There are many interesting numbers in the New York Times/CBS News Poll just released.
President Bush's approval rating registered at 36%, up from 33% last month. More significantly, his disapproval rating fell from 60% to 55%, his lowest number since January.
35% of those surveyed approve of how the President is conducting foreign policy, while 54% disapproved. The last time this question was asked, in May, only 27% approved while 63% disapproved. Meanwhile, 40% of those polled approve of how the President is handling the North Korea issue, while 35% disapprove.
51% approve of how the President is handling the war on terror, while 42% disapprove. This again is the President's best showing since January.
51% of those polled consider the economy in good or fairly good condition.
35% of those polled will vote Republican while 45% of those polled will vote Democratic this November. This is the best showing for the Republicans since last year. The percentage of those who say that this election will be a vote against President Bush is 33%, while 48% say it is not about him.
The image of the Democratic Party is presently 52% favorable and 41% unfavorable. In May, the image was 55% favorable and 37% unfavorable. 43% of those polled have a favorable image of the GOP while 51% have an unfavorable opinion. That is an improvement since the last time this question was asked, when only 37% had a favorable view and 57% had an unfavorable opinion.
With respect to Iraq, by a 42% to 36% margin, those polled prefer Democrats. However, that is a huge improvement from May, when Democrats held a 48%-30% lead over Republicans. Perhaps most importantly, 47% believe that we made the right decision in Iraq while 48% believe we made the wrong decision. That is a drastic improvement since May, when only 39% felt it was the right decision and 56% felt it was the wrong decision.
Most importantly, 47% approve of how the President is handling the Israel-Hezbollah situation, while only 27% disapprove.



Comments (16)
Considering the source that... (Below threshold)1. Posted by joe | July 27, 2006 12:59 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Considering the source that means his approval ratings are in the low 40's
1. Posted by joe | July 27, 2006 12:59 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 00:59
2. Posted by Clint | July 27, 2006 1:45 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
How more than 30% of people in this country could support him after all this time, I don't know. And, how the Democrats could be so pathetic as to lose elections give all that's gone wrong, I don't know either.
2. Posted by Clint | July 27, 2006 1:45 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 01:45
3. Posted by Steve L. | July 27, 2006 5:58 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I have to believe that the current situation in Israel is helping. Once again, people are seeing that the Democrat's position that we should just bend over and be happy about it isn't working. Israel has tried doing that, and it did no good. I think people are smart enough to understand that the President isn't taking that approach.
3. Posted by Steve L. | July 27, 2006 5:58 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 05:58
4. Posted by dr lava | July 27, 2006 6:23 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If you are still behind this president after evidence of his absolute incompetence hits you in the face every day, it may be time for your family to step in and get you some help.
If there was a military solution to terrorism, like bush advocates, don't you think Israel would have made some headway in that regard over the past 48 years??
4. Posted by dr lava | July 27, 2006 6:23 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 06:23
5. Posted by bobdog | July 27, 2006 6:57 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Nonsense. "Absolute incompetance" is a self-serving value judgement, not a fact.
Name one positive contribution made by the Democrats in the last six years. There isn't one, unless you consider constant whining and obstruction a contribution. I never hear a convincing argument how the Democrats would do things differently.
Who speaks for you? John Dean? John Kerry? Harry Reid? Nancy Pelosi? Al Gore? Hillary Clinton? Which of these corrosive "leaders" speaks for the party? What exactly would they do if they were in charge? You don't know, because they never get past namecalling and get around to proposing anything constructive.
Either lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.
5. Posted by bobdog | July 27, 2006 6:57 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 06:57
6. Posted by Oyster | July 27, 2006 7:22 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Bobdog is right. Regardless of how they package their program or how they word their debates, "We're not Republicans" is still all they're saying.
Bush has done a few things I haven't agreed with; his stance on illegal immigration and his kow-towing to congressional spending being two of them, but I won't forget his attempt to try and give us more power over our own retirements and future through reforming Social Security. And I certainly won't forget the Democrat's message in their opposition, "You're too stupid to be allowed to control your own money." AARP was instrumental in squashing that reform.
And Dr lava: Talk about getting help ...
All these years a "cease-fire" means Israel stops firing and her enemies keep blindly shooting off rockets and suicide-bombing cafes and buses. "Diplomacy" means Israel is to sit at the table and work out actual plans toward peace while her enemies sit at the table and chant 'Death to Israel' and their militants keep blindly shooting off rockets and suicide-bombing cafes and buses. Then the ensuing "peace-plans" means Israel makes various concessions turning land over and releasing criminal elements from jail while her enemies keep blindly shooting off rockets and suicide-bombing cafes and buses.
What part of the "status quo" are you having trouble understanding?
6. Posted by Oyster | July 27, 2006 7:22 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 07:22
7. Posted by dr lava | July 27, 2006 7:30 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You folks make my point exactly. Instead of addressing the fact that we have a delusional president and a failed administation you turn around and blame some moronic democrats who have been basically powerless for 4 years.
How can you folks continue to deny the fact that this president is an absolute failure. I voted for Bush in 2000 it took me 3 years to realize that I had been lied to and used. How long will it take you folks. Or are you totally brainwashed?
Of course those democrats are idiots but what do we do about idiot #1 in the whitehouse??
7. Posted by dr lava | July 27, 2006 7:30 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 07:30
8. Posted by Rovin | July 27, 2006 7:49 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"You folks make my point exactly. Instead of addressing the fact that we have a delusional president and a failed administation you turn around and blame some moronic democrats who have been basically powerless for 4 years."
Try more like 12 years (94 to present)dr, and, fortunatly, they still have no clue why.
But, that's just speaking "basically"
Of course, Howie Dean sure "helps" representing such a lost party.
8. Posted by Rovin | July 27, 2006 7:49 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 07:49
9. Posted by jhow66 | July 27, 2006 10:46 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Wonder how long it's going to take "clint" and "dr l." to realize that ass kissing doesn't work either. Wonder how then would handle all these problems? Ever hear a solution from them? Naa just whining and bitching about Bush. They have whats called BDS. Poor souls as there is no cure for it because they can't even get anyone elected dogcatcher.
9. Posted by jhow66 | July 27, 2006 10:46 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 10:46
10. Posted by P Bunyan | July 27, 2006 1:00 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
dr lava must get his/her news from CBS and the New York Times.
It's very hard to "address the fact that we have a delusional president and a failed administration", because it is an ill-informed opinion, not a "fact".
The reality is that the president is not delusional and the administration is far from a failure. (Not saying they've been perfect, either.)
But if you rely on the MSM I can see how you might reach that false conclusion. If you know the real news and both sides of every story and you still come to that conclusion then you must be either a communist/secular-socialist/democrat (all synonymous) or a moron.
10. Posted by P Bunyan | July 27, 2006 1:00 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 13:00
11. Posted by Tincan Sailor | July 27, 2006 1:02 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I being of sound mind hate to say I'm a
registered democrat,kind of like back alley
whisper,but then I've never and will never vote
on party lines...Look at the clowns running the
Euro/pinko/demo party, Nancy Pelosi, Whiskey
Teddy,Algore,Hanoi Kerry,Scary Reid and the
King of the clowns Howard the nut Dean and you
Bash Bush!!!Well lets put em back in office,hell
we won't need an Army Just lots of Knee Pads
Chapstick and rectal lube... Israel is up to
one thing and only 1 a good hard ass whuppen
a beat down till ol hezz can't stand with out
help,beat both eyes closed and knock out all
the teath and smash the nose flat,get the
point!!!If the victum should die to effen bad...
Now for Bush,not on my top ten "BUT" at least
he had the Cajones to draw a line in the sand
for the Goat ropers,which is more than Reagan,
w#1 and Clinton did...I doubt the folks are
going to belive there really is a war going on
that involves all of us till a IED or dirty
bomb is set off here in America...I hope I
never have to say I told you so...
11. Posted by Tincan Sailor | July 27, 2006 1:02 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 13:02
12. Posted by joe | July 27, 2006 2:41 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
In the hysterical minds of the people who get all there news from the MSM, they think that a 2-3% of GDP budget deficit is the worst thing that's EVER happened and our military in Iraq has been annihiliated except for one brigade that is surrounded like Custer at Little Big Horn.
12. Posted by joe | July 27, 2006 2:41 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 27, 2006 14:41
13. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | July 28, 2006 1:02 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Name one thing Bush has done to help Americans.
While you chew on that, I can name some things that have hurt Americans:
1. The Bankruptcy Bill
2. The failure to protect and then help New Orleans
3. The ridiculous Medicare Part D--you'd think after complaining about bureacracy and the waste of entitlements the GOP would write an entitlement that did not waste (i.e. no bargaining) and was not a bureaucratic mess (i.e. people not signing up for the right plan, or not at all)
4. Preventing further research into stem cells with the most tortured logic all time.
5. 2500+ Americans dead and thousands more wounded in Iraq (to say nothing of the Iraqi innocents killed)
6. The poverty rate is on the rise after falling year after year under Clinton
7. Billions of dollars lost on war profiteering, which our "tough guys" in the Senate refuse to investigate.
8. Certainly did not heed the warnings before 9/11, which cost us 3000 lives and untold economic damage
These are not just uninformed opinions, but based on lots of facts and the opinions of experts from both sides of the continuum. My opinion is that he is not very thoughtful, not terribly aware of the world around him, his cabinet plays fast and loose with the truth, and that he is incapable of hearing the opinions of anyone outside of his little neocon cabal. This is my opinion based on the way events have gone---I don't have any specific data to support it, other than what former cabinet members have said.
All I ever hear is that the economy is doing well (even though statistics show it is not helping most Americans) and that we have not been attacked (which ignores the failure of 9/11 and of course sets a pretty low standard for "success", while ignoring the thousands of acts of violence against our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan).
13. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | July 28, 2006 1:02 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 28, 2006 13:02
14. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | July 28, 2006 1:05 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
As for what Democrats would do, that is the kind of fear mongering that Rush et al love to use. Its like saying "One of us has to clean the toilets, and it won't be me."
"Someone has to lead the country, and it cannot be the Democrats." Then you end up with the conclusion that it HAS to be the GOP, even when they lie, bribe, cheat, close off information, hide their motives, confuse the public, etc.
The idea that some ideology is more important than good, clean, and honest government is suicidal for a country. You can see it in fundamentalist religious countries---they have to support the people of the state religion, even though they are corrupt. When your vote is promised to someone regardless of their behavior, you essentially have no vote.
14. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | July 28, 2006 1:05 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 28, 2006 13:05
15. Posted by fpesanford | July 28, 2006 6:09 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh good one Kimyl. Lets see
1. Bankruptcy; made people responsible for their behavior. Don't see a problem with that!
2. New Orleans; He actually requested more money than Klinton, and we all know that the corrupt polititions n NO made substandard levies. Not to mention the Democrat Governor that and Mayor that did not implement their own evacuation plans.
3. Can't argue with that. Let's scrap Mediacare altogether.
4. Hs did not prevent Stem cell Research. Private and state funds can do waht they want. And since Adult stem cells have actually been used to make cures why don't we put our efforts there instead.
5. You make it sound like if we had not gone to Iraq everything in Afganhistan would have been fine. Not to mention that fact that there is no easy way to supply and support the troups there. Do you really thin that if we had not gone to Afgahistan hundreds/thousands of new el Quaida would not have been created. What we've done is make them split there forces. We have enough to make them do it. Actually it is a good military tactic.
6. I'm truely sorry to hear that, but there is an extremely strong economy and plenty opportunites to get out of poverty. One's socio economic positoin in the US is, more so than any other nation, a situation of self determination. However, if you want to lay blame, lay it at the feat of the NEA and NFT for doing such a poor job of educating Americas youth.
7. Companies that crank out high end armaments will make money. That is a fact. Especially when they are building highly specialized equipment and doing it on very tight deadlines. There is no more profiteering noew than at any other time. But, if you think that Democrats would somehow put an end to it you are terribly naive.
8. bush headed the warnings, his CIA wasnot allowewd to give the inforamtion to FBI, thanks to the "wall" put between the two by Klinton.
15. Posted by fpesanford | July 28, 2006 6:09 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 28, 2006 18:09
16. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | July 28, 2006 8:01 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Bankruptcy: helped predatory lenders make more money! Repsonsibility is a great idea, but not if you are a credit card company, only if you are a naive person who is given way too much credit.
If you think New Orleans was a success in any sense, you are beyond help. Money? How about not having any kinda plan even after it was obvious how serious this was. Additionally, if he had invested money in the levees, or even acknowledged what he was told about them, we might know why they flooded or been able to help people.
Again, why did Bush expand this program with a costly, only mildly helpful option which does not use our size for bargaining company? Defend the GOP congress and the prez...
He limited funding for stem cell research, and everyone knows our tax investment into medical research pays ENORMOUS dividends. Adult stem cells do not show as much promise, because adult cells are limited to a narrow set of possibilities. Adult stem cells can repair at a basic level---embryonic stem cells can generate new tissue. Also, his veto puts about 400,000 embryos in the garbage, while private citizens are allowed to "murder" humans?
If after 9/11 we had used our might to arrange a strong counter-terrorism effort worldwide instead of bombing some countries that had nothing to do with it, we might have fewer al Qaida members and larger support worldwide to deal with real problems (North Korea, Iran, Syria, etc.)
Poverty is up and wages are flat. MILLIONS of Americans are working hard, playing by the rules and ending up behind because wages are flat while costs rise (especially health care, which everyone needs).
I'm not talking about missile systems, I am talking about the companies making money to feed our troops or provide logistics, and we have already lost billions over there that is unaccounted for (not to mention that people who do not have oversight tend to put money in the wrong hands).
I just brought that up because people talk about how we have not been attacked since 9/11, as if 9/11 is no fault at all of an administration that had been in charge for months, and had written warnings about it.
So....what has Bush done for Americans again?
16. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | July 28, 2006 8:01 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 28, 2006 20:01