Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

Bush Approval: Three new polls, Trend at 35.8%

Topics: George Bush

currentBushApproval20061015small.png

No time to write this up. Come back for that later. Bottom line: CNN at 36%, Gallup and Zogby at 37%. Trend estimate falls to 35.8% This is a stunning decline that doesn't yet seem to have reached bottom. Can the White House do anything to stop it?

FourPanelApproval20061015small.png

Note: This entry is cross-posted at Political Arithmetik.

 

Comments
Aaron:

Can you say impeachment, anyone?

____________________

DJShay:

Is that spike towards the end of 2006 due to the 9/11 anniversary? Looks like it. But all the polls, at least visually, look to have Bush at a lower rating at the beginning of 2006. I don't ever remember him being below 38 or 39% before.

____________________

DJShay:

I just answered my own question. Bush at 34% in Feb of this year. The Dubai Ports fiasco. Isn't it amazing that that so many "mistakes" have occurred in his presidency that you can't keep track of them all?

____________________

I'd venture that the steep decline is Bush returning to the long-term trend line after being artificially pumped up by the 9/11 PR stunt. Perhaps it's happening a bit faster than before either because it's campaign season and more people are paying attention, or because the PR stunt had even less substance behind it than previous ones.

I'd like to think it's steep because people are belatedly realizing that he's trying to grab the power to wiretap everyone and "disappear" people, but I'm not that much of an optimist.

____________________

The War on Terrorism spike, if that is what is was, saw orchestrated speeches surrounding the September 11th anniversary given credibility by what was treated as a legitimate terrorism threat -- the so-called liquid bomb plot in England -- so rhetoric neatly matched breaking news.

Since then, the liquid bombs were exposed as being more of a fantasy than an full-fledged plot.

Furthermore, the President's rhetorical efforts to subsume Iraq into the overall War on Terrorism seem to have backfired. His positive image as GWoT leader has been tarred with the negative taint of role as Iraq C-in-C.

Maybe the White House should not have tried so hard to tie the two together. Bush himself told CBS' Katie Couric that connecting the two was "one of the hardest parts" of his job.

____________________

Eric Lowin:

I sincerely hope that IL DUBCE, our domestic version of Mussolini, continues to decline in the polls...but 30% is about rock bottom. That, after all, is roughly the percentage of people in Russian who still think Stalin was a great guy. Should the polls be correct and the Republicans lose the house and mayebe the Senate, can anyone say "subpeona power"? I hope Cheney has his bag packed because he is going to Leavenworth or, irony of ironies, Guantanamo!

____________________

Jerry Rosenswaike:

This is my initial prediction: Democrats win 39 House seats and 7 Senate seats--but just as important are the Governorships. That is good indicator for 2008 election. Look, Republicans may be arrogant, hypocritical and cynical--but they are not totally stupid. If they go into 2008 with 140,000 tropps in Irag--or even 100,000 troops--they will not only lose presidency but lose another 30 House seats and 5 Senate seats. They are not that foolish. No republican (McCain, Guilani, Romney) wants to run on four more years of Iraq! That means the Demorats better decide to stand FOR SOMETHING.

____________________

southern democrat:

Standing "for something" becomes much easier for the Democrats after November. First off, they will control at least one house of congress, and able to set a legislative calendar. Second, they will have a presidential primary forced to the front of the political picture. No real difference in division, but a difference in the perception of division. Instead of Democrats having no plan, we'll have competing democrats with different plans. We'll also have competing republicans with different plans, most opposed to the sitting president, creating greater perceived division in the republican party.

____________________

QWQ:

Survey USA: 50-State Tracking Poll
(released 10/17)

Bush's weighted average:

37, down from 39 last month.

____________________

EKL:

And yet Bush & Rove remains very positive regarding the midterms. Could it have something to do with the Saddam verdict scheduled to be announced two days before the election?

Perhaps their optimism reflects the fact that when you control Diebold, polls don't matter.

____________________

emh:

Charles, can you help me understand why you use some polls but not others? Are there methodological, historical or other reasons?

Thank You

____________________

Nadia :

Personally, I think that Rove/Bush are so optimistic not based on an analytical study of the information about what's going to happen, but they're saying these things to inspire their political volunteers. If Rove was to say the GOP is in huge trouble, it would really demoralize their volunteer operations and base, and that's their last hope right now.

____________________

emh-- When I first started tracking approval in September 2005, I included all national approval polls from conventional phone surveys that I could find complete data for. I've since included Rasmussen and SurveyUSA's IVR polls in the database but have not wanted to add them to the data I display without a thorough analysis of how IVR polling compares to conventional phone. That analysis has been much slower in coming than I'd like-- partly due to waiting for more data to accumulate (unavoidable) and partly because I've been a little busy (with co-creating Pollster.com, among other things!)

I also hesitated to introduce new polls into the approval trend in the midst of the campaign, lest it appear I was adding polls to support some preference for the results (either way.) This has kept me from adding ARG's national polling which I've only recently acquired (thanks to the help of ARG's Dick Bennett). As it happens, ARG doesn't change the current approval estimate, but I decided to wait until November 8 before adding them in.

So the polls I include are a mix of methodological preference and the accident of what happened to be available when I started. After the election I'll finally do that IVR vs phone comparison and then decide whether to include Rasmussen and SurveyUSA in the trend estimate, and certainly add ARG.

If there are other omissions to my list of polls, I'd be delighted to know about them. The more data the happier I am. More analysis to do!

Charles

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR