Barely half say Bush should be re-elected

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3960306/

Barely half of Americans say President Bush deserves to be re-elected, but they are even less enthusiastic about his Democratic challengers, any one of whom he would overwhelm if the election were held today, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

The poll found that 42 percent believe the president does not deserve to return to office, compared with 51 percent who think he does.

The president’s assessment tracks almost exactly with public perceptions of the U.S. war in Iraq — 52 percent said the campaign to remove President Saddam Hussein from power was worth the casualties and cost, while 40 percent said it was not.

[Born Free]

1. I know a lot of disappointed republicans these days

There are a lot of good republicans, unfortunately, they are not the ones in control today. I believe the "good" republicans will turn away from the bush team. It's a tough decision for them, they know their party has the control , but they also know the ones leading their party are wrong. When they are together and under peer pressure they talk party but alone they express doubts. Fortunately, we are all alone in the voting booth.
Democrats need to be strong, they need to continue putting America's needs before their own desires, and enough good republicans will join us to start getting America back on the right track.

[slor]

2. Still too many...

considering all the evidence that shows his incompetence!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. I think the traditional GOP is finally waking up

because they realize what Bush is doing isn't following the conservative ideal of balancing the budget. They are worried about the erosion of their rights in the Patriot Acts. And they hate the intrusion of government into their lives. They realize that the neocons don't have their interests at heart.

If I lived in NH, I'd be campaigning for two people-my Democrat candidate and John Buchanan, the Republican who is running against Bush.

[cthrumatrix]

3. wait til the media gets it going again --- ooops they have---they like

gep and kerry vs the king

[dusty64]

5. I'm sorry, I

find it hard to believe that more people think he should be elected now than actually voted for him in 2000. What has he possibly done that would convince citizens of that? Considering the source I remain optimistic.

[rustydog]

6. The headline should read: barely half of Republicans

say Bush* should be re-elected.

[warrior1]

7. and this is

based on being a complete failure at ever thing he's done. And he wants to go the moon. Shit. I'll bet he'd managed to fuck this up too.

[reprobate]

17. I'd be quite happy to send him to the moon. One way.

[underpants]

8. 9 person debates and no ONE candidate and message W gets 51%

When there is a nominee/ticket and their message is the same one over and over and over we will see W go back to his maximum number which is 47% just like in 2000.

Time and pressure time and pressure people.

[maddogesq]

10. On target!

You are exactly right. When that big field narrows down (which has begun with Bruan dropping away), the media will have to cover more "on message" issue stuff, rather than the "bickering and fighting" coverage we have gotten lately. I do hope Sharpton stays in it for awhile, because he is a tremendous spark and motivator to the people that feel hopeless and left out. It will be a 3-4 way race before long.

[RamboLiberal]

12. I feel the opposite on Sharpton right now

He's being a sideshow and actually hurting the candidates - especially Dean. That was a cheap stunt IMHO during the debate about Dean's cabinet makeup in Vermont.

[TreasonousBastard]

11. Yup...

historically, people tend to support the incumbant, and the numbers are actually pretty low for Shrub at this point, if they are indeed accurate.

As things heat up, and a (hopefully) unified Democratic message gets out where people actually see the alternative, Shrub's numbers may go down significantly.

I'll forebear naming any names, but we really should be thinking about nominating someone who Republicans will feel comfortable voting for. Many of them are our allies this time.

[underpants]

13. Will W be able to take August off? (if not watch for the temper)

We seem to forget that W himself is known to have quite the temper and if he can't take a month off (he probably will take a full month of campaigning what else is he going to do? Order cheeseburgers?) we may see his anger flair up.

[lancdem]

14. Good post

Makes me feel better. Thanks for putting it in perspective.

[kentuck]

9. And 16 percent of Democrats are included in that number...

Who should be able to be persuaded otherwise with a little truth-telling and some facts. Will those 16% vote for Bush? That is another question entirely. Almost 60% of Independents are included in those numbers also. It is doubtful that all those would vote for Bush if the election were today. I would be very worried if I were the Repubs. I don't see that much to be enthused about in those numbers.

[F-5]

15. 52% of the people who said the campaign to remove Saddam

from power was worth the casualties......if only those 52% knew that the main reason we went into Iraq was to get WMDs...not Saddam. They should also know that we went there because of that whole "imminent threat" bullshit.

Some people need to be educated. :eyes:

[Mechatanketra]

16. Don't confuse the label with the package.

I suspect for the vast majority of the war supporters, this was about Saddam. "WMDs" and "imminent threat" were buzzwords to stall other nations with doubt so no one would get the bright idea to try defending Iraq. But for Joe Sixpack, this was about getting to hit "reset" on Desert Storm and play it over so we could get a better score -- and the GOP knew it.

The Nuremburg principles are dead where American soil is concerned. Joe Sixpack just doesn't seem to believe starting a war is inherently bad anymore -- just losing them.