Bush Descending
So, Bush continues to fall. Here’s the latest graph from Professor Pollkatz, combining results from 13 different polls asking, “do you approve of President Bush’s job performance?” (Click on the graph for a larger version.)
With Bush’s visible weakness, criticism is getting both more widespread and more pointed. For example, Clarence Page has a column on the latest vortex of doubletalk: Blurring the line between Hussein and 9/11.
There’s also a lot of interest in just what Bush intends to say to the world in his UN address tomorrow, and how the world is likely to respond. As Jay Bookman points out in an opinion piece in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, it’s not like Bush has a lot of time to play with: Deadlines in Iraq can’t be ignored. Simon Tisdale in The Guardian gives a pretty clear idea of the tough crowd Bush is likely to face: How the world can aid Iraq without helping Bush. And Josh Micah Marshall has an excellent Talking Points Memo entry where he talks about the way Bush & Co. seem stuck in a self-defeating cycle: Denial, anger, bargaining.
In a certain sense, I think this is Bush’s last chance. The polls show that solid majorities still approve of him personally (if not of his job performance), and think he’s essentially honest. It’s just that they (as ever) disapprove of his actual policies, and increasingly believe that he’s just not competent. Which leaves him a last opportunity: He could take advantage of that personal liking to apologize, both to the American people and to the world, and humbly ask for another chance. Maybe something like this:
I come before you today to make a painful admission: I have made mistakes. I mistakenly believed that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. I mistakenly allowed the American people to be misled about the nature of his involvement in the 9/11 attacks. And I mistakenly spurned the United Nations, insisting that the US could go it alone, if necessary, in overthrowing the dictatorship in Iraq and erecting a stable democracy in its place.
In all these actions, I must now admit to having been wrong. So I come to you humbly, contritely, acknowledging my error and asking you to give me another chance. I am a changed man. I promise that you won’t be disappointed.
Of course, there’s no way Bush would say something like that. Instead, we’ll get more bluster, more bravado, more little-kid taunting. It’s just his nature. Maybe Rove will still be able to pull an October Surprise (a real, live nucular crisis in Iran or North Korea? bin Laden’s head on a plate?), but I’m kinda doubting it. No, the most-likely scenario at this point, at least as I see it, is a continued lame-duck descent, with Bush raging against the dying of the light all the way down.
September 22nd, 2003 at 11:12 am
We can only hope.
September 22nd, 2003 at 12:46 pm
I’m beginning to think it’s humanity’s only hope.
September 23rd, 2003 at 3:29 am
Another Political Post in Which I Bore 98% of SDW Readers
This Newsweek article should give all you Democrats rallying behind Wesley Clark a loooooong moment of pause: “I would have…
September 23rd, 2003 at 3:29 am
Another Political Post in Which I Bore 98% of SDW Readers
This Newsweek article should give all you Democrats rallying behind Wesley Clark a loooooong moment of pause: “I would have…
September 23rd, 2003 at 3:31 am
Another Political Post in Which I Bore 98% of SDW Readers
This Newsweek article should give all you Democrats rallying behind Wesley Clark a loooooong moment of pause: “I would have…
September 23rd, 2003 at 10:14 am
It’s a tad annoying that you’ve used this misleading graphic. It appears Bush’s numbers are lower here than they actually are since the ratings don’t start at 0%.
September 23rd, 2003 at 10:38 am
There’s a certain irony in your complaining about that issue in particular, on behalf of this president in particular, seeing as his administration is the acknowledged master at lying with technically-true assertions that nevertheless create a misleading impression.
But honestly, I don’t think that’s the intention of the guy who created this graph, and it wasn’t my intention in choosing it. I’m just focusing on the actual data, rather than scrunching the interesting part into the top portion of a mostly-white graph. I like this one (the one just showing Bush’s numbers), because it includes lots of different polls, giving you a sense of the overall trend that is more objective than if you just look at one particular poll.
If you want a zero-based graph, you could check out the other ones Pollkatz offers where he just gives the Gallup numbers on lots of different presidents. But in that case, be prepared to be annoyed at the way choosing Gallup confronts the Bush-supporter with a really huge drop in the latest update (8 points in just a few weeks, or something like that). Ouch.
I guess one could also argue that putting 40% at the bottom of the graph is realistic, in that a president who drops below that point has essentially no hope of winning an election if he can’t turn that around.
But I’m not arguing that, and yeah, you’ve got a point. Warning to those who prefer going shopping to doing math: the numbers in the right margin are important. Ignore them at your peril.
September 23rd, 2003 at 10:03 pm
Some Spiffy Links
Ok, buckle up. – Daniel Drezner says that a reader of his who wrote to the Sacramento Bee about the censoring of Dan Weintraub got back a nasty email. I got back an email myself:Dear Mr. Williams: Thanks for the…
September 23rd, 2003 at 10:03 pm
Some Spiffy Links
Ok, buckle up. – Daniel Drezner says that a reader of his who wrote to the Sacramento Bee about the censoring of Dan Weintraub got back a nasty email. I got back an email myself:Dear Mr. Williams: Thanks for the…
September 23rd, 2003 at 10:04 pm
Some Spiffy Links
Ok, buckle up. – Daniel Drezner says that a reader of his who wrote to the Sacramento Bee about the censoring of Dan Weintraub got back a nasty email. I got back an email myself:Dear Mr. Williams: Thanks for the…
September 23rd, 2003 at 10:04 pm
Some Spiffy Links
Ok, buckle up. – Daniel Drezner says that a reader of his who wrote to the Sacramento Bee about the censoring of Dan Weintraub got back a nasty email. I got back an email myself:Dear Mr. Williams: Thanks for the…
September 25th, 2003 at 10:47 am
aply named sight
September 25th, 2003 at 1:44 pm
Steve W:
I initially had the same objection to the graph until I thought about it for a minute…the point of reference for good job/bad job isn’t zero, it’s 50%! Professor P. is certainly NOT a Bush fan, but he does do a good job of separating his opinions from his data analysis.
November 1st, 2004 at 11:48 am
EVER REASON BUSH USED TO JUSTIFY THR IRAQ WAR HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE AN UN REFUTEABLE LIE OR A MANIPULATION OF THE TRUE FACTS.AS A RESULT OF THESE LIES OVER A THOUSAND U.S. SOLDIERS HAVE DIED,WE HAVE APPROX.
26,800 WOUNDED&DISABLED,AND OVER 100,000 IRAQI CIVILIANS HAVE BEEN KILLED.I ASK YOU WHO IS THE TERRORIST!!!! INSTEAD OF RUNNING FOR REAAPPOINTMENT BY THE SUPREME COURT,BUSH SHOULD BE UNDERGOING IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE MURDER OF AMERICAN TROOPS!!!!THIS MAN IS NOTHING BUT A LYING MURDERER WHO HAS USED THE OFFICE OF THE PRESCIDENCY FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL AGENDA.
April 3rd, 2005 at 12:42 am
Hello all,
You people knocking Bush !! he is not a Murderer, how would you like to have had your families perished in one of the trade centre buildings???
Iraq is an evil place and it’s a shame that there are lot’s of civilian Iraqis there who don’t like the government that got killed but that comes with the territory unfortunately. If that shit head Saddam had not have been stopped he would have kept on Slaughtering he’s own people any way and more lives would have been lost than that of the resultant War.
It was long overdue actually…the liberation, They should haved wiped him off the face of the map the first time around. So people should be thankful to George Bush a man of true Grit, a hero.
All the Best….Dr. Robert