness: I really need to demonstrate that the schools and housing are problems that need fixing? You're kidding with that one, I hope?

[jwcomer]

27. I'll be proudly voting for Bloomy again

Look PaulHo,

If we had had Dem in charge, NYC would have been run the same as our federal government is being run. Nothing better than a moderate RINO in charge of NYC. There is no doubt in my mind that with a Dem mayor the city would be in a very deep fiscal hole right now. Bloomberg owed nobody and as a consequences he was able to make smart decisions that, yes, pissed off a lot of people. Good for him. It was what NYC needed. Besides we all know he isn't a real Republican. The alternative to another four years of Boomberg scares me. Why fix what ain't broke. Its like Virginians wanting to bring in a Republican governor when their current system is working great. Or like the US electing bush over gore when the current system was working great. Keeping the devil you know is usually sound advice.

-Walton

[aquart]

21. He re-organized city response with 311.

It's been effective. If he hadn't championed the stadium, he would be looking very sweet.

A Manhattan stadium was a moronic idea. And we never wanted the Olympics. It will be years before we feel like painting a target on our backs like that. The rich guys made a huge mistake pimping the Olympics to a city this scarred.

I actually like Bloomberg. I'm voting for a man I believe will be less effective, his opponent, though.

[belle]

15. While I don't love Bloomberg, he really isn't much like Bush

And has come out against various of his policies and positions publically on several occasions.

[Smarmie Doofus]

18. He's about as much like Bush as he can afford to be....

and still be electable in NYC. Example: he says he's pro-choice and against Roberts. But who donated more $$$ to Bush '04 than anyone else in the USA? Bloomberg.

He didn't realize that Bush, if reelected with Bloomeberg's $, was going to appoint an anti-choice jurist to the Supreme Court?

Come on, now.

[jwcomer]

28. there a good reason for the bloody donations

Yes, Bloomberg donated a lot to Bush. Its called payola. I hate it myself, I doubt Bloomberg cared much for it either. But I have zero doubt that he did this not to get Bush reelected but rather as political quid pro quo in order to help the city that he cares deeply about.

No one is perfect but he has done precisely those things which I voted for him to do:
1) He kept the city from going bankrupt.
2) His presence was a big reassurance to big business in the post-911 city. I have no doubt that this and his strong relationships in the financial sector had a positive impact on the local economy over the last 4 years.
3) He has made more progress in education than I expected given the systematic problems in NYC.
4) He curried favor with the Albany and DC governments to get a lot of assistance. Maybe not everything which was promised but more than a Dem would have pulled off.
5) He hasn't made anything worse than what he started with.

That's a pretty good record in my book. He isn't perfect. I don't approve of all his decisions (particularly the west side stadium and the Olympics stuff.) But I have a lot of respect for the man. And as a citizen of NYC, he's earned my vote.

-Walton

I know this isn't a very kosher view for DU. But I've never cared much for dogma.

[Ishoutandscream2]

4. Damn! I might have to move to New York

They sure aren't drinking the koolaide up there!

[Straight Shooter]

7. I would have thought it would be in the 18% range.

29 percent seems kind of high for a state that suffered the LIHOP/MIHOP casualties of someone who needed a new Pearl Harbor.

edit because my mind is only in first gear this morning

[Kber]

9. State wide poll figures in upstate

which accounts for the higher #

In NYC, I'd expect single digits. Low single digits.

[Straight Shooter]

11. Even so, 29% seems high; only 13% lower than so-called average.

Zogby has bush at about 42-43% approval rating. I just can't wrap my mind around that he isn't at, like, 3% approval.

Thanks for the clarification.

[The_Casual_Observer]

10. With 3 miserable years to go it, will hit the mid teens.

[bemildred]

12. Race to the bottom with Toledo in Peru.

Who can hit 5% first?

[lovuian]

13. I think those polls will even plummet when they get their heating

Bills!!!

Poor Northerners!!! Poor Americans 33% is still to high!!!

[Joey Liberal]

14. Great news for Hillary

Hillary will win in a landslide.

[NYC Liberal]

30. The last poll had Hillary getting reelected 64-28 percent.

So yup, landslide ;)

[piecewisey]

19. not surprising!

New Yorkers know what's happening in this country - maybe better than a lot of other areas...

[newyawker99]

25. Hi piecewisey!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[0007]

22. bttft

[GetTheRightVote]

24. Q: Will the rest of the country follow in NY steps ?

I hope they do.

:kick:

[fujiyama]

29. If it's that low statewide

I can only imagine how low it is in NYC itself. My guess is it's around 10%.