Bush Nearing Nixon’s Approval Ratings
Filed under: George W. Bush, Polls — Michael van der Galien on June 22, 2007 @ 12:09 pm CEST
This will not make Bush very happy: his approval ratings are, with 26%, at an all time low. No President, except for Nixon, ever had such low approval - and high disapproval ratings. Of those asked, 65% disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job. This 65% includes 1/3 of all Republican voters.
Nixon’s record is 23% - it will be interesting to see whether Bush will break Nixon’s record.
Before Bush supporters start defending him by saying that the war is to blame:
Bush scores record or near record lows on every major issue: from the economy (34 percent approve, 60 percent disapprove) to health care (28 percent approve, 61 percent disapprove) to immigration (23 percent approve, 63 percent disapprove).
And there is more bad news, not just for Bush but for all Republicans: “50 percent of Americans disapprove of the president’s handling of terrorism and homeland security.”
The GOP strongest asset these last couple of years was homeland securty and the GWOT. If the voters start disapproving of the way the GOP deals with these issues, the will have an incredibly hard time winning the elections in 08. This is the domain of the GOP. If the GOP loses its edge on this one, Republicans cannot possibly hope to win.
Of course, these polls are also good news for Republicans, at least in so far that they know now that they can distance themselves from Bush as much as the want. They can criticize Bush’s policies on an whole array of issues, not just on Iraq; but also on the economy, health care, immigration and, yes, terrorism. No reason to hold back.
Yes, I am trying to look at this situation as “the glass half full.”
As far as the Demcrats are concerned: the approval ratings of Congress are horific as well. Something needs to be done about that - however, I consider the approval ratings for the President to be more important (politically) than those of Congress. At least at this point in time.
1 kritter
June 22, 2007 @ 1:32 pm CESTNixon actually comes off well in the comparison. Yes, there’s the black mark of Watergate, the arrogance of power, the numerous lies and omissions.
But there’s also the creation of the EPA and OSHA, his outreach to China, detente with Russia’s Breznev, antipoverty efforts, and the implementation of the first federal affirmative action programs. Today he would be classified as a liberal along the lines of Jimmy Carter.
Besides creating a Supreme Court that is slanted towards business interests over the ordinary taxpayer (no great achievement imo) what has Bush done?
2 Alan
June 22, 2007 @ 1:56 pm CESTI’m not sure Nixon is so comparable to Carter…Nixon was fairly conservative on social issues, even if he was liberal on economic ones. Though Carter wasn’t that liberal on social issues himself…
3 C Stanley
June 22, 2007 @ 2:30 pm CESTI think two things that Bush has done (for which he doesn’t get enough credit) are to create the Millenium Challenge Account program and to massively boost aid to Africa (particularly with the HIV/AIDS initiative- I realize that some of the methods are controversial but even those who disagree should admit that the large increase in funding HAS helped).
Domestically, again, there’s controversy over tax cuts (IMO, criticism is due not so much for the cuts themselves but for the simultaneous increase in spending) but with the cuts, the economy has improved and revenue to the federal government has increased.
Moderates and liberals should find agreement with No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bill, although many will say that NCLB wasn’t funded adequately (and conservatives will say that both of these were misguided).
Despite criticism for unilateral foreign policy, Bush insisted on multilateral talks with NK which at this point has led to some success.
There’s definitely a lot to criticize but I think that history will be a bit kinder to him than current day critics.
4 kritter
June 22, 2007 @ 2:32 pm CESTNixon’s domestic agenda would be viewed as very liberal today. I forgot to mention that he also adjusted social security payments upwards to match inflationary pressures.
Carter is viewed as a liberal now, but in his presidency was viewed as a social and fiscal moderate.
My point is that the country has moved so far to the right, that Nixon would not be welcomed into today’s GOP.
5 Bush Nearing Nixon’s Approval Ratings » The Moderate Voice
June 22, 2007 @ 2:33 pm CEST[…] Please click here to read more. […]
6 M. McCartney
June 22, 2007 @ 2:41 pm CESTNot to quibble, but I believe that Harry S. Truman once tumbled to a 22% approval rating (according to Gallup) in the latter days of his presidency, besting Richard Nixon in the “Worst Ever” category.
Of course, polling as we know it has only existed since the 1930s. It would’ve been interesting to see what rating Abraham Lincoln would’ve garnered in early 1861, for example.
7 kritter
June 22, 2007 @ 3:02 pm CESTHarry Truman was only unpopular because of the Korean War. He had a host of major successes including implementation of the Marshall Plan in Europe, shepherding the US into the newly-created UN, avoiding a mainland invasion of Japan in choosing to use the A-bomb, and having the courage to integrate the armed forces.
I’m sorry, but I find the comparisons of W to Truman and Lincoln absolutely ludicrous. Bush’s popularity ratings have been in the toilet for his entire second term, and rightfully so. Most of his successes- have been controversial, and his failures in the realm of loss of civil liberties, bloating and inefficiency of the federal bureaucracy, management of two wars, ineptitude in dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, disconnect of the federal response during Katrina, politicization of the DOJ, encouraging war profiteering, global warming denial, have been almost universally decried. I don’t think historians will save his hide.
8 David Carter
June 23, 2007 @ 2:03 am CESTIf anything, when this incompetent excuse for a president is viewed through a genuine historical perspective, the primary focus of most of these future historians will be how amazing it was that we managed to impeach him and, in the end, save the bill of rights and our country….at least, that is my hope for this beleaguered nation. If this congress fails in it’s most basic oversite responsibility and does not impeach Bush, Cheney, Rice, and Gonzales, future presidents will know that they have unlimited power, and no possibility of any consequences for their actions. The American experiment in representative democracy will be over. And many will mourn.
9 nabeel jamshed
October 18, 2007 @ 11:20 am CESTi think that bush does not have the charismatic personality, the long term vision of nixon and i think it was the biggest mistake of the millinium to select an incompetent and ammature person as the president of the united states. to think that he could ride in nixon shoes is non sense. nixon, who won the second term in office by land slide only to loose the office as an after math of water gate scandal was a great intellect and a leader unlike the texas tyrant who resembles the likes of billy the kid. if u run against bush he would make famous.