Bush's Poll Numbers

by Cliopatria

Polls are funny things. Rarely do they really say what they purport to say (or what their proponents say that they say), but they also are not meaningless. And as Charlie Alexander at Ohio University was always quick to remind us, polls do not tell us what all people (Americans, or Texans, or baseball fans, or whatever the target demographic is) believe, but rather what the respondents believe. Now I always have felt that good polls should do a decent job of reflecting that larger demographic, but"decent" is a long way from"perfect" and in any case, the winds of public opinion swirl notoriously.

All of that said, the Bush administration cannot be pleased with recent polls that reveal that their man has record low numbers at this stage in his second term. Assuming that the flaws and strengths of this particular poll have been consistent over the years (in other words that wherever it has been wrong it has tended to be wrong across administrations; ditto its strengths) the President is not in very good position to push forward his agenda. This might well mean that his lame duck period (already truncated in an era in which potential contenders start trudging to Manchester and Des Moines the year after the last election to start laying the groundwork for the next one) will start early. Maybe it has already.

A popular president would have had a difficult time getting through a massive (Note to self: don't write"boondoggle," don't write"boondoggle," don't write"boondoggle") overhaul (Restraint: 1, Visceral Urges: 0) of Social Security. Forget one who might be disliked by as many folks as liked in any particular Congressman's district. Many Republicans appear unwilling to fight for the changes to Social Security (perhaps cognizant of history, some might recall Roosevelt saying that he was making it so that no"sonofabitch in Congress" could change his program) that the President is asking them to support.

Beyond all of this, the President has staked a great deal of his political capital on Iraq, and some would say on a larger democratization push around the globe, or at least in the Middle East, and it remains to be seen just how that gambit will turn out. Perhaps many Americans (or at least many respondents intended to reflect the views of their fellow Americans) are a bit democracy-fatigued. Whatever it is, the latest polls are not especially good news for President Bush. Soon enough, members of the House and a third of the Senate will be trudging home to prove to the good folks in their backyards that they have done good work (or at least that they have not stripped the District of everything that was not bolted down -- a tougher sell in some areas than others, admittedly). Once that time comes, it will be every politician for him- or herself, and the President had better hope that the recently ascendant forces of democracy for which he is only partially responsible will have continued their march.

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

JoAnn Ryan - 4/15/2005

It is (and usually is) a bit crazy down here. The Dems don't have a front runner yet, or at least not one who is outwardly vocal. The GOP is the craziest bunch so far. There's the incumbent governor, Perry, who just really hasn't done much and offended his staunchly conservative allies when he wanted to fund education via topless bars. Then there's Comptroller Strayhorn who has gone so vehemently against Perry while not declaring her intentions that people are sickening of it. And finally, Sen. Hutchinson, who cannot determine yet if it is in her best interests. It may be a good year for the Dems to sneak in, given the scandals suffered by the GOP members here, but then again Democrat is a dirty word in Texas.

David Lion Salmanson - 4/15/2005

Aren't all truffle pigs blind or is this only done to ones that won't stay on task? It helps keep them docile and focussed on their sense of smell - what they use to find the truffles.

Rich Holmes - 4/14/2005

JoAnn-

What is going on down there anyway? My goodness! It seems like there are some people right now whose sole job is to review every single video clip of Hilary since the beginning of time and scream and hollar every time someone from the 'other' side is seen associating with her. This game of politics can be a crazy dance sometimes, no?

Any thoughts on who is going to ultimately pull it out in the Texas gubernatorial race?

+Rich

JoAnn Ryan - 4/14/2005

I agree that her political skills are extraordinary. Yet, being woman who's faced the glass ceiling several times, I am not sure if we've really progressed to that level. You can't rely on women voters voting together on this issue either, because we can't seem to get together on any issue. So, I still don't think it's possible now.

JoAnn Ryan - 4/14/2005

Rich:

We'll have to make you an honorary Texan. Here the GOP "candidates" for governor are using any connection to Hilary by the rival GOP candidate as fodder for too much liberalism. It's a game of who can be negatively connected to Hilary in a larger sense.

Derek Charles Catsam - 4/14/2005

I'm not certain of either of those things. I think Americans would elect a woman under the right circumstances. the fact s that our olitics are so polarized right now that both candidates would go in with a guaranteed support rate of about 40% and a rate of opposition equally high. Clinton is a savvy politician, and behind her will be the savviest politician of recent decades, so i can see her making a strong run. her negatives are high, but so were Bush's. That's the nature of the beast these days, I'm afraid.
dc

Rich Holmes - 4/14/2005

. . . especially if her last name is Clinton.

JoAnn Ryan - 4/13/2005

I guess I'm more of an idealist that hopes all people vote with informed and intelligent minds. What a concept.

JoAnn Ryan - 4/13/2005

I think what I should have said is that as far as we have progressed, it still isn't that far- the US won't elect a woman as a president, yet.

Derek Charles Catsam - 4/13/2005

JoAnn --
Hillary will run not as a feminist, and oftentimes not as a woman per se. but she has her eyes on that prize.
giuliani has a huge reservoir of positive goodwill. i still am not quite certain why. After 9/11 I saw him acting very humanely, he was effective, but who wouldn't have been? I am not certain how the rough and tumble of a campiagn will treat him, but I think he and Hillary are set to square off in 2008.
dc

Derek Charles Catsam - 4/13/2005

Why not -- most of us already do so while biting our tongues and swallowing hard.
dc

JoAnn Ryan - 4/13/2005

I agree- left and thereby considered "liberal" by most Americans has become a dirty connotation, so swinging there might be far-fetched. I also agree that most of us are pretty centrist. However, it is amazing to what Americans apparently focus on during elections- relying on soundbites and extremist calls. Maybe we should just vote with our eyes closed.

JoAnn Ryan - 4/13/2005

I personally agree with the McCain/Guiliani ticket prediction. I don't think Guiliani holds enough sway outside the Northeast. Clinton/Biden- interesting. I don't yet think that Americans are ready for the feminist perspective- unfortunately.

Derek Charles Catsam - 4/13/2005

I do indeed recall your predictions about Dole in 1993. Even a blind pig digs up a truffle every now and then.
I wonder if the order might not be reversed, however -- Giuliani/McCain. And I wonder if they won't be facing off against Clinton/Biden.
dc

Rich Holmes - 4/13/2005

DC you may remember a certain high school senior predicting in the summer of 1993 that Bob Dole would be the presidential nominee for the Republican Party in 1996. (I still have the shirt to prove it.) I'm calling a McCain/Guiliani ticket for '08.

Tell your friends you heard it hear first at Rebunk.

Derek Charles Catsam - 4/12/2005

JoAnn --
I would not be at all surprised if the seemingly striong conservative ascendancy of the last few years did not find itself short-lived. I doubt that we'd shift leftward. i think it would be more accurate to say that for all of the seeming division between left and right, America is pretty centrist, and we swing between poles that are neither as far right nor as far left as the most ardent critics, but that those divisions in the center represent shockingly hard-fought terrain.
dc

JoAnn Ryan - 4/12/2005

I agree. The domestic problems should be killing him by now. I for one am tired of the gas prices already and of hearing about more dead soldiers and kidnapped Americans (and I'm a native Texan). Perhaps the recent Texas Monthly article about state politics provide reasons why Americans are tiring of it all. It stated that Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick likes to hold his ground on whatever issue to the extent that he politically forces his "loyalists to go against the interests of their districts." Now, I am not a Republican or a Democrat, but I was amused when a die-hard staunch conservative informed me that he was so tired of the lies of the Republican leadership of the great state of Texas that he was ready to vote for Ann Richards in the next governor's race. Whew! You'd think Bush's leadership could hold the die-hards within his own state. So, I completely agree that his poll numbers are indicative of a larger and more pressing issue. It should prove interesting in both state and national politics if nothing else.