Bush fatigue

July 27, 2007

I’ve been wondering about this myself for quite a while, but Atrios went ahead and checked Nexis to get the answer.

Number of times the term “Clinton fatigue” appeared, according to a Nexis search, in major papers during July of 1999: 27.

Clinton Gallup poll approval rating in July of 1999: 64

Number of times the term “Bush fatigue” has appeared, so far, in July of 2007: 1, courtesy of Byron York’s hair.

Bush Gallup poll approval rating in July of 2007: 31.

Now, perhaps conservatives will say the comparison isn’t fair because July 2007 isn’t over yet. Maybe, they’d argue, there will be a rash of “Bush fatigue” references in the remaining four days that would show something closer to parity.

With that in mind, I went ahead and checked June 1999 to June 2007. Eight years ago, there were 29 references to “Clinton fatigue” in the major newspapers. Last month, there was just one reference to “Bush fatigue.”

Because I’m a big geek, and it’s a relatively slow news day, I kept digging to take this comparison even further.

Try this one on for size — last month, June 2007, there was one story in a major newspaper that referenced “Bush fatigue,” but there were two references to “Clinton fatigue.” Yes, just last month, “Clinton fatigue” references still outnumbered “Bush fatigue” references, despite the fact that Clinton left office seven years ago.

Better yet, so far, for all of 2007 to date, “Bush fatigue” has garnered 21 references. “Clinton fatigue” so far in 2007? 35.

Eight years ago, the major papers set a pretty high standard. In August 1999, “Clinton fatigue” references climbed to 44. In September 1999, it reached 99. By October 1999, it was 106. (Remember, these are major newspapers; Fox News isn’t included in the mix.)

Given the recent scandals and Bush’s abysmal public standing, the “liberal” media really needs to pick up the pace on highlighting “Bush fatigue” — which is far more real than “Clinton fatigue” ever was.

Bush Rage might be a better indicator. The guy really pisses me off.

OT I wonder how many hours per day the vacationing Iraqi Congress gets of electricity for their air conditioner.

  • Do bloggers count? Because if so that rash you mention may have just been started by Atrios bringing it up. Between him and you the number of articles with instances of “Bush fatigue” has tripled.

  • CB, maybe you ought to adjust your query to “fascist dictator fatigue” –perhaps that will yield more accurate results.

  • Simple explanation. Nobody asks about “Bush fatigue” because they’re just too tired and worn out to look it up.

    For the people of America and the world, “Bush fatigue” is not an abstract concept or a subject for casual inquiry. It’s a constant, gnawing state of common experience. Big difference there from “Clinton fatigue”.

  • I’d also like to see the count for the word ‘unpopular’ with regards to coverage of GWB. During his hey-day, he was called ‘a popular wartime leader’ anytime the media wanted to give cover for GWB’s excesses and failures and as a cudgel against criticism. There is very little in the way of a corresponding effect with ‘unpopular President’ in the news reports I see so far. I see ‘unpopular war’ and other comments about his actions, but GWB has earned a lot of negative adjectives, but the media is a bit too timid to apply those labels consistently.

  • Hey CB: One request:

    I think a graph would be nice to be able to show people, tracking the number of references to Bush and Clinton Fatigue, and the approval polling data to show how “liberal” the media really is.

    Pictures speak louder than words.

  • Perhaps we’re suffering Bush Fatigue so severely that it hurts to even mention it.

    But I think Atrios missed something that’s usually right up his alley. Clinton Fatigue was a way for the Very Serious People to tell us we didn’t want Al Gore. And what better cure for Clinton Fatigue than a guy to have a beer with?

  • I see the phrases “Clinton Derangement Syndrome” and “Bush Derangement Syndrome” tossed around frequently. I’m fairly sure that I suffer a bit from the latter, although there has been no official diagnosis.

    “Clinton Derangement Syndrome” is probably more common, since it can be caused by reaction to either Bill or Hillary – or both! I also think that the Clinton variety is more severe. It’s sufferers present as truly, deeply deranged.

  • I think JoeW hit it on the head. It’s all about the context. “Clinton Fatigue” was about ending the long, national nightmare that was the Clinton/Gore administration. If Cheney, or maybe even Rice, was running, we might see more references to “Bush Fatigue” in the press… Nah… I don’t think so either.

  • Some of the first places to be taken over during coup attempts historically have been broadcast outlets (radio stations, etc.), thus allowing the coup plotters to control the flow and content of information to the populace. While we have yet to see tanks and troops in our streets it is obvious the America is undergoing an attempted ‘soft coup’ on the part of those elements in this country who would bring fascism to us. The majority of MSM outlets have been in the hands of the fascists for some time and due to the monopolization of the broadcast outlets and newspapers we should not expect it to change anytime soon. So, one should not be too surprised at all the omissions, lies, redirections,etc. which animate from the MSM, for the MSM is nothing less than the the official propaganda organ of 21st century American fascism. We do,however, still have the internet. Because bloggers are not financially beholden to the corporate ‘news’ monopolies, their message is impossible to control. Because of this, expect control of the internet to be a major battleground in this current struggle.

  • You can’t compare an arbitrary phrase from a decade ago to wording used today. “Clinton fatigue” was a catchy phrase and not a long-standing political term.

  • Is it a slow news day or are you simply fatigued from all the Bush excitement of yesterday?

  • I’ve got Bush fatigue. If he’d cut back to about 25% of his current level of illegal, unethical, anti-humanitarian, unconstitutional crimes I could stay outraged. As it is I can only read each day and chuckle. I’m overwhelmed.

  • Did I miss something? Is the “Clinton fatigue” phenomenon you have noted about the former President or the current presidential candidate? If it’s about the latter, well, MSM bias explains a lot.

  • “Clinton fatigue” was just a media fishbowl creation – by 1999 they had clearly gotten tired of writing daily breathless stories regurgitating the various VRWC talking points and endlessly speculating about “travelgate”, “filegate”, Vince Foster, White Water, semen-covered blue dresses, impeachment, “wag the dog”, etc. that sucked the air out of rational discussion or consideration of any real actual issues of importance to the American public.

    Compare this to the kid gloves, willful ingornance, and rah-rah cheering that has characterized the media during the Bush Administration and of course there isn’t any media “Bush fatigue”. Ginning-up and perpetuating scandal is hard work – they haven’t done that for the past 6 years.

  • I’m glad Wahoo can still chuckle. I can only shake my head and wonder if the “two outrages and at least one “whopper” from Tony Snow per day is a deliberate strategy. Each day brings more news, more evidence that this administration is damaging this country and its form of government. I’m sorry to say that it keeps me off balance. It is difficult to decide just exactly which outrage should be the subject of my next communication to my senators and representative. Bush Fatigue = Bungle Fatigue = Crony Fatigue = Emperor Fatigue. So much incompetence / so little time.

  • For myself in the 1990s, “Clinton Fatigue” was when I started getting sick and tired of listening to all the shit the wingnuts kept making up about the guy.

  • Maybe it’s just that “Bush fatigue” could be misconstrued as an occupational hazard of those in a certain very old profession.

    • Comments are closed.