• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bush job rating falls to all-time low

talloulou said:
I'd never vote for Hilary either:mrgreen: But I fear many women will and maybe not 'cause she's the best for the job but because she is a woman. That's why I'd like the Republicans to run a qualified woman against her.
Click to expand...

I think many would not vote for her because they are women.
 
I would not get to concerned over this poll..I heard it was loaded with left wing dems...........
 
There are polls then there are polls then there are "pollcats".
 
This is just another poll that, like any other poll that doesn't agree with the posters point of view, that will be dismissed.

I remember once my ol' friend, Missouri Mule, a staunch conservative, claiming that Zogby was one of the few reputable pollsters left out there. I wonder what he thinks now?
 
It seems like all I ever hear Bush say is TERRORIST........TERRORIST......FREEDOM.........
Jeeze, Doesn't he have anything else to say?
 
jfuh said:
Sounds pretty reasonable that he's only spying on suspects doens't it? This is also the guy that claimed Iraq would a piece of cake and we'd have iraqi's welcoming troops into thier cities and cheering. This is the same adminstration that awarded Trent Lott the freedom medal for his "outstanding work", nominated by far the worst american "diplomat" to the UN and insists that things are going well in Iraq when it's anything but. Do you trust this administration that much to be just "spying on al qaeda"? WHo knows what else they use such executive priviledge for. THis administration just quite simply, has absolutely no credibility.
Click to expand...

Coincidentally, I just came tonight from hearing John Bolton speak about the Iranian nuclear threat, and I thought he was incredibly well spoken, knowledgeable, and had a fantastic grasp of diplomacy. He received a standing ovation from the hundred or so people in the room after answering topics ranging from US paying UN dues to Israel's actions in regard to Iran.

And coincidentally, the NYTimes doesn't seem to think he's that bad anymore...

"When it comes to reforming the disgraceful United Nations Human Rights Commission, America's ambassador, John Bolton, is right; Secretary General Kofi Annan is wrong; and leading international human rights groups have unwisely put their preference for multilateral consensus ahead of their duty to fight for the strongest possible human rights protection."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/26/o...n/Editorials and Op-Ed/Editorials&oref=slogin
 
jfuh said:
I don't think it matters too much of how you weight it. Bottom line is Bush's support is low. Even if he had 43%, that's still quite low, particularily at a time of war (contrast Eisenhower, Roosevelt, JFK).
Click to expand...

"So this poll which is the entire point of this thread is incredibly bogus. It doesn't matter, Bush still sucks."

Right.
 
RightatNYU said:
"So this poll which is the entire point of this thread is incredibly bogus. It doesn't matter, Bush still sucks."

Right.
Click to expand...

So you would rather have Kerry?
 
Navy Pride said:
So you would rather have Kerry?
Click to expand...

I was offering an alternative interpretation of jfuh's statements, not my sentiment.
 
RightatNYU said:
Coincidentally, I just came tonight from hearing John Bolton speak about the Iranian nuclear threat, and I thought he was incredibly well spoken, knowledgeable, and had a fantastic grasp of diplomacy. He received a standing ovation from the hundred or so people in the room after answering topics ranging from US paying UN dues to Israel's actions in regard to Iran.

And coincidentally, the NYTimes doesn't seem to think he's that bad anymore...
Click to expand...
It doesn't say that Bolton is great now does it? It simply said that with regards to this issue, Bolton is right.
 
Last edited:
RightatNYU said:
I was offering an alternative interpretation of jfuh's statements, not my sentiment.
Click to expand...
Spin on my argument I see. Did you continue to read the remainder of the post at all? What I don't understand is how those of you on the right, how scandal after scandal that comes out from thie administration and the current GOP party that you still trust these guys? What happened to "restoration of integrity"? It only seems more of corruption, lies, and abuse of power.
 
jfuh said:
It doesn't say that Bolton is great now does it? It simply said that with regards to this issue, Bolton is right.
Click to expand...

Which is a 180 from their prior stance that John Bolton would be completely out of place in the UN, and a disaster. So far, of all the editorials I've seen since he actually GOT IN, they're backing him 1-0.
 
RightatNYU said:
Which is a 180 from their prior stance that John Bolton would be completely out of place in the UN, and a disaster. So far, of all the editorials I've seen since he actually GOT IN, they're backing him 1-0.
Click to expand...
Seems quite a contrast. All editorials, and 1-0. Not to mention it's not even a compliment of him, but simply an agreement of what he has done.
Bolton has been in the UN now for how long? Done nothing at all productive or drawn any additional support from foreign nations.
I remind you that bolton is someone that is so pathetic that Powell came out to meet with congressional leaders against him.
 
jfuh said:
Spin on my argument I see. Did you continue to read the remainder of the post at all? What I don't understand is how those of you on the right, how scandal after scandal that comes out from thie administration and the current GOP party that you still trust these guys? What happened to "restoration of integrity"? It only seems more of corruption, lies, and abuse of power.
Click to expand...

Remainer of WHAT post? That was the entirety of your post. Naught else.

And what on earth does the rest of that have to do with the topic at hand? Oh, that's right, nothing at all. Your poll was proven to be bullshit, but you subscribe to the Dan Rather "Fake but accurate" school of politics? I'm obviously not going to win you over on the broader issues and you're not going to convince me of anything, so let's save the time and skip it.
 
jfuh said:
Seems quite a contrast. All editorials, and 1-0. Not to mention it's not even a compliment of him, but simply an agreement of what he has done.
Bolton has been in the UN now for how long? Done nothing at all productive or drawn any additional support from foreign nations.
I remind you that bolton is someone that is so pathetic that Powell came out to meet with congressional leaders against him.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? You attack Bolton for not doing anything productive, but by whose standards? Do you know ANYTHING about what happens in the UN? Do you know what he HAS done? What has he failed to do that someone else WOULD have done? Who was the ambassador before Bolton? How about before him? Without google, I'd say you probably have no clue, and have even less of an idea of what they did. UN ambassador is not a glamorous job, it doesnt usually get written up in the NYTimes, especially if the ambassador is a righty. The fact that it was shows that hes doing something right.

God, your "ability" to take a positive editorial from the times about the UN ambassador and somehow construe it to be a sign that he's "pathetic" is just, well....pathetic.
 
RightatNYU said:
Remainer of WHAT post? That was the entirety of your post. Naught else.
Click to expand...
That's a flat out lie.
jfuh said:
Even if he had 43%, that's still quite low, particularily at a time of war (contrast Eisenhower, Roosevelt, JFK).
Click to expand...
That's the remainder of the post you responded to.

RightatNYU said:
And what on earth does the rest of that have to do with the topic at hand? Oh, that's right, nothing at all. Your poll was proven to be bullshit,
Click to expand...
It has everything to do with this. THere's a reason that this poll came out that showed such a low approval rating. I gave the exact reasons as to why, all you've done is attempt to discredit me. with pointless personal attacks. Could you start and discuss the issues.
 
alphieb said:
It seems like all I ever hear Bush say is TERRORIST........TERRORIST......FREEDOM.........
Jeeze, Doesn't he have anything else to say?
Click to expand...

oh man... dont get me started... watching the state of the union address was so tedious...
 
RightatNYU said:
I was offering an alternative interpretation of jfuh's statements, not my sentiment.
Click to expand...

The truth is and old broom could have beaten Kerry in 2004 He was that bad a candidate and now the dems are going to do the same thing in 2008 with the "Ice Princess" Hillary.......
 
jfuh said:
That's a flat out lie.

That's the remainder of the post you responded to.
Click to expand...

Uh, I DID quote the entire thing.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=243930&postcount=32

I have no clue what argument you're trying to make.


It has everything to do with this. THere's a reason that this poll came out that showed such a low approval rating.
Click to expand...

Yes, the reason is that the poll was incredibly flawed, as I proved above.

I gave the exact reasons as to why, all you've done is attempt to discredit me. with pointless personal attacks. Could you start and discuss the issues.
Click to expand...

I'm confused, what "exact reasons" did you give?

Care to discuss the issues? You must be joking.

This thread is about one issue: The CBS poll that claimed that bush had a 34% approval rating. I took that issue and proved that this poll was completely unreliable and false. That's the end of the discussion. If you want to talk about Iraq, or Katrina, or wiretapping, then go start a thread about it and have fun. This ones been finished.
 
Are there ANY polls that reflect Bush's approval (or lack thereof) ratings that you guys would agree with?

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

Or is it suffice to say that any poll reflecting a majority disapproval is a junk poll?

Ever heard the phrase, "Everyone marching was out of step but Johnny?"
 
Last edited:
Are there ANY polls that reflect Bush's approval (or lack thereof) ratings that you guys would agree with?
Click to expand...

Sure, a poll taken outside the Naval Submarine Base, Bangor Wa.
 
Captain America said:
Are there ANY polls that reflect Bush's approval (or lack thereof) ratings that you guys would agree with?

http://http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

Or is it suffice to say that any poll reflecting a majority disapproval is a junk poll?

Ever heard the phrase, "Everyone marching was out of step but Johnny?"
Click to expand...

I cited one earlier. Rasmussen is one of the best polling firms in the country, it currently has Bush at 43%.

www.rasmussenreports.com
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
Sure, a poll taken outside the Naval Submarine Base, Bangor Wa.
Click to expand...

:rofl Right on. Go Navy.

But then again, some might question the opinions of those who work with something that's long, hard and full of seamen.:rofl
 
RightatNYU said:
Uh, I cited one earlier. Rasmussen is one of the best polling firms in the country, it currently has Bush at 43%.

www.rasmussen.com
Click to expand...

Fair enuff..... I couldn't get the link to work for me. Rassmussen has Bush at 57% disapproval rating I take it?
 
Captain America said:
Fair enuff..... I couldn't get the link to work for me. Rassmussen has Bush at 57% disapproval rating I take it?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, that was my fault, its rasmussen reports.

Here's the direct link:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm

Today it's 43% fav, 55% opposed. They use a unique system of rolling 3 day polls that work very well in picking up on trends, identifying voter reactions, and offering ideas where numbers are heading. Lots of polls on there, mostly free.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom