Poll: More disapprove of Bush than any other president
 

Poll: More disapprove of Bush than any other president

WASHINGTON DC (CNN) -- A new poll suggests that President Bush is the most unpopular president in modern American history.
A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Thursday indicates that 71 percent of the American public disapprove of how Bush is handling his job as president.
"No president has ever had a higher disapproval rating in any CNN or Gallup Poll; in fact, this is the first time that any president's disapproval rating has cracked the 70 percent mark," said Keating Holland, CNN's polling director.
"Bush's approval rating, which stands at 28 percent in our new poll, remains better than the all-time lows set by Harry Truman and Richard Nixon [22 percent and 24 percent, respectively], but even those two presidents never got a disapproval rating in the 70s," Holland said. "The previous all-time record in CNN or Gallup polling was set by Truman, 67 percent disapproval in January 1952." .,..........
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/...oll/index.html

http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/rzi

I think Nixon was a lot worse that Bush!

I also think that it is funny that the poll started in the 1930s!

IMO, our worst President was Warren Harding in the 1920s, talk about scandal and stealing from the government!

Andrew Johnson was actually impeached and removed from office.

Grant's administration was thoroughly corrupt.

James Buchanan was responsible for a civil war.

-- I think that's at least three worse Presidents who would have had lower approval ratings FWIW.

Does your comment also hold true for Reuters????:confused::confused:

Apparently if it's not Fox, it's not news. :rolleyes:

To correct you, Andrew Johnson was not removed from office!

He was impeached as he tried to empliment Lincolns ideas for rebirthing the South. That is why they tried to impeach him even though he was from Eastern Tenn.

Yes, Bush is not a big point getter because of the war in Iraq. He is not also liked because of the Recision that we are in!

What some forget is Congress that cannot get off of their dead asses and do a damn thing except pork barrel. Oh, with PCness embedness?:rolleyes:

So, I guess my queastion is what would you do to change it?

NADA, but complain!:rolleyes:

To Hell with this! Recind!

http://www.keplers.com/_images/autho...y_canceled.gif

Key word "modern" history. There hasn't always been polling.

If you're going by the textbook definition of recession......we, technically, aren't in one.

As for the rest of your post.....I don't know, but it made my head hurt.

I do not trust a poll like this due to the impact of timing. The true impact of a President is not known until long after the fact- and even then it is subject to the opinions of the majority of people who let their personal feelings get in the way of analyzing hard facts.

History textbooks have been kinder to Nixon than polls contemporary to his Presidency would suggest- mainly due to his masterful efforts to forge a relationship with China. Kennedy is revered- but for the wrong reasons. There is much to like about him, but the substance of that is forever lost due to the nature of his death. And- incidentally, Kennedy also took some bold moves on foreign policy like Bush has. Kennedy proved very wrong in some ways- though where he was right in idea if not approach (Vietnam) many refuse to discuss that aspect of his Presidency. Carter has proven to have been utterly worthless- and his public life since leaving office supports that. Clinton I think will in the long run prove to be greatly admired.

Bush II has yet to be rightly judged since his most controversial moves- all foreign policy related- will need many years to see their ends. He will either prove to be a great visionary or a complete incompetent. The pre-emptive strike approach to foreign policy is so bold and so unprecedented that even I dare not forecast how it will play out. But I am at least smart enough to know not to dismiss or idolize the man at this point.

Macallan- you are right. Technically we are not in a recession- not even close actually.

But I wonder if maybe the term recession needs re-defining in this era when for the first time in modern history there truly is a global economic infrastructure developing.

Most US companies who have shown really great results this quarter derived much of that from foreign growth. And even many of them have seen a serious slowdown in US sales. Starbucks and McDonalds are two good examples.

Right now we are not technically in a recession under the current definition, but for a great many Americans it is definitely a recessionary time.

And while I think globally things are looking a bit better, here in the US things are going to get far worse in the next 12 months for the average American.

The poverty statistics are off too. They do not take into account housing costs- which are what have risen the most dramatically in the last decade. At a time when foreclosures are rising, rents are up dramatically which really hits the poorest Americans right in the gut.

Point being- the numbers look pretty rosy, and they are for a certain segment of our population. But they also cover up a long-coming crisis for a lot of people.

Received this news digest as I was reading this:
today's papers: A summary of what's in the major U.S. newspapers.
Recession Lessened

http://www.slate.com/id/2190560?wpisrc=newsletter

While we may not be in one today, I am not to hopeful about tomorrow.
I really hope I am wrong. Time will tell.

Only time will tell as far as Bush's impact, like EE-BO said.

I also think that these polls are being greatly affected by the 24/7 news. We have idiotic reporters selling stories to the general public...full of people writing 360 billion dollar checks. Yeah...the brain drain of the US is almost complete.

Nope. Johnson was impeached, but not removed from office. He was acquitted by a single vote.

Bush waged a war that cost thousands of lives, against a country that did not attack us nor had any WMDs. He took a thriving economy and a balanced budget and wrecked both. I can see why he's being voted as the worst.

It is no surprize to most of you that I've not been a Bush II fan, but having lived through the Nixon years (and Johnson as well), it would be difficult for me to say that "W" is the worst ever.

At least he hasn't committed, condoned or covered up any felonies that I'm aware of.

And while I'm often offended by blaming "the media" for everything, I do think it's entirely likely that 24/7 coverage can skew "polls." (That would make a good thesis topic for some Communications grad student)

I suspect, though, that like Jimmy Carter, who history has treated more kindly than his comtemporaries did, no matter how it looks at President Bush, many will still take him to task.

I doubt that he will be considered among the "great" chief executives.