I question that 25% of the US actually believe the train wreck Bush has engineered is a good thing.
To me, the number just reflects rigid partisanship and stubbornness in the face of ever growing and harsher criticism of Bush and his supporters.
IMO, if people responded to these polls truthfully - without consideration of the political advantage negative votes provide “the other side”- Bush would be below 20% already.
And I believe he will get down to 17-18ish in the polls before he leaves office.
OTH, pulling a rabbit out of the hat in Iraq in the next year would change all that…
and while he is at it, maybe he can tweak the kinks out of cold fusion technology to eliminate our energy concerns forever .
Comment by RandyB — Monday, July 23, 2024 @ 4:13 pm
The theoretical lower limit would be the margin of error for the poll - whatever that might be.
In regards to the post by RandyB, I’m not sure it really matters whether or not 25% of people think the Bush administration is “good”. Like it or not we have a 2-party system. Personally I almost never like either of the presidential candidates, and have to choose which I dislike less. And any time I’m polled on things like presidential policies, I respond in the context of what the alternative would be, in the case of Bush, that is John Kerry policy. Hence, I would be among the 25%, because while I abhor Bush policy, it is my judgement that Kerry policy would have been even farther from what I think to be ideal. Or, put differently, I approve of President Bush’s policy in the context of a 2-candidate system in which I have a great deal of information about both candidates. That’s not the same as saying I approve of Bush policy in a vacuum. You can hate something, but if the alternative seems even more distasteful (and you only have 2 choices), your poll result can be difficult to draw conclusions from.
I wouldn’t rush to label those 25% as blindly partisan. A lot of things can motivate people to think in different ways, and it is arrogant and prejudicial to presume to know their minds. It doesn’t seem likely to me that there is any one reason for people to poll a certain way. Everyone has their own reason, for good or bad.
Comment by Captain D. — Monday, July 23, 2024 @ 7:01 pm
Point taken, Captain D., on our often dismal choices in the 2 party system. And I should have stated that I believe - “some” (not all) - of the 25% approval merely reflects partisanship or political stubbornness.
Perhaps my opinion sounded arrogant and prejudicial. However, I don’t understand how rationalizing your own “approval” of policies you “abhor” makes any sense divorced from the context of “blind partisanship”.
Stating that one approves of abhorrent policy in order to defend one’s vote in the election 2 years past smacks of moral relativism and political stubbornness to me.
The poll question merely asked if one approved of the job Bush was doing (see link). You conflated this question with “would you rather see Kerry running the country?.” You transform your disapproval of policy into approval of the status quo (no Kerry in White House).
This sort of rationalization is exactly what I believe is happening in many instances. For political reasons, one states approval of Bush in polls but in their heart of hearts thinks Bush is doing a horrible job.
You don’t have to be a mind reader to arrive at that conclusion - you just verified the point. (as do many on talk radio every day)
Comment by RandyB — Tuesday, July 24, 2024 @ 5:29 pm
The Iraq War bespeaks a lot about Bush’s personal shortcomings and his administration’s horrible policy choices. To date, the war has cost over $340 billion dollars—money which could have been spent much more wisely and with better end results. It is estimated, for example, that the expenditure of a mere $19 billion would eliminate starvation and malnutrition worldwide. In a time when the current defense budget is $522 billion, the goal of eradicating world hunger is clearly well within reach. Thus, it is clear that the occupation of Iraq needs to end, and it needs to end now without regard to what this will do to United States interest in Iraq’s oil. There are simply much more important issues that need to be addressed, and by avoiding these issues and adhering to his doomed quest for victory, Bush will only continue to fall in popularity polls.
Comment by Jessica — Tuesday, July 24, 2024 @ 7:48 pm
[…] PoliBlog ™: A Rough Draft of my Thoughts » 25% Posted National Politics on Monday, July 23rd, 2024. […]
Pingback by The World Around You » Blog Archive » How Low Can He Go? — Monday, July 23, 2024 @ 3:22 pm
I question that 25% of the US actually believe the train wreck Bush has engineered is a good thing.
To me, the number just reflects rigid partisanship and stubbornness in the face of ever growing and harsher criticism of Bush and his supporters.
IMO, if people responded to these polls truthfully - without consideration of the political advantage negative votes provide “the other side”- Bush would be below 20% already.
And I believe he will get down to 17-18ish in the polls before he leaves office.
OTH, pulling a rabbit out of the hat in Iraq in the next year would change all that…
and while he is at it, maybe he can tweak the kinks out of cold fusion technology to eliminate our energy concerns forever .
Comment by RandyB — Monday, July 23, 2024 @ 4:13 pm
The theoretical lower limit would be the margin of error for the poll - whatever that might be.
In regards to the post by RandyB, I’m not sure it really matters whether or not 25% of people think the Bush administration is “good”. Like it or not we have a 2-party system. Personally I almost never like either of the presidential candidates, and have to choose which I dislike less. And any time I’m polled on things like presidential policies, I respond in the context of what the alternative would be, in the case of Bush, that is John Kerry policy. Hence, I would be among the 25%, because while I abhor Bush policy, it is my judgement that Kerry policy would have been even farther from what I think to be ideal. Or, put differently, I approve of President Bush’s policy in the context of a 2-candidate system in which I have a great deal of information about both candidates. That’s not the same as saying I approve of Bush policy in a vacuum. You can hate something, but if the alternative seems even more distasteful (and you only have 2 choices), your poll result can be difficult to draw conclusions from.
I wouldn’t rush to label those 25% as blindly partisan. A lot of things can motivate people to think in different ways, and it is arrogant and prejudicial to presume to know their minds. It doesn’t seem likely to me that there is any one reason for people to poll a certain way. Everyone has their own reason, for good or bad.
Comment by Captain D. — Monday, July 23, 2024 @ 7:01 pm
Point taken, Captain D., on our often dismal choices in the 2 party system. And I should have stated that I believe - “some” (not all) - of the 25% approval merely reflects partisanship or political stubbornness.
Perhaps my opinion sounded arrogant and prejudicial. However, I don’t understand how rationalizing your own “approval” of policies you “abhor” makes any sense divorced from the context of “blind partisanship”.
Stating that one approves of abhorrent policy in order to defend one’s vote in the election 2 years past smacks of moral relativism and political stubbornness to me.
The poll question merely asked if one approved of the job Bush was doing (see link). You conflated this question with “would you rather see Kerry running the country?.” You transform your disapproval of policy into approval of the status quo (no Kerry in White House).
This sort of rationalization is exactly what I believe is happening in many instances. For political reasons, one states approval of Bush in polls but in their heart of hearts thinks Bush is doing a horrible job.
You don’t have to be a mind reader to arrive at that conclusion - you just verified the point. (as do many on talk radio every day)
Comment by RandyB — Tuesday, July 24, 2024 @ 5:29 pm
The Iraq War bespeaks a lot about Bush’s personal shortcomings and his administration’s horrible policy choices. To date, the war has cost over $340 billion dollars—money which could have been spent much more wisely and with better end results. It is estimated, for example, that the expenditure of a mere $19 billion would eliminate starvation and malnutrition worldwide. In a time when the current defense budget is $522 billion, the goal of eradicating world hunger is clearly well within reach. Thus, it is clear that the occupation of Iraq needs to end, and it needs to end now without regard to what this will do to United States interest in Iraq’s oil. There are simply much more important issues that need to be addressed, and by avoiding these issues and adhering to his doomed quest for victory, Bush will only continue to fall in popularity polls.
Comment by Jessica — Tuesday, July 24, 2024 @ 7:48 pm