GOP's Numbers Tank in Latest NBC/WSJ Poll

Taking a look at the latest poll from The Wall Street Journal and NBC News, I might comment on the fact that George W. Bush's approval rating is at an all-time low for the poll, making this the third poll released yesterday to show the President achieving that unenviable feat, or that Congress' approval rating has slipped noticeably down to 23 percent, above the low of 16 percent in the previous Congress but still horrible. Instead, I want to take a look at a yet unreleased set of numbers hinted at by the folks at MSNBC's First Read:

The most striking thing about the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll is the damage that's been done to the GOP brand. Bush is not only unpopular (his approval rating is just 29% and favorability is only 32% -- both all-time lows for him). But his unpopularity also is dragging down the image of the Republican Party to its lowest level ever in this survey (28% positive rating). For better or worse, the GOP needs Bush to improve if they want the party's image to improve.

Although it's not terribly easy to draw a conclusion from a description of poll numbers that does not contain all of the available data, these numbers do not seem to bode well for the electoral hopes of the Republican Party. And these numbers should not be viewed as simply in a vacuum, just one outlier poll making a conclusion that is not supported by the preponderance of evidence. Polling earlier this year from CBS News and The New York Times showed the exact same thing -- the Republican Party's image has seldom, and perhaps even never in recent memory, been as bad as it is today.

These numbers also track with other data from the poll. The Journal's first release of data (.pdf) contains the following question: "Generally speaking, which party more closeley shares your values and positions on the issues--the Republican Party or the Democratic Party?" By a 13-point margin, respondents chose the latter over the former, a further indication of the unpopularity of the GOP.

The political environment still can and might change profoundly before voters go to the polls to select the composition of the next Congress, as well as the man or woman to serve in the White House. But for now, the Republican Party is simply really unpopular -- so much so that it will be a drag upon whichever underwhelming comes out of the GOP's presidential nominating process.



Display:


Congress worries me a bit (none / 0)

Everything looks great for Democrats.  Hillary beating Giuliani looks downright awesome.  However I do worry about Congress.

I know that Congress as a whole does tradionally have very low ratings, while individual members are often ranked much higher at home.  However, I worry that Democrats are pushing hard enough on the domestic front with real bread and butter legislation to crow about in '08.  I worry that bickering over the war (when the votes are not there to end it) and too much focus on investigations could hurt Democrats.

I want to see the pressure kept up on Bush on the war and I want to see the investigations, but I want to see some other issues that Americans care about as well pushed more to the front.


by dpANDREWS on Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 11:37:02 AM EST

Re: Congress worries me a bit (none / 0)

Remember this poll is of all adults not registered voter's or likely voter's.

Democrats always do well in all adult polls, but not as well as registered voterer's and likely voter models.


by BDM on Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 11:53:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Historic Lows Are Historic Lows (3.00 / 2)

There's no way around it, the GOP is in trouble. And it's not just the broad popularity numbers--their fundraising is way off, too.

The Versailles press is doing a wonderful job putting makeup on this pig 24/7, or their numbers would be even worse.

Of course we have no reason to be complacent. Nov 2008 is a long ways off, and generic numbers only translate very loosely into winning specific seats in Congress.

But it's equally mistaken to poo-poo these numbers as if they were nothing unusual.  They most definitely are unusual, and hint at the possibility of a second straight wave election in the House--something that hasn't happened since 1930-1932.

Now the 2006 wave was smaller than either of those, and any 2008 is likely to be smaller, too.  But even so, doing something that hasn't happened in 75 years is nothing to sneeze at.  And it could very well happen.


by Paul Rosenberg on Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 12:05:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Congress worries me a bit (none / 0)

To lose control of Congress, Democrats would have to lose at the Presidential level by at least nine points.  


by Toddwell on Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 09:08:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: GOP's Numbers Tank in Latest NBC/WSJ Poll (none / 0)

Good news. The only thing that tempers my optimism about next year is the hovering specter of a Hillary Clinton nomination. I don't have much hope for our prospects if she is nominated.


by Oregonian on Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 12:48:13 PM EST

Re: GOP's Numbers Tank in Latest NBC/WSJ Poll (none / 0)

that is kind of disconcerting but I would argue that the people who enjoy the illusion that she will run in the general, by far - the most - are the GOP who think she is the most likely to be beaten in the general + want her there by design.


by Trey Rentz on Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 03:04:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: GOP's Numbers Tank in Latest NBC/WSJ Poll (3.00 / 2)

Its hard for any party to win three straight terms, but even more so when the President leaving office is unpopular. I can just see the "do you really want a third term?" commercials coming.


by AC4508 on Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 02:23:24 PM EST

Re: GOP's Numbers Tank in Latest NBC/WSJ Poll (none / 0)

Right. A third term for the incumbent party has only happened once or twice since FDR set the four-term record, followed by one term of Harry Truman. In 1988, Ronald Reagan's VP, George H.W. Bush, was able to pull it off as the "third term" of the popular incumbent. And in 2000 the majority of voters favored a third term for Bill Clinton's VP and his party.

But normal is, two terms in, two terms out.

The record:
Eisenhower - (R), 1952 & '56
Kennedy-Johnson - (D), '60 & '64
Nixon - (R), '68 & 72
Carter - (D), '76 ( oops! )
Reagan-Bush - (R), '80 & '84 & '88
Clinton - (D), '92 & '96
Bush - (R), 2000* & '04

The forecast:
Democrats, '08 & '12


by Woody on Fri Jun 15, 2007 at 01:04:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My view (none / 0)

Failure is unpopular. Although there are TV shows that contradict this viewpoint, its important to realize that the American people are holding the bush administration and the GOP accountable.

IMHO this fits in well with the democratic party's general ideal that people can rule - they may take a while to come around, but this shows that joe six pack is clearly able to finally see through the smokescreen.

what I would like to see is a skyrocketing popularity amongst the democrats - i recall harry reid standing up to the GOP , causing just such a bounce. the GOP is hardly a toothless tiger these days, frustrating every effort to drain the swamp they have created. dems all to winning to do backroom deals instead of climb on the backs of their dragon friends.

if i could i just wanted to add a personal note. ever since the democrats have taken power i have become palpably more relaxed, and focussed, and effective at work.

but still - we seem to be talking to deaf ears. When will progressive issues finally take root in strong , veto-proof legislation?

Has reform occurred? IMHO pelosi made inroads but
thats it. And thats been done before, hasn't it?


by Trey Rentz on Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 03:02:22 PM 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.