Robert's Virtual Soapbox
It's not mean if it's true.
Last updated:
9/2/2005; 1:48:27 AM


August 2005
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Jul   Sep



Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
Subscribe to "Robert's Virtual Soapbox" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

E-mail this blog's author, Robert Crook:
Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
 

Tuesday, August 30, 2005

 

Poll: Most Americans on Cindy's side

as Bush plays 'How low can you go?'

From The Washington Post today:

Rising gas prices and ongoing bloodshed in Iraq continue to take their toll on President Bush, whose standing with the public has sunk to an all-time low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The survey found Bush's job approval rating at 45 percent, down seven points since January and the lowest ever recorded for the president in Post-ABC surveys. Fifty-three percent disapproved of the job Bush is doing.

The war has been a drag on Bush's presidency for many months, but his Iraq approval ratings in the new poll were little changed from two months ago, despite widespread violence, a rash of U.S. casualties, antiwar protests outside the president's Texas ranch and a growing debate about reducing U.S. troop levels.

What may have pushed Bush's overall ratings down in the latest poll is pervasive dissatisfaction over soaring gasoline prices. Two-thirds of those surveyed said gas prices are causing financial hardship to them or their families. Gas prices stand to go even higher after Hurricane Katrina's rampage through the oil-rich Gulf of Mexico.

More ominously for the president, six in 10 Americans said there are steps the administration could take to reduce gas prices. Slightly more than a third say the recent run-up has been due to factors beyond the administration's control....

Bush also received negative marks for his handling of immigration, the economy and Social Security, although his ratings on the latter two were not as low as they were two months ago. A majority of Americans supported his handling of the campaign against terrorism.

The poll numbers paint a portrait of national frustration with the direction and leadership of the country, which, if not reversed in coming months, is likely to color the environment for next year's midterm elections, putting incumbents in both parties on the defensive.

Dissatisfaction is not limited to the president. Fewer than four in 10 Americans -- 37 percent -- approve of the way the Republican-controlled Congress is doing its job, the lowest rating for lawmakers in nearly eight years.

The survey also provided bad news for Democratic leaders, who are judged as offering Bush only tepid opposition. Slightly more than half of those surveyed expressed dissatisfaction with congressional Democrats for not opposing Bush more aggressively. [As they should have!]

Self-identified Democrats were particularly impatient. More than three in four said congressional Democrats have not gone far enough to oppose Bush on Iraq or on administration policies in general.... [Yep!]

Independents were similarly dissatisfied with Democratic leaders for not challenging the president over the war and other issues, with six in 10 saying Democrats have been too meek. [Are you listening, DLC?]

Public attitudes toward the war have not changed significantly since the first of the year, the poll found. Slightly more than four in 10 -- 42 percent -- approved of the job Bush is doing in Iraq; 57 percent disapproved, unchanged in recent months. Slightly more than half -- 53 percent -- said the war was not worth it, while 46 percent said it was, identical to the results of a Post-ABC poll two months ago. By a 51 percent to 38 percent ratio, the public said the United States is winning the war, despite mounting casualties and insurgent attacks.

A majority (54 percent) continued to say the United States should keep military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there; 44 percent said U.S. forces should be withdrawn. Six in 10 opposed announcing a timetable for withdrawal. Only about one in eight -- 13 percent -- said U.S. forces should be withdrawn immediately....

Despite escalating bloodshed, the struggles to approve a draft constitution and the well-covered antiwar protests led by Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq, the survey found little evidence that antiwar sentiment has increased the past two months.

The survey also found that Sheehan, who has been protesting the war outside Bush's ranch near Crawford, Texas, has become the most visible symbol of the antiwar movement. Fully three in four Americans have heard or read about her.

Sheehan met last year with Bush at an event for military families and has been seeking another meeting with him. Slightly more than half of the country -- 52 percent -- said Bush should meet her again; 46 percent said he should not. Fifty-three percent supported what she is doing and 42 percent opposed.

The poll found that opposition to the war has deepened among Democrats. Two months ago, two in three Democrats said they strongly disapproved of Bush's handling of Iraq; that has risen to three in four. Over that same period, the proportion of Democrats who described themselves as "angry" over Bush's Iraq policies has risen from 36 percent to 46 percent.

The poll found that Sheehan's activities may have helped increase support for the war among Bush supporters. Although eight in 10 Americans said Sheehan's protests have not changed their attitudes toward the war, one in 10 said she has made them more likely to support the conflict -- the same proportion that said she has made them less likely to support the war.

A total of 1,006 randomly selected adults were interviewed by telephone Aug. 25-28. The margin of sampling error for the results is plus or minus three percentage points.

Note that Bush's disapproval rating -- 53 percent -- is exactly the same percentage of people who support Cindy Sheehan and is exactly the same percentage of people who say that Gulf War II wasn't worth it. His approval rating -- 45 percent -- also mirrors, within the poll's margin of error, the percentage of people who oppose Sheehan, 42 percent, and the percentage of people who say that Gulf War II was worth it, 46 percent.

To me this indicates that the nation has taken sides along pretty strict anti-Bush and pro-Bush lines: Pretty much if you support Bush you support Gulf War II and oppose Cindy, and if you oppose Bush you oppose Gulf War II and support Cindy.

I'm not surprised that Cindy's anti-war efforts haven't significantly altered anti-war sentiment, because by the time Cindy began to camp out near Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, on Aug. 6, most Americans had already decided their position on Gulf War II.

In the Post-ABC Poll, when asked, "Has Sheehan made you more likely to support the war, more likely to oppose the war, or hasn't she had much effect on your opinion of the war?", 79 percent said she hasn't had much effect, 10 percent said she made them more likely to support the war, 9 percent said she made them more likely to oppose the war, and 2 percent said they weren't sure. The poll's margin of error makes the 1-percentage-point difference between the 10 percent more likely to support the war and the 9 percent more likely to oppose the war statistically insignificant.     

I am encouraged by the poll numbers, though: No more than 45 percent of the nation supports Bush in a series of recent national polls and more than 50 percent of the nation opposes him in a series of recent national polls. Congress' approval rating of less than 40 percent in recent national polls indicates blood in the water, as does California Gov. Ahhhnuld Schwarzenegger's 34 percent approval rating in a recent California poll.

November 2006 should be interesting; anti-Republican sentiment should be so great that even if the Repugnicans fuck with the electronic voting machines again, it will be obvious that they have done so.


10:41:15 PM    Comments []

Photo

Associated Press photo

California Gov. Ahhhnuld Schwarzenegger pictured today with Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa at the governor's office here in Sacramento.

Underwhelmed by His Orangeness

Today I saw California Gov. Ahhhnuld Schwarzenegger in person for the first time. I was within spitting distance of him (but did not actually spit on him).

The California state agency for which I work sent out an all-staff e-mail within an hour of Schwarzenegger's visit stating that he would be visiting. I detest the man, but I thought I'd see what he looks like in person.

Most of my fellow state employees verbalized the same reason: They wanted to see how tall he was, how wrinkly he was, or, in my case, how orange he appears in person. (He often looks like an Oompa-Loompa on steroids on TV and in pictures.)

Besides, I figured, if Ahhhnuld were to get shot or something and I were there to witness it, what a kick-ass blog piece I'd get out of it.

Schwarzy was wearing the same suit and tie as pictured in the AP photo above. He is surprisingly short, probably no more than an inch or two taller than I am, and I'm about 5'9" or 5'10". While his upper body is fairly bulky, I noted that he appears to have chicken legs, especially for a former bodybuilder. To his credit, he didn't look as orange as I had thought that he would (although why he wants to accent his orangeness with an orange tie I don't know).

I could have shaken the guv's hand had I wanted to -- some of those standing immediately next to me shook his hand -- but I don't shake hands with Republican politicians, especially ones who come into power the way Schwarzenegger did. (The 2003 California gubernatorial recall election, while legal, was basically a do-over because the Repugnicans had nominated the loser Bill Simon to run against former Gov. Gray Davis in 2002. The Repugs didn't get their way when Davis was re-elected, so they called for a do-over, only this time they put forth a Hollywood action hero.)

Anyway, Schwarzenegger shook state employees' hands outside of the building for perhaps a few minutes before he went inside the building to have his meeting with his suck-ups, and then all of us went back to our work.

I might have offended some of his supporters with the groping jokes I made as I walked back to my office, but as Schwarzenegger's approval rating among Californians is only 34 percent, statistically speaking, I pissed off only about one in three people.


7:17:35 PM    Comments []

Photo  Photo

Reuters and AFP photos

Upper left: A man and his dog wait to be rescued from the roof of their flooded house in New Orleans today after Hurricane Katrina visited the city. Upper right: A Coast Guard helicopter lifts a person to safety today in New Orleans. Below left: New Orleans residents are rescued from rooftop by boat today. Below right: More New Orleans residents await rescue from a rooftop. Katrina is believed to have killed hundreds who had had plenty of warning.

Photo  Photo

Katrina: Good for the gene pool?

First, let me remind you that it's not mean if it's true.

That said, what's up with all of the people who were given plenty of warning but decided to remain in the wake of Hurricane Katrina?

It would be devastating to lose your home and most if not all of your possessions to a hurricane, tornado, flood, fire, earthquake or other disaster, no doubt. But it's not like if you remain with your house you can save it from the likes of Hurricane Katrina.

But lots of people in some red states remained with their houses, so lots of people in some red states died, unnecessarily. My guess is that their primary reason for remaining in their homes was to prevent any looting.

It would be an easy choice for me to make: My home and my possessions or my life?

The victims of Hurricane Katrina are all red staters, and most of the red states already get more federal tax dollars than they pay in, but I'm going to donate to the American Red Cross anyway. Here's how you can, too.


6:40:34 PM    Comments []



© Copyright 2005 Robert Crook. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
Last update: 9/2/2005; 1:48:27 AM.
Powered by