CNN reports that Bush is making history:
Bush leaving office more unpopular than Nixon
WASHINGTON DC (CNN) -- On the day that President-elect Barack Obama is visiting the White House, a new national poll suggests that the current occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is the most unpopular president since approval ratings were first sought more than six decades ago.
Seventy-six percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday disapprove of how President Bush is handling his job.
That's an all-time high in CNN polling and in Gallup polling dating back to World War II.
"No other president's disapproval rating has gone higher than 70 percent. Bush has managed to do that three times so far this year," says CNN polling director Keating Holland. "That means that Bush is now more unpopular than Richard Nixon was when he resigned from office during Watergate with a 66 percent disapproval rating."
Before Bush, the record holder for presidential disapproval was Harry Truman, with a 67 percent disapproval rating in January of 1952, his last full year in office.
Hmm, there's something about Harry - despite a high number of undecided Truman once held both the highest disapproval rating ever and the historic ebb tide for approval. Gallup explained this last April:
Harry Truman's 22% approval rating was accompanied by a 64% disapproval rating, leaving 14% of those interviewed who did not offer an opinion about his job performance. Richard Nixon's two 24% job approval ratings in 1974 were paired with 63% and 66% disapproval ratings, leaving 13% and 10% with no opinion.
In the most recent poll for Bush, his approval rating is 28% while his disapproval rating is 69%, leaving only 3.5% (rounded to 4%) who don't have an opinion.
That said, per CNN Bush's current *disapproval* rating is 76%. With no undecideds, that leaves room for a 24% approval rating. Hey, did Bush manage to take out Harry's 22% mark? And why can't I find that seemingly simple number? These reports indicate that there were no undecideds at all - how odd.
The prelude is looking more like the beginning of the Carter administration every day.
Verner, sorry we missed this time.
Ranger:"My guess is that GITMO policy remains essentially unchanged while Obama "explores his options" and "works on a new policy." It will fade from the MSM headlines as it is no longer nessessary to beat on the occupant of the White House. Dems won't say anything about it, as the US public really doesn't care that much one way or the other."
My thoughts exactly.
Posted by: clarice | November 11, 2008 at 02:08 PM
"Im sorry but thats just not true.Is she just not capable of honesty or is she just a liar?I need some help with this."
So something slimy crawls out of a vat of thousand year old bat's piss and claims something is untrue.Welcome to the world of the Obamanoid.
Posted by: PeterUK | November 11, 2008 at 02:09 PM
The Republicans have left the Obama Administration considerably less fiscal running room than would be ideal at the outset of a severe recession, and now they intend to complain about the consequences of their own legacy.
Posted by: truthynesslover | November 11, 2008 at 01:40 PM
You mean like how the Clinton administration handed a recession to Bush on the way in, and then Democrats complained about how many jobs had been lost under Bush?
You mean like how the Democrat cronies looted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, then had their Democrat legislators fight tooth and nail to prevent serioud regulation of the GSEs even after they had been caught red handed with their hands in the till, then blamed the entire economic fallout of the GSE collapse on Bush?
That's the way the game gets played. Some times it breaks your way, some times it doesn't.
BTW, Obama is already behind the curve on the economy. They just reported on the radio that 70% of people think the economy will turn around as soon as Obama takes office. Unfortunately for Barry, economists are exspecting un-employment to continue climing until the end of 09 at least, at which point it will be at around 8.5 to 9%. Sucks to Barry and have to explain that "the fundimentals of the economy are sound" and "things have turned around" in the face of those kinds of un-employment numbers.
Oh, and add to that the fact that a lot of those people thinking they are going to get a tax cut, or at least no tax increase, are going to see their take home pay drop dramatically when the cap on FICA taxes get lifted.
Posted by: Ranger | November 11, 2008 at 02:10 PM
The Republicans have left the Obama Administration considerably less fiscal running room than would be ideal at the outset of a severe recession, and now they intend to complain about the consequences of their own legacy.
Posted by: truthynesslover | November 11, 2008 at 01:40 PM
You mean like how the Clinton administration handed a recession to Bush on the way in, and then Democrats complained about how many jobs had been lost under Bush?
You mean like how the Democrat cronies looted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, then had their Democrat legislators fight tooth and nail to prevent serioud regulation of the GSEs even after they had been caught red handed with their hands in the till, then blamed the entire economic fallout of the GSE collapse on Bush?
That's the way the game gets played. Some times it breaks your way, some times it doesn't.
BTW, Obama is already behind the curve on the economy. They just reported on the radio that 70% of people think the economy will turn around as soon as Obama takes office. Unfortunately for Barry, economists are exspecting un-employment to continue climing until the end of 09 at least, at which point it will be at around 8.5 to 9%. Sucks to Barry and have to explain that "the fundimentals of the economy are sound" and "things have turned around" in the face of those kinds of un-employment numbers.
Oh, and add to that the fact that a lot of those people thinking they are going to get a tax cut, or at least no tax increase, are going to see their take home pay drop dramatically when the cap on FICA taxes get lifted.
Posted by: Ranger | November 11, 2008 at 02:11 PM
How cool is this? The FEC is going to audit the McCain campaign but not, I repeat not, the Obama campaign. Via Hot Air.
Posted by: Sue | November 11, 2008 at 02:11 PM
I suggest adding the prefix "un" to your handle. Should help.
Lochnessbluffer is fine. Might need to rename the thread History with a kilt, though.
Posted by: Elliott | November 11, 2008 at 02:15 PM
Sue,
I think that's because McCain took public financing. I heard one of the media conference calls a few weeks ago where Rick Davis mentioned that was the reason they would be audited but Obama's campaign would not.
Posted by: Elliott | November 11, 2008 at 02:16 PM
They just reported on the radio that 70% of people think the economy will turn around as soon as Obama takes office.
And apparently they have pretty specific ideas about what the Bill-payer in chief will do for them.
I'm thinking here of the video of the lady who went to an O rally and came away saying that she never expected to see something like that, and that "I won't have to work to fill my gas tank. I won't have to work to pay my mortage."
If he managed to give people these kinds of ideas with his fine words, he's gonna have some 'splainin' to do.
Posted by: PD | November 11, 2008 at 02:17 PM
Thx, Extraneous. I'd been thinking of leaving gun at home not conceal carry, but....
Posted by: Jim Ryan | November 11, 2008 at 02:18 PM
Thomas Collins,
On a "least damage" basis I'd go for someone like Lugar.
Another fantasy game is going to be: "What does this gutter trash have to do to be forced to resign?" I expect the popularity of that game to grow by leaps and bounds beginning in March.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 11, 2008 at 02:22 PM
Hey truthy--I know you don't care (or understand) but the only thing the geniuses at the New Yorker's "think tank" can come up with to deal with the economic downturn is a "stimulus package" which gets huger the worse things are? Says a lot about the quality of thought over there.
Throw money at the problem. Yeah, that always works. (Yes, I know Repubs do it to. It doesn't work for them, either).
I though Obama had a "plan." What is it? What was it?
Posted by: Boatbuilder | November 11, 2008 at 02:29 PM
Sue-
Election law and the FEC watchdogs only apply to Republicans in the upcoming Obama Administration.
Rick-
Thanks for the links was going to ask you something similiar yesterday. I'm going to look up a few things but I'm a bit surprised by the reaction. One thing regarding your civil unrest comments is that China and the outgoing Bush Administration might be able to come to an agreement to end the Korean War (just trying to keep things positive)-I'm thinking an offer might be on the table. I'm sure the Japanese and South Koreans would be on board too.
Posted by: RichatUF | November 11, 2008 at 02:30 PM
Boatbuilder-
"think tank" can come up with to deal with the economic downturn is a "stimulus package" which gets huger the worse things are? Says a lot about the quality of thought over there.
Hey it worked in Japan in the 1990's didn't it?
Posted by: RichatUF | November 11, 2008 at 02:33 PM
PeterUK and Elliott, thank you - I brought a little paper poppy home from London that I meant to wear today and you've reminded me to put it on.
Best Veterans' Day/Remembrance Day wishes to all and thank you to all our JOM veterans, and their families, for their service.
Posted by: Porchlight | November 11, 2008 at 02:33 PM
I think nothing provides a better stimulus than the notion that one must redo the business or go bankrupt. Continuing to shove more money in the pockets of the profligate only stimulates then to ask for more.
Posted by: clarice | November 11, 2008 at 02:38 PM
Of course this is from WorldNet Daily but...
Barry ♥'s Hamas
Sleep well Israel.
Posted by: Soylent Red | November 11, 2008 at 02:41 PM
Continuing to shove more money in the pockets of the profligate only stimulates then to ask for more.
Right Clarice. The reason these people need help is because they weren't operating correctly. All bailouts do is enable bad behavior.
You don't fix an alcohol addiction by providing more alcohol.
Posted by: Soylent Red | November 11, 2008 at 02:44 PM
Newt had a temper tantrum, 13 years ago; and that allowed Clinton to get the upper hand. Clinton demagogued the issue, and the '94 class of Republicans had their major loss. That told them, that budget reform was not a winner. Right around that
time Franklin Raines was cooking up phony
deficit projections; not unlike what Skilling was doing in the private sector.
Meanwhile the only significant reductions were in defense, intelligence, et al. There was a tech boom, with a bubble that popped
in the Spring of 2000. The CRA made it possible for the subprime market to explode. We had a rude awakening on September 11th; but non defense expenditures
rose as high as legitimate national security. Consequently, even the sizable capital flows to the treasury; were not enough. Greenspan made it worse, with his
interest rate ski-slope from 2004-2006. Virtually every policy that arose from the
new congress has been a disaster; Obama's tenure is just emblematic of that. McCain was one of the only who tried to fix it, like he did with immigration, campaign finance, et al; but he got negative credit
for the attempt. The affluent were the swing vote in this election; and they voted
as if they didn't know how their money came to them.
Consider this, Sarah ran for office and won in 1992,1996, and in 2006; when Gale force winds were moving against the GOP atCategory
3, as opposed to the Category 5 of today. You say there's a better candidate, with a better track record; who they had to invent tar to throw at find me one, and I'll
relent, but you know where I stand. Mind you it's going to take a miracle, to handle
the economic plebiscite in the One's capacity to handle the matter.
Posted by: narciso | November 11, 2008 at 02:46 PM
BTW truthy...
Where the hell is my handout check? And, once again, I checked the bank account and Barry hasn't paid my mortgage. Gas tank is getting a little low too.
WTF truthy? You need to get your boy on the ball.
Posted by: Soylent Red | November 11, 2008 at 02:46 PM
Still no word from McCain on the attacks on Palin?
The man who wanted to be Commander in Chief remains AWOL.
Posted by: PD | November 11, 2008 at 02:46 PM
"I'm a bit surprised by the reaction."
I'm not. The "Emerging Markets" gargle is almost the silliest thing I've ever seen (Alternative Energy takes the cake). The home of the most ancient civilization (at least arguably) is an "emerging market"?
The wondrous mix of cronyism, feudalism and the deep conviction that "joss" determines destiny won't change in Asia any time soon. The Chinese people know damn well that property rights are even more of an illusion under Chicom rule than they were under any Emperor. Much of Asia feels the same way. The Chinese government doesn't hold American bonds because it believes in capitalism but because it has absolutely no faith in its own (or Asia's) ability to maintain growth.
They are correct.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 11, 2008 at 02:49 PM
A sad commentary for this Veteran's Day. Sounds like we'll have fewer vets to celebrate in the future.
Poll on Military.com:
When I think of President Obama as my commander-in-chief…
I'm filled with pride. I look forward to serving under him. 19%
I'm worried and doubt I'll re-up when my time comes. 53%
I'm ready to salute and follow his orders. 27%
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 11, 2008 at 03:00 PM
Re Soylent Red's posting of the article on Obama's folks meeting with folks from Hamas:
In the article it is stated that the Obama folks asked the Hamas folks to keep the meetings secret until after the election. Looks as if Hamas kept the secret. In light of the leaks on the Obama/Bush meeting, I can only conclude that Hamas is a more reliable negotiating partner than Obamistan!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 11, 2008 at 03:02 PM
"Sleep well Israel"
Funny you mention this. On my way to work, I use a main interstate that intersects the city of San Francisco. This section of the freeway has many billboards, one notable one was "Congratulations Madame Speaker"....today there is one that just seemed so out of place -
"Visit Israel"
Posted by: Enlightened | November 11, 2008 at 03:06 PM
In the past two election cycles, Democrats have added ten new Democratic veterans to Congress. Last week, President-elect Barack Obama helped close the gap among military voters, winning 44 percent of veterans as opposed to John F. Kerry’s 41 percent in 2004.
Domestically, the party that rushed us into war in Iraq has abandoned the needs of veterans here at home. It was a Democratic senator, Jim Webb of Virginia, who led the successful fight against the Bush Administration for a new GI Bill. It has been Democrats who have fought to expand health benefits for veterans, improve access to health care for reservists, and cut through the red tape at the VA.
Support the troops,remember them on veterns day.
Posted by: truthynesslover | November 11, 2008 at 03:16 PM
Now this is what you need for self defence
Posted by: PeterUK | November 11, 2008 at 03:17 PM
Sara, do you have corresponding numbers for Pres. Bush?
Posted by: PD | November 11, 2008 at 03:18 PM
Someone help me out please. What does Obama gain by leaking a falsehood about what discussions were between Obama and President Bush?
Posted by: bad | November 11, 2008 at 03:19 PM
Just stopped by a local gunshop to get some ammo for deer season. They were moving Ammo at a brisk pace and had also been selling a LOT of long rifles.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 11, 2008 at 03:24 PM
Second question. What compelled Podesta to finally step up and tell the truth, that Bush DID NOT ask for quid quo pro?
Was there a recording of the discussion?
Posted by: bad | November 11, 2008 at 03:28 PM
Elliott,
Lochnessbluffer is fine
LOL, I was thinking of Lochnessmistress!
Posted by: Ann | November 11, 2008 at 03:29 PM
I wonder if you who are so anxious to see GM go under have considered the drain on your taxes when close to 400,000 employees are suddenly on the street and applying for unemployment and/or welfare?
GM is more than producing cars, BTW. What about trucks, buses, military equipment, satellite systems, etc. GM also has other substantial business interests. General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC) and its subsidiaries provide a broad range of financial services and insurance products to GM customers, dealers and employees. Hughes Electronics Corp is a specialist in telecommunications, focused primarily on entertainment, information and business communications services. GM Locomotive Group produces diesel-electric locomotives and related products. Allison Transmission is the largest US producer of medium- and heavy-duty vehicle transmissions.
Although it is the UAW pensions to the tune of billions a month that are the underlying problem, there are lots of people working for GM who don't fit that profile:
Engineers
Quality Assessment
Research and Development
Car Dealer
Application Software Management
Chemical and Environmental Science Lab
Creative Design
Financial Services
IT Planning
Market Research
Technology Development
Most would be salaried employees and they don't have the guarantees the hourly employees get thru the UAW.
Steve Jobs to head GM? Better yet, how 'bout Mitt Romney, the turn around specialist?
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 11, 2008 at 03:30 PM
Was there a recording of the discussion?
Aren't all conversations in the Oval Office recorded?
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 11, 2008 at 03:32 PM
Sara, do you have corresponding numbers for Pres. Bush?
Not handy, but the majority of the military support their mission under Bush, so I think the numbers would be positive.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 11, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Not handy, but the majority of the military support their mission under Bush, so I think the numbers would be positive.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 11, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Re-enlistment rates are the biggest indication of how much member of the military support the policies of the Commander in Chief. They have been at record levels for the last 5 years.
If 53% are anticipating getting out now, maybe we will need a draft in the next year or two.
Hope all those under 30 people who voted for Obama are ready to put there bodies behind their votes.
Posted by: Ranger | November 11, 2008 at 03:43 PM
bad- where did you see Podesta admit that?
Posted by: MayBee | November 11, 2008 at 03:43 PM
Support Lefwting Morons - Vote Present
Truthy's got that part right.
Posted by: Enlightened | November 11, 2008 at 03:44 PM
Maybee
He was shown on Fox News. Cnn also has a story saying Bush didn't do as potrayed by Obama aides.
LUN
Posted by: bad | November 11, 2008 at 03:48 PM
Maybee
Shep Smith was having a cow about why the Obama camp let the false story, which was given to multiple sources, stand uncorrected for so long.
Posted by: bad | November 11, 2008 at 03:51 PM
Sara-
I wonder if you who are so anxious to see GM go under...
Don't put me in that camp. I'm sure that Bush is going to relent and the GM/Chysler merger will go through, and the merged company will shed about half its work force using the bailout to fund UAW buyouts. The professional staff at the 2 companies are going to be updating resumes too and looking outside of Michigan for employment.
I could, almost, get worked up into a Malkin Purity Brigade lather on the bailout, but this is what we get when the US government forces automakers into CAFE standards, provides a generous tariff for truck building, and actively obstructs attempts to drill for oil (so oil prices, therefore gas prices, can be easily manipulated by the vagaries of other nations foreign policy). Elections have consequences and the UAW (oops GM), whose average employee's pay and benefits package is north of 150k, will get a bailout provided by coming tax increases on people making 50k. I'm not sure what Ford's ideas are, but I think the 3 of them are playing chicken with each other, the Treasury, and the UAW and the bankruptcy filings are already printed.
Posted by: RichatUF | November 11, 2008 at 03:55 PM
If 53% are anticipating getting out now, maybe we will need a draft in the next year or two.
Unless we go into full depression, then the military is a great place to be as a re-upper.
My husband was due to retire at 20 but then the Carter years happened with interest rates at 19% and the employment picture grim, so we decided to stay another 5, ended up staying close to 8 more. The pay is lousy, and the hours worse, but at least we knew there would be a paycheck and healthcare, as bad as it was.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 11, 2008 at 03:57 PM
LUN
Posted by: bad | November 11, 2008 at 03:58 PM
"Support Lefwting Morons - Vote Present"
How about,Morons Support Movement ?
Posted by: PeterUK | November 11, 2008 at 04:05 PM
Thanks, bad.
Politico puts the original quotes in Rahm Emmanuel's mouth.
Obama’s newly appointed chief of staff Rahm Emanuel suggested Sunday that the president elect wasn’t interested in a deal to remove White House opposition to a stimulus package in exchange for congressional approval of the trade agreement, which has been opposed by unions and some Democrats.
Well. Now we know how the Obama team is going to play.
Posted by: MayBee | November 11, 2008 at 04:06 PM
What does Obama gain by leaking a falsehood
So far, he's become a multimillionaire, the most popular man in the world, and President-elect of the United States.
What have we gained by telling the truth and preserving confidences, is a better question.
Posted by: bgates | November 11, 2008 at 04:06 PM
"the bankruptcy filings are already printed"
I would hope so. The faster they file the faster people can adjust to the environment during restructuring. Chapter 11 provides a very good environment for clearing deadwood and retaining the individuals likely to contribute the most in the future. I would imagine that GM, Ford and Chrysler all have their lists prepared. There isn't a large company in the US which wouldn't be healthier after a 15% pruning of deadwood.
It isn't the end of the world nor the end of the companies, it's the end of the productive having to drag the unproductive along as their handicap for working in a decadent environment. I'm not going to bet on a refusal to bail them out but it's money down the drain. Airbus squared - a jobs program disguised as a company.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 11, 2008 at 04:15 PM
looking outside of Michigan for employment.
It isn't just Michigan. The 10 years I lived in Indiana, every single family in our neighborhood worked for GM in one capacity or another, either one of the many auto plants or Allison, or in GM racing or EDS.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 11, 2008 at 04:16 PM
Obama’s newly appointed chief of staff Rahm Emanuel suggested Sunday that the president elect wasn’t interested in a deal to remove White House opposition to a stimulus package in exchange for congressional approval of the trade agreement, which has been opposed by unions and some Democrats.
Was this some sort of set-up for the Monday meeting?
Posted by: bad | November 11, 2008 at 04:16 PM
Rick-
I'd hope the business side of the automakers would be trying to get a handle on the CDS exposure to F, GM, and Chysler bonds. It is the other stick in the mud in this, what if they all file and blow up another bank or insurance company (to three...who knows?). I agree with your point that shoveling money into them is a bad idea though but I'm not sure that the Bush Administration wants to take the risk on all three.
Sara-
I was being cheeky with the Michigan comment and thought that the UAW misery zone was a bit over the top.
Posted by: RichatUF | November 11, 2008 at 04:29 PM
The Democrats and their looney, liberal illuminatis like Dodd and Frank looted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac until they brought them down. When they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar, they blamed the entire collapse on Bush. Why aren't those two, in particular, held accountable?
Posted by: Angie Smith | November 11, 2008 at 08:06 PM
Regarding carrying concealed weapons.
The ankle holster with an AMT .380 is tolerable but it is still like having a ball and chain around you. Which is proper, because it is one.
They are heavy no matter where you carry them and a tremendous responsibility all of the time. That's why I don't carry one unless something calls for it.
One of the things about this country of which to be proud is how safe it is for ordinary citizens. Our job is to keep it that way.
Posted by: sbw | November 13, 2008 at 07:57 AM
more weird stats from alaska;
For now, more than 90,000 votes remain uncounted. More than 224,000 votes were cast on Election Day.
So almost a third of the votes remain unknown a week after election day. And none of it explains why turnout fell so dramatically:
Pundits at home and across the country said the turnout numbers smelled fishy. Fenumiai said Monday that there's no evidence of fraud or irregularities. "I can't speculate as to why people just didn't show up to vote," she said.
Hhhmmmm,the 'most popular govenor "runs for president and turnout is lower than 2004?
But Election Day is looking like it was a turnout bust in Alaska. As of Thursday, voter turnout in the state stood at a measly 45.1 percent -- well below the 69.1 percent turnout clocked in in the 2004 presidential race, according to state election officials.
maybe now we know HOW she got elected?
In her latest embarrassment, Sarah Palin has sparked new disbelief among Alaskans about her basic grasp of rudimentary facts about her own state. From Alaska Dispatch's Tony Hopfinger:
In an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren this week, Palin attempted to explain how oil development works in Alaska compared to other parts of the country. The governor claims Alaska is unique because it owns the oil, as opposed to oil companies holding sole claim to the crude on the North Slope. She’s wrong. We tried to find an example elsewhere in the country where a company owns the oil, but came up short ... Is it too much to ask that our leaders understand the fundamentals of oil leasing, taxing and ownership, both in Alaska and the rest of the country? We are America's oil province, after all.
Well, she did randomly insert the word "perhaps."
Posted by: truthynesslover | November 13, 2008 at 02:53 PM
I got no clue how I got here.
But, maybe the election turnout in AK was low because the election was pretty well decided by the time they voted AND the weather up there is pretty bad?
As to the energy issue, she's exactly right. Most oil in other parts of the U.S. is drilled on private property where royalties are paid to the landowner. One company will come in and buy royalties on huge tracts of realestate, and no other company can develope on those acres. I'd say she knows of which she speaks.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 15, 2008 at 11:49 AM
o.k. can you read?
The governor claims Alaska is unique because it owns the oil, as opposed to oil companies holding sole claim to the crude on the North Slope. She’s wrong. We tried to find an example elsewhere in the country where a company owns the oil, but came up short .
Posted by: truthynesslover | November 15, 2008 at 05:32 PM