Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reuters: Bush job rating hits record low in NBC/WSJ poll (29%)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Eugene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 09:46 PM
Original message
Reuters: Bush job rating hits record low in NBC/WSJ poll (29%)
Source: Reuters

Bush job rating hits record low in NBC/WSJ poll
Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:51PM EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush's approval
rating has dropped to 29 percent in an NBC News/Wall Street
Journal poll released on Wednesday, his lowest mark ever in
that survey, which also found only 23 percent approved of
the job Congress was doing.

Bush's approval rating slid 6 points from 35 percent in April,
NBC said, citing a decline in support within his own Republican
Party. Sixty-six percent said they disapproved of Bush's job
performance.

In the poll, 62 percent of Republicans approved of Bush's job
performance, down from 75 percent in April. Thirty-two
percent of Republicans in the latest poll disapproved of Bush's
performance, up from 21 percent in April.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1340797820070614
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PDJane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. I keep wondering why it's so high..........
When Cheney's is around 9% or so.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gato Moteado Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. approval rate less than 30%, an administration laden with scandal....
...a vp that commits treason on a daily basis, gas prices over $3 a gallon, foreclosures at an all time high, we're stuck in an unpopular war, the economy is shot....

remind me again...why is impeachment off the table?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Impeaching Bush means Cheney will be the Prez?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hart2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. That's why Cheney gets impeached first. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. will bush be able to appoint/choose another before he himslf gets impeached also?? ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hart2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. A new VP would need confirmation by BOTH houses of Congress.
There is no requirement for ether house to even hold a vote on such a nominee, since there is historical precedent to leave the VP office vacant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Thank you....then we should be looking for ways to Impeach ASAP
at the very least...A NO CONFIDENCE VOTE for our "CRONY PRESIDENT"

He is worse than "BROWNIE"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A wise Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. Cheney is already President
Do you think Bush has the brains to create all this mess alone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. The De Facto Prez who is the Veep? I buy that...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm not popping the champagne over that number
For a couple of reasons:

(1) He doesn't give a shit what his numbers are: he will continue to do whatever he wants for the next 18 months (besides immigration reform). And it won't be good.

(2) The numbers for Congress being even lower means, together with Bush's abysmal (and deserved) ratings, that people are simply fed up with government and politics altogether. That is not such a good sign. I canvassed door-to-door in New Hampshire in 2004 and encountered no small number of people who said: I'm not voting in the primary; no politician is going to do anything that is important to me; they're all the same. If that feeling has spread, it's a bad sign for democracy. It's also why we shouldn't be constantly bashing the Democratic Congress every time they fail to get the supermajority they need for something or another: it gives people that "they're all the same; government is hopeless" attitude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harlinchi Donating Member (954 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 10:55 PM
Response to Original message
6. Are they unable to cite his numbers without citing those of Congress, too?
Every recent report on his poll numbers also cite the approval numbers of Congress, usually within the same sentence!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 04:52 AM
Response to Original message
8. if Congress's numbers stay this low....
I smell a big THROW THE INCUMBENTS OUT surge brewing

The DEMS victories in the '06 midterms was largely because they promised a change...people are seeing pretty much more of the same

yes, there have been some small victories - however "We Don't Have the Votes" is not a good slogan for the '08 races
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC