MyDD :: NBC Poll: Another New Low for Bush

NBC Poll: Another New Low for Bush

by Chris Bowers, Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 08:20:59 PM EST

Low numbers for Bush, and low numbers for Congressional Republicans. From the release:

The poll shows that Bush's approval rating stands at 39 percent, a new low for the president. In the last NBC/Wall Street Journal survey, which was released in mid-September, 40 percent approved of Bush's job performance while 55 percent disapproved. In addition, just 28 percent believe the country is headed in the right direction, another all-time low in Bush's presidency.(...)

In addition, with 13 months until the 2006 congressional elections, 48 percent say they prefer a Democratic-controlled Congress, compared with 39 percent who want the Republicans to control Capitol Hill. In fact, that nine-point difference is the largest margin between the parties in the 11 years the NBC/Journal poll has been tracking this question.

What would a nine-point victory in the national vote for the House mean to Democrats? Well, for one thing, it probably means that they would win all thirty of these seats.

Tags: Republicans (all tags)

Permalink :: 18 Comments :: Post a Comment

Yay (none / 0)

Seeing that we only have to win 15 seats to retake Congress, I think we could do it.

Max Friedman

by Max Friedman on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 08:26:15 PM EST

I don't think that Bush has ever been (none / 0)

that popular. He wasn't that popular a president back in November 2004. So what does this say about Kerry? People just didn't like Kerry. At all. And Edwards was incompetent. A lot of voters (idiots, IMO) didn't much like Bush, but found Kerry insufferable.

And these yahoos Edwards and Kerry both want to run again? Please, does the ego know no bounds?

McCain is defining Obama, and Obama is neither defining himself, nor McCain. This is awful.

by jgarcia on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 08:57:28 PM EST

Re: I don't think that Bush has ever been (none / 0)

I pretty much agree. However in regard to Edwards; being imcompetent never hurt Bush (maybe the people just demand that Dems elected President are competent as many of the Republicans elected to that office are suspect)

by mtguyinokc on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 09:14:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

CA-48 can use the help today (none / 0)

when the numbers are hot off the press!

We go to ballot on Dec 6th and could use all the help we can get.

Take a look at Steve Young for Congress and see if shocking the Republicans back into the stoneage is worth a few dollars of yours?

Help us win the seat the Republicans least expect us to win and start the 2006 elections right!

...just a red meat eatin' Democratic Dawg at PolCampaign

by BigDog on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 09:31:48 PM EST

Re: CA-48 can use the help today (none / 0)

Any polling in CA-48?

by dantheman on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 09:36:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CA-48 can use the help today (none / 0)

We are the minority in a heavy Republican district. Our race is counter intuitive EXCEPT:

A. The country has turned on the Admin
B. This is Special Election with an expected turnout less than 20%
C. We have just been given a 100 phone specialized phone bank to use to solicit Absentee Ballot applications which we can deliver by hand.
D. We will have additional GOTV troops from other sources now that we won the nomination Oct 4th.
E. Our opponent takes us for granted.

We need to move just turnout our base and effect the Indy's and Republicans and we can simply suprise the World on Dec 6th.

The Republican Nomination was won with just 10% of the Districts voters and 8% of the it's population. The General election,after the recent 20% turnout for the Special CA-48th Primary, the Nov 8th turnout for the State wide Special Election by Gov Muscles then the Dec 6th Special General Election of the CA-48th....it'll be lucky to get 18% turnout.

When we have our people out by absentee and in person, we can win. It's that light turnout that makes it really possible. And it takes money.

We're worth your money. It will be spent well.

...just a red meat eatin' Democratic Dawg at PolCampaign

by BigDog on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 10:04:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

VT AL? (none / 0)

Seriously? Vermont has got to be the most liberal state in the country. Anyone got an explination for this? Or is it just because it's an open seat?

by dantheman on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 09:37:31 PM EST

Re: VT AL? (none / 0)

I'm assuming the risk of a Republican winning is only present if it becomes a three way race between a Dem, A Rep, and a Progressive Party candidate. In the absence of IRV, a three way race with two progressive candidates splitting the left/center vote is the Republican's dream scenario. Its how Heather Wilson initially won her seat in New Mexico with under 45% of the vote (Greens and Dems split left/center vote).

by Keith Brekhus on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 01:32:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

A Long Way tTo Go (none / 0)

While numbers like this are encouraging, 13 months can be an eternity and most voters only look at "what have you done lately." For example, if anytime before next June or July, bush announced that the Iraqi Army could handled things on their own (even if not true) and our troops would start withdrawing (even if not true), he removes that as an issue. Remember Nixon, Kissinger, and Viet Nam. And, unfortunetly, juries and commissions don't always find the law/rules breakers (Delay, Frist, etc.) guilty. Maybe the Dems should start hammering home the immorality and unethical aspects of these people....and not let up.

Memo to neocons: I respect your right to have an opinion, but I just don't want to hear it anymore.

by blogus on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 09:44:43 PM EST

Re: A Long Way tTo Go (none / 0)

I would say that it should be a requirement that the Dems start hitting the immorality and unethical aspects.

by yitbos96bb on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 11:09:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fine. What does it mean? (none / 0)

I got all excited the last two elections seeing Dems ahead even close to the elections and lose.
Not this time. 13 months is several life times politically. With 13 months for the CWM to spin and reassure and lie does this mean ANYTHING except to help the Rethugs gear up.
And don't forget Diebold.

by Doc Allen on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 09:49:29 PM EST

Agree (none / 0)

Gosh I wish all of this news was coming out in October of 2006 instead of 2005. However, I suspect if this was 2006, we wouldn't be witnessing the internal strife and continuous misteps of the Republican Party and the administration in particular.

The Republican Party functions and thrives purely on competition and elections. Remember, 2003 was not a positive year for them either. Iraq had turned into a much bigger problem then previously anticipated, the economy was sluggish, job growth was stagnant, etc. Yet, they were able to turn everything around in 2004, using wedge issues and the war to become victorious.

The Republicans will be using the same cookbook, just a different receipe for a different election year. We must be prepared. We must develop our own message and get ready to engage in some hand-to-hand combat.

by Eric11 on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 12:29:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Numbers you cite are old (none / 0)

In the excerpt that you post, you cite the septemeber numbers. The new approval rating from NBC/WSJ is 39% and it's only 2%, thats right only 2% among African Americans. I suppose you could call that a bit of a racial divide.

Tennesseans for Russ Feingold

by schwompa on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 10:05:18 PM EST

Re: Numbers you cite are old (none / 0)

Oops I misread the excerpt. I apologize.

Tennesseans for Russ Feingold

by schwompa on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 10:06:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Just wait till you get your winter heating bill... (none / 0)

Here are two other gems from the article.

"The poll shows that Bush's approval rating stands at 39 percent, a new low for the president. In the last NBC/Wall Street Journal survey, which was released in mid-September, 40 percent approved of Bush's job performance while 55 percent disapproved."

"Strikingly, much has happened in the time between those two polls -- many of them seemingly positive events for the White House. The president delivered a prime-time speech from New Orleans, in which he promised to rebuild the Gulf Coast. He also made several more visits to the region, to examine the damage caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Furthermore, he saw the Senate confirm John Roberts to the Supreme Court, and he nominated Miers, his White House counsel, to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor."

If they think the numbers are bad now, just wait till everyone gets their heating bill in a couple of months. The floor is going to fall.

by bushsucks on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 10:48:38 PM EST

Re: Just wait till you get your winter heating bil (none / 0)

I'm mildly curious as to just how far the floor can fall. The last breakout I saw showed Bush's support at GOP 69, Ind 26, Dem 11.

Even a 69 among the GOP is eyebrow raising; you know that 50+ percent will go down with Bush's ship to the very end. I think the Ind 26 can't be too far from the floor their...maybe 20.

That 11 Dem is nearing the limits of compressibility, too, though I'd want to ask why they still self-identify as Dems.

by InigoMontoya on Wed Oct 12, 2005 at 11:50:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just wait till you get your winter heating bil (none / 0)

Where did you find the internals (by party breakdown) on this poll. 69% among R is pretty abysmal, making 39% general approval seem high. For example, the CBS poll that found 37% approval rating had 79% Republican approval (29%I, 14%D).

I would expect the GOP floor to be about 65%, independents to go down to 20%, and D's to dip to single digit. As well, a shift from R's to Independents. From the CBS numbers, that would leave a new floor at ~30%.

by bushsucks on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 01:43:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

repeating what others have said (none / 0)

its 13 months to go. adding on to this- the problem that i have with this number is does it reflect the partisan break down of individual districts. how useful are the numbers for understanding our chances with candidate choices in play and with the intertia of the present party stucture of the democrats involved?

by bruh21 on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 12:11:12 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.