Is Bush in the midst of a popularity surge?

Because the president’s popularity (or lack thereof) is linked so closely to the midterm elections, it’s probably worth taking a moment to consider whether Bush is currently on the upswing. Greg Sargent has seen the reports indicating that the president’s national support is “rising,” and that “the real beneficiary of that could be House Republicans,” and looks at the numbers.

* The last five Rasmussen daily polls have shown Bush declining from 47% on Sept. 14 to 40% yesterday. That’s a seven point drop in five days.

* A Harris poll released on Sept. 15 showed Bush’s approval rating at 38%, up four points from the last one. But Bush’s numbers are still lower than they were in Harris’ polls in January and February of this year, when they were 43% and 40% respectively. Harris shows that Bush has been fluctuating back and fourth under 40% since then — and still hasn’t cracked 40%, even though his numbers are now “rising.”

* A Fox poll from Sept. 14 shows Bush’s approval at 40%. That’s up from August and July, but still down from June, when he was at 41%, and down by more since February’s 44%. Again, the long view shows more fluctuating under 40%, with occasional brushes with the 40% mark.

* A Wall Street Journal poll from Sept. 14 showed Bush’s approval at 42%. That is up from other numbers in 2006.

* A Gallup poll from Sept. 12 found Bush at 39% — down from late August’s 42% and two points better than early August’s 37%. More fluctuations just above or below 40%.

Looking back over the last month to six weeks, it looks as if the president may indeed have seen a slight up-tick — a couple of points, thanks in large part to shoring some of his base — but it’s hardly anything to write home about. Bush’s approval stands at about 40%, give or take a few. Anyone saying Bush is enjoying a surge in popularity is overstating the case. A lot.

Of course, that’s the short-term take. Taking a broader view, the trend is unmistakable.

Media Matters’ Eric Boehlert noted this week that the “pervasive buyer’s remorse that hovers around President Bush’s second term, as measured by public opinion polls,” has become the elephant in the room.

The issue of buyer’s remorse is directly connected to a larger, twofold problem surrounding the ongoing coverage of Bush’s polling numbers. First, there’s developed a pervasive press obsession with trying to be the first to document Bush’s rebound in the polls. (It stands in stark contrast to the press conduct during President Clinton’s second term when reporters and pundits were forever hunting, unsuccessfully, for evidence that Clinton’s popularity was slipping.)

Secondly, and just as disturbing, is the categorical refusal by the press to put Bush’s consistently dreadful poll numbers into any kind of historical context. The fact that Bush has been bogged down for much of this year with poll numbers in the 30’s is nothing short of astonishing. In the last half-century, the only other comparable second-term collapse belonged to Richard Nixon, whose fall, of course, was fueled by the revelation that a criminal enterprise had been operating from inside the Oval Office. Yet Bush’s second-term performance is rarely mentioned in the same breath as Nixon’s.

Quite the contrary, despite historic dissatisfaction with Bush, the press continues to depict him as the central, charging force in American politics, while setting aside all sorts of time and energy trying to document Bush’s (we’re told) inevitable rebound.

The reality is, Bush is one of the least-liked presidents since the advent of modern polling. Minor fluctuations from the high 30s to the low 40s may help news outlets justify expensive polling efforts, but it doesn’t change the president’s general standing with the public.

Gas is approaching the $2 mark, so he’s going to see some benefit from that. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.

  • The president and his party seem to be able to control the discussion.

    It’s election time and we are talking about terrorism again.

  • Tradesports.com shows that the Republicans are now better than a 54/46 favorite to retain the house and a 82/18 favorite in the senate.

    The Democrats were a 60% favorite in the house about 2 weeks ago. Obviously, something has shifted quite a bit.

    Steve, you really should be looking at Tradesports. It can tell you a lot of things better than most polls. One of the things that scares me a lot is that Kean is now a slight favorite in NJ.

    I don’t work for tradesports and have not even used their service for anything other than looking at the real odds of political events. They are far more accurate than any poll.

  • And yet Tuesday’s USA Today declared him to be on the rebound.

    And what about those amazing lows in oil prices? Didn’t Bush tip his hand on that just a week or so ago? “That’s something else to keep an eye on” or something like that? Did he work some deal, and then find himself unable to keep from bragging?

  • Whenever I see that 2/5 of the American people approve of the way this disaster of a president is doing his job, I want to scream. Since his numbers have been as low as the low 30% we know that there are some people amongst the 2/5 who are not diehard Bush supporters. What the hell do they suddenly approve of?

  • Neil,

    It is an interesting idea this paramutual stockmarket version of election evaluation. Tell me this, what is their track record? Looking back at the 2000 and 2004 elections did Bush win both of these? I looked a the site but did not see any evidence on past performance.

    Let’s also look at this idea. Using a football comparison, I may want the Vikings to beat the Bears this weekend but looking at the stats and past history of teh Vikings I will put my money on the Bears. I will still support the Vikings. Do you see where I am going? The wallet goes left eventhough the heart goes right?

    If the GOP holds congress I will be surprised. I really think there are groups (and I am not affiliated with or aware of any of them) who will not stand peacfully for another 2 years of Bush and a GOP congress.

  • How do you define popular? I think in Bush’s case we’re talking about the difference between a leper covered with really nasty lesions and a leper with just a few big sores. The latter might be more “popular” than the former but you wouldn’t want to give either a hug.

    I don’t know why the press wants to see this critter rebound. Now unmistakable evidence of a relapse, that I’d like to see. Could it be some ghoulish desire to see what it would take to cause such a rebound? I’m thinking it will take another terrorist attack that allows him to go into full Junior Birdman mode to get people to like him again (he can always blame the Democrats and naughty Republicans for the fact that the attack occurred).
    And of course, presidents often enjoy a surge in popularity after their death. Especially since that would mean Cheney is in charge.
    Eeek!

  • I remember saying a long time ago that 37% would be the floor. I must confess that I harbored some hope that I was wrong, but I knew that if neither failure in Iraq, Katrina, corruption, treason, you name it would make the least dint in Republican voter sentiment then nothing will.

    What’s behind this? I suspect that there are a lot of people who take a religious view of political party. There’s no other explanation that makes sense. After all, the historically sorry example of Catholicism (most recently with pedophilia) hasn’t been enough to make people renounce that religion in disgust. Or maybe it’s something akin to loyalty to one’s college football team–the team may be made up of thugs and crooked coaches, but they can do no wrong unless they betray the team.

  • NeilS: The president and his party seem to be able to control the discussion.

    seem to? c’mon, we all know better than that.

    pk: Did he work some deal, and then find himself unable to keep from bragging?

    why would he ever keep himself from doing anything, especially shit he enjoys? he’s like captain picard–his god tells the preznit to ‘make it so’, and he does. of course, for whatever reason, his god’s unaware he’s dealing w/the anti-Midas but hey — nobody’s perfect.

  • It’s classic marketing:

    One company (party) spends its operating costs making a better product; the other spends its operating costs repeating over and over again that their product (party) is better.

    Unfortunately, the latter always seems to win out.

  • I believe the record of Tradesports was almost perfect in the 2004 election. I seem to remember that the called every, or virtually every, state correctly.

    This year they have expanded things to include a number of house races and every senate and governor race.

    I remember when the Iowa market opened up and was the brain child of of one of the professors I knew in Iowa City. I think Tradesports is bigger and, probably, more accurate.

    As you pointed out, just because the Bears are favored by 10 points doesn’t change the fact that I want the Vikings to win.

    I actually think the Dems are going to take the Senate because I think NJ will stay Democratic and I actually think that Ford is going to win in Tennessee. So, those are two things where the odds are against me.

  • All I can say is -please- lets get out and hit the pavement. Republican’s win because of their get-out-the-vote machine. Period. We need something to rile up the public in order to keep elephants from retaining control of the House or Senate.
    In 2004 if the Abu Gr/prison scandal had come out a few months later it would have helped Kerry.
    We also need more than Keith Olberman keeping us informed of GWB’s misdeeds. He answers GWB’s speeches and actions with very angry, but very factually correct “Special Comments”. He is one heck of a speech writer, his words move me. (For those of you who have not listened I recommend it. It can even be downloaded for your podcasts).
    Keith is great, but then we have Chris Mathews on the hour before him on MSNBC going on and on with “…if George goes up (in the polls) 2 more points this week, and 2 the next…” He really is irritating when he shows his colors (he has a brother running for some office in Pa as a Republican).

  • Forgive me if I seem to digress from the subject, but I’m curious—are these surveys real-time, person-to-person, or are they “CATI” (computer-assisted telephone interviews) done by machine? And if they’re computer-based, who manufactured the hardware and developed the software?

    I know that the Diebold GEMS tabulator system produces multiple copies of the database records—and by scrolling to the far right of the screen, an individual can “disconnect” the software subroutine that keeps those multiple databases identical. The “second” copy of the list—the one used by county Election Boards to report the vote-tallies—is the one that can be changed.

    Given this, is it possible for someone to access a CATI program—either “in-situ” or offsite—and alter the numbers? It seems so “conspiracy-theory-ish,” but Herr Bush’s record of screw-ups and criminal stupidity has gotten worse over the past four months; one would think the polls would reflect that, and the kool-aid consumption seems to be about the same as then. There’s also the numbers on the different races to indicate that a good many Republikanners—in both Houses of Congress—are still sailing along at a “down bubble” trim….

  • We live a plutocratic, fascist State, and Bush is the dictator. The publisher tells the editor that Bush is popular, and we’ve always been at war with East Oceania, and it must be so.

    The talking heads from Lehrer to Brian Williams to Katy Couric knows who is signing the checks.

    What else is new?

  • From Talking Points memo:

    The Times/CBS News poll also found that President Bush did not improve his own or his party’s standing through the intense campaign of speeches he made and events he attended surrounding the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The speeches were at the heart of a Republican strategy to thrust national security to the forefront in the fall elections.

    Mr. Bush’s job approval rating was 37 percent, virtually unchanged from the last Times/CBS News poll, which was conducted in August. On the issue that has been a bulwark for Mr. Bush, 54 percent said they approve of the way he is managing the effort to combat terrorists, again unchanged from last month, though up from earlier this spring.

    Republicans continue to hold a slight edge over Democrats on which party is better at dealing with terrorism, though that edge did not grow since last month despite Mr. Bush’s flurry of speeches on national security, including one from the Oval Office on the night of the Sept. 11 anniversary.

    In the poll, 50 percent of voters said they would support a Democrat in the fall Congressional election, compared with 35 percent who said they would support a Republican. But the poll found that Democrats continued to struggle to offer a case for control of government to be turned over to them; only 38 percent of all respondents said the Democrats have a clear plan for how they would run the country, compared with 45 percent who said the Republicans had offered a clear plan.

    I think that last point is a biggie. We have Democrats campaigning against the Culture of Corruption, and then we have those two morons, Shumer and Emmanuel, crowing about how much corporate slush they’re swimming in. The best thing Democrats could do between now and November 7 is gag these two professional losers. It also doesn’t help that tthe rest of the Professional Losers in Washington are still “fine tuning” their message (as reported here too many times) to find the right words that will smooth the way.

    If these people snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, as it looks entirely possible they could, then the Republicans are going to be entirely justified tto pull on their boots and spurs and saddle up the country.

  • Regarding Tradesports.com: Bettors usually take as many factors as possible into account when deciding odds and where to put their money. I wonder how significant cynicism about the reliability of our balloting system plays into the numbers favoring RepubCo?

    If real money is on the line, no serious bettor is going to throw his/hers away just because they don’t want to believe the travesty of a compromised election is possible.

    The heart may say we’re living in a democracy. The “smart” money may say otherwise.

  • It is not possible for our elected representatives to hold any sort of honorable “debate” over torture. Bush says he is waging a “struggle for civilization,” but civilized nations do not debate slavery or genocide, unjust war and they don’t debate torture, either. This spectacle insults and dishonors every American. One should not have to talk about torture, because the real question is moral: What kind of nation are we? What kind of people are we?

  • k-man: What kind of nation are we? What kind of people are we?

    a bunch of fucking dummies who sit on their asses and watch TV and when seeing news of oh say…torture, renditions, stolen elections &c comes on, get momentarily miffed and then go back to drooling or go out shopping.

    i think of The Orange Revolution of a few years back and the thing in Mexico after /their/ last election and i could cry.

    wait–amerikan idle’s on! *drooollllllll*

    duh, what was i saying again? couldn’t have been too important…oooh, now ‘friends’ is on!

  • So the poll numbers are low, but what does it mean? Bush’s poll numbers were fairly low for an incumbent president at the 2004 election, and everyone said “no way will he win with those numbers!” But here we are.

  • What these poll results tell me is that about 10% of the population – those who change their opinion on a monthly basis – are dumber than a box of rocks. They’re even dumber than the 30% who never waiver in their belief that GWB is doing a heckuva job.

  • Comments are closed.