PDA

View Full Version : Republican Right abandoning Bush


electriclite
05-05-2006, 03:51 PM
You know you're in trouble when your own people have beef with you.

Republicans abandoning the President (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12643666/)


Republican right abandoning Bush
45 percent of self-described conservatives disapprove of president


WASHINGTON - Angry conservatives are driving the approval ratings of President Bush and the GOP-led Congress to dismal new lows, according to an AP-Ipsos poll that underscores why Republicans fear an Election Day massacre.

Six months out, the intensity of opposition to Bush and Congress has risen sharply, along with the percentage of Americans who believe the nation is on the wrong track.

The AP-Ipsos poll also suggests that Democratic voters are far more motivated than Republicans. Elections in the middle of a president’s term traditionally favor the party whose core supporters are the most energized.

The poll, conducted by the international polling firm Ipsos, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points, larger for subgroups.

This week’s survey of 1,000 adults, including 865 registered voters, found:

Just 33 percent of the public approves of Bush’s job performance, the lowest of his presidency. That compares with 36 percent approval in early April. Forty-five percent of self-described conservatives now disapprove of the president.

-Just one-fourth of the public approves of the job Congress is doing, a new low in AP-Ipsos polling and down 5 percentage points since last month. A whopping 65 percent of conservatives disapprove of Congress.

-A majority of Americans say they want Democrats rather than Republicans to control Congress (51 percent to 34 percent). That’s the largest gap recorded by AP-Ipsos since Bush took office. Even 31 percent of conservatives want Republicans out of power.

-The souring of the nation’s mood has accelerated in the past three months, with the percentage of people describing the nation on the wrong track rising 12 points to a new high of 73 percent.

-Six of 10 conservatives say America is headed in the wrong direction.

GOP analyst cites concerns

Republican strategists said the party stands to lose control of Congress unless the environment changes unexpectedly.

“It’s going to take some events of significance to turn this around,” GOP pollster Whit Ayres said. “I don’t think at this point you can talk your way back from those sorts of ratings.”

He said the party needs concrete progress in Iraq and action in Congress on immigration, lobbying reform and tax cuts.

“Those things would give the country a sense that Washington has heard the people and is responding in a way that will give conservatives a sense that their concerns are being addressed,” Ayres said.

Conservative voters blame the White House and Congress for runaway government spending, illegal immigration and lack of action on social issues such as a constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage. Those concerns come on top of public worries about Iraq, the economy and gasoline prices.

Candice Strong, a conservative from Cincinnati, said she backed Bush in 2004, “but I don’t agree with the way he’s handling the war and the way he’s handling the economy. I think he should have pulled our troops out of Iraq.”

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Art/USNEWS/060505/AP_BushPoll.gif

Who’s motivated to vote?
Hard-line conservatives are not likely to vote Democratic in the fall, but it would be just as devastating to the Republicans if conservatives lose their enthusiasm and stay home on Election Day.

AP-Ipsos polling suggests that Democrats may be winning the motivation game. Fewer voters today than in 2004 call themselves Republicans or Republican-leaning. In addition, 27 percent of registered voters were strong Republicans just before the 2004 election, while only 15 percent fit that description today.

Democratic numbers are the same or better since 2004.

“This tells us we’ve got our work cut out for us,” said Sen. Sam Brownback, a conservative Republican from Kansas who may run for president in 2008. “The key for us is to show restraint on spending and on dealing with immigration.”

Bush’s strong suit continues to be his handling of foreign policy and terrorism, an area in which he modestly improved his ratings since April. Still, a majority of Americans disapprove of his performance on both fronts.

It gets worse. Only 23 percent of the public approve of the way the president is handling gasoline prices, the lowest in AP-Ipsos polling. Those who strongly disapprove outnumber those who strongly approve by an extraordinary 55 percent to 8 percent.


What history suggests
As for his overall job performance, history suggests that Bush’s paltry 33 percent spells trouble for Republicans in the fall.

In the past six decades, only one president had a lower job approval rating six months before a midterm election — Richard Nixon in May 1974, the year in which Watergate-scarred Republicans lost 48 seats in the House and four in the Senate.

By November, Nixon was out of a job too, having resigned the presidency in August.

Nearly half of the public strongly disapproves of Bush, a huge jump from his 5 percent strong disapproval rating in 2002. The poll has a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

Of all Republicans, nearly 30 percent disapprove of the job Bush is doing, including 13 percent who feel strongly about it.

“Hopefully this is a wakeup call for my party to get out of its bunker and hunker mentality,” said Republican strategist Greg Mueller, whose firm specializes in conservative politics.

That punching bag feeling
He urged his party to start criticizing Democratic positions on the Iraq war, immigration and the economy.

“We’ve been like a punching bag,” Mueller said.

Democrats need to gain 15 seats in the House and six in the Senate for control of Congress, no easy task in an era that favors incumbents.

“What we have to do is earn the public approval of our right to govern again,” said Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean.

The Democratic strategy is to nationalize the elections around a throw-the-bums-out theme.

Republicans counter that they will do better than polls suggest when voters are forced on Election Day to choose between candidates in their particular House and Senate races.

“But,” Ayres said, “we better get in gear.”

someguy
05-05-2006, 04:21 PM
Bush is making the Republicans look terrible, it's no wonder they're going against him. Because of him all the Repubs have this insane evangelical type Christian image.

The Postmaster General
05-05-2006, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by electriclite
Republican strategists said the party stands to lose control of Congress unless the environment changes unexpectedly.[/i]


Uh-oh.

EVILxxx
05-05-2006, 06:23 PM
Bush is a sinking ship right now. There is absolutly no way to get his low approval rating up unless he 1) fully stabilizes Iraq 2)catches Osama 3) lowers gas prices.
He'll probably have to do all three.

electriclite
05-05-2006, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by EVILxxx
Bush is a sinking ship right now. There is absolutly no way to get his low approval rating up unless he 1) fully stabilizes Iraq 2)catches Osama 3) lowers gas prices.
He'll probably have to do all three.



I'm guessing now he wishes he had made #2 a priority.


I dunno though, as Bubba subtly hinting to up top, there's always the case of an "October Surprise", its worked in the past for the Republicans, I just don't know if they have any surprises left in their cap.

I dunno if they can do a rerun on gay marriage, and they've already played their hand with immigration too early.

(taps finger on head ala Pooh bear) Think, think, think, think........

The Heart Collector
05-05-2006, 07:48 PM
hahah Bush is so terrible he's joined Democrats and Republicans for a common goal.

shoe1985
05-05-2006, 08:29 PM
To tell you guys the truth, I am voting mostly independent. Neither side has the right ideas. If I was to choose a side between the big 2 it would be Democrat, plus I am one, but they are not impressing me right now. We need to get rid of everyone in office, and I mean everyone. The House and Senate are so currupt it isn't funny. I am not voting anyone back into office for PA.

TheDeadWalk
05-05-2006, 08:31 PM
Originally posted by The Heart Collector
hahah Bush is so terrible he's joined Democrats and Republicans for a common goal.

CREDIBILITY IS THE KEY HERE


hey who's with me when i say that this information is false and that i watch news shows



Kidding aside, I like hearing that the collective unit that is the United States is slowly starting to decide that this administration is ruining the country whilst steadily pissing off the rest of the world. Way to go Repubs. Maybe in two more years we can go back to debating economical philosophies and how we feel that they differ.

Lynn7
05-05-2006, 09:07 PM
Some of my conservative friends are angry at Bush because of his stance on the illegal immitgants and some of them are angry that he is not conservative enough on many issues. But poor guy can't get any points for leaning left on some issues because the liberals would hate him even if he agreed with them on every issue because he doens't wear the "D"

Someone told me that a liberal columnist wrote a scathing article about Colbert's speech and how it was hateful and mean spitited (becasue Bush was a sitting duck). I almost fell over. A liberal judging a fellow liberal to have done something wrong?! It is simply unheard of! The dem party of the last 20 years stands firmly together no matter what a party member might do. The Republicans aren't like that. They are more split on issues. There are the liberal REpubs, the moderate ones and the ocnservative ones. They are just not a cohesive group at all. They are the ones who had Lott step down in the midst of his unfortunate remark and they are also the ones who pressured Delay to get out. Some Repubs hate McCain and some hate Bush. They aren't in lock step behind anyone.

Brando @$$ Fat
05-05-2006, 09:21 PM
In the past, Bush has had the ability to boost his poll numbers way up temporarily by just giving a damn speech to the nation. Though they decline only a few weeks later, it proves that the American people are dumb and will buy anything.

shoe1985
05-05-2006, 09:37 PM
Bush is afraid to do anything. Clinton took chances and most of those chances worked. I am a pro Clinton person because he had things going well. Many people dislike him for his affair, but this country was better off. Bush came in and had many problems, 9/11, and he has never done anything that worked. Every business he has ever had has failed. His dad usually had his back, but now he is on his own. He needs to begin taking chances on issues that matter. He is standing by his decision with Iraq, but as we can tell he needs to do more. The way it looks, he is going to go down as one of the worst presidents ever. He has 2 more years to make things better instead of doing nothing.

Lynn7
05-05-2006, 09:42 PM
Um, what did Clinton do except watch the polls each day and ask Dick Morris what he should do to get his poll numbers up? He did Ok the first year of so but then his poll numbers were absolute crap until he had Morris come up with the family values campaign. Any president who has time to go screwing around with Lewinsky and Mondale's daughter and hitting on Kathleen Willy when she was down and out couldn't have been all that busy guiding the country anywhere. Well, we did bomb an aspirin factory and there was always the great war that the movie Black Hawk Down was about. Stunning use of military. A man who is certainly worthy of your admiration.

shoe1985
05-05-2006, 09:51 PM
Some things that happened while Clinton was in office:

1. We had jobs. You could quit your job and go to another one that paid the same or better.

2. Deficit hit 0. This was a huge thing and not where is it?

These are just two things that I am grateful for. He did a lot more, but he had a great administration. He even had Hilliary on his administration. So when the 2008 election comes around, if she is on the ballot I have my vote ready.

someguy
05-05-2006, 09:56 PM
Lynn is busting out the claws now, you brought up Clinton ;)

It doesn't matter much about the deficit to her, she's going to tell you that Clinton got lucky due to booms in stocks from the dot com industries or some other things like that.

I want to see what she'll say about jobs though.

The Heart Collector
05-05-2006, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by Lynn7
Well, we did bomb an aspirin factory and there was always the great war that the movie Black Hawk Down was about.

Jesus fucking christ, you can't possibly be using that against Clinton while defending George 'Iraq is a clusterfuck' Bush. I mean seriously, my mind just exploded.

Brando @$$ Fat
05-05-2006, 10:56 PM
The Battle of Mogadishu was with good intentions, even if things fucked up. Besides, we're not talking Clinton, we're talking Bush.

EVILxxx
05-05-2006, 11:07 PM
Lynn didn't bring up Clinton. Shoe did.

Brando @$$ Fat
05-05-2006, 11:13 PM
Oh, well, I stand by my previous point about Mogadishu.

electriclite
05-06-2006, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by Lynn7

Someone told me that a liberal columnist wrote a scathing article about Colbert's speech and how it was hateful and mean spitited (becasue Bush was a sitting duck). I almost fell over. A liberal judging a fellow liberal to have done something wrong?! It is simply unheard of! The dem party of the last 20 years stands firmly together no matter what a party member might do. The Republicans aren't like that. They are more split on issues. There are the liberal REpubs, the moderate ones and the ocnservative ones. They are just not a cohesive group at all. They are the ones who had Lott step down in the midst of his unfortunate remark and they are also the ones who pressured Delay to get out. Some Repubs hate McCain and some hate Bush. They aren't in lock step behind anyone.

Good, you should have people in your own party, whatever it may be, ready to tell you when your shit stinks. They had the right idea to pressure DeLay out, the charges alone were enough to win a Democrat his seat. He left and now the Republicans can get someone else, who won't be a sitting duck, to run for his old seat.

There are also moderate and conservative Democrats too Lynn. You couldn't have possibly forgotten about Zell Miller, he spoke at the Republican Convention for christsakes!

Why does it surprise you that a liberal would criticize another liberal? This whole thread is about people of the same ilk criticzing their own for what they find disagreeable. I dunno, maybe I'm too familair with irony, but stuff like that happens a lot, and I for one find it encouraging.

T

shoe1985
05-06-2006, 08:17 AM
I was saying how Clinton took chances and Bush didn't. Most of the chances Clinton took worked. Bush is trying to be conservative and it isn't working. He could learn something from Clinton, not the cheating lesson either.

Brando @$$ Fat
05-06-2006, 12:38 PM
Even though I don't like Bush, I have to admit he has taken a shitload of chances. Hell, his presidency has been one prolonged chance after another.

Lynn7
05-06-2006, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by electriclite
Good, you should have people in your own party, whatever it may be, ready to tell you when your shit stinks. They had the right idea to pressure DeLay out, the charges alone were enough to win a Democrat his seat. He left and now the Republicans can get someone else, who won't be a sitting duck, to run for his old seat.

There are also moderate and conservative Democrats too Lynn. You couldn't have possibly forgotten about Zell Miller, he spoke at the Republican Convention for christsakes!

Why does it surprise you that a liberal would criticize another liberal? This whole thread is about people of the same ilk criticzing their own for what they find disagreeable. I dunno, maybe I'm too familair with irony, but stuff like that happens a lot, and I for one find it encouraging.

T

Zel Miller and Jospeph Lieberman are the only two who come to mind. Who else has held differing viewpoints from the Democratic Party? There was the governor from Pennsylvania (Casey?) who was pro-life but wasn't allowed to speak at the convention years ago.He was very saddened by his rejection before he died. I maintain that the Democratic Party is no longer the one it used to be. It used to stand for ideals and now it just stands for a few organizations. When women were mistreated in the workplace there would be an outcry but there was a double standard because if the woman who was mistreated got in the way of the party's well being, she was shredded and tossed aside (KAthleen Willey for one who had been a loyal Clinto supporter).

Brando @$$ Fat
05-06-2006, 02:54 PM
Lynn, I respect your beliefs and the fact that you're not one of those Republicans who abandoned the Bush ship as soon as it started to sink, but you've got to open your mind. First off, Democrats were never really the party of ideals (neither was the G.O.P.). Sure, Kennedy and Roosevelt were good presidents, but they were not the idealistic leaders we think of them as. Roosevelt entered his presidency confused and he even admitted that he didn't know what he would do about the Great Depression. It wasn't until near the end of his presidency that it was all over with. As for Kennedy, he wasn't really president long enough to be all that effective. Yes, he jumpstarted a lot of great things like the Civil Rights movement and Space exploration and whatnot, but we will never know how those things would have flourished under his presidency.

What I suppose I'm saying is, Democrats stand for just as much now as they did back then.

MacReady
05-07-2006, 02:16 AM
Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
What I suppose I'm saying is, Democrats stand for just as much now as they did back then.

No, they've taken a dive into right-wing territory. Hillary is pro-war, vehemently pro-censorship and barely pro-choice. There was also that guy who's name I can't recall who tried to censure Bush, but not a single Democratic senator went for it. Hell, even Kerry seemed to have some pro-war sentiment. The party has taken a major downward slide, and I could argue they're equal to our Conservative party.

EVILxxx
05-07-2006, 02:49 AM
Originally posted by MacReady
No, they've taken a dive into right-wing territory. Hillary is pro-war, vehemently pro-censorship and barely pro-choice. There was also that guy who's name I can't recall who tried to censure Bush, but not a single Democratic senator went for it. Hell, even Kerry seemed to have some pro-war sentiment. The party has taken a major downward slide, and I could argue they're equal to our Conservative party.

They are just playing politics, believe me. Hillary has always had a stick up her ass about "saving the children".
The Democrats are getting pounded on two key issues: Home Land defense, and family values.
Their strategy has changed slightly, but i don't think their beliefs have.

The Postmaster General
05-07-2006, 09:09 AM
Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
What I suppose I'm saying is, Democrats stand for just as much now as they did back then.


Well, thankfully sweeping statements will always be irrelevant.