08/26/2002 Archived Entry: "Bush and his Republicans"

The newest Gallup poll is out. Other polls which I pay attention to show a similar drop of support for Bush. The Harris Poll, which is without a doubt the most accurate Presidential polling group over the past 25 years, shows Bush’s ratings have essentially remained unchanged at 63% positive (up from July’s 62% positive) and 37% negative (identical to the July figure). Harris also shows that the issues of Terrorism and National Security have waned in ranking the most important issue, with the Economy (32%) now on top of the list of concerns. The recent IBD/CSM poll shows a 61/27 approval ranking, and we'll likely get another Zogby poll out showing Bush in the low 60's soon.
The Democrats are at about 50%, and the independents are at 56%, and it's unlikely they will drop much further-- at least not before the Republican numbers change. It's the Republicans who keep Bush's numbers high: Bush's rating among Republicans remains in the middle 90s, where it has been since September 2001.

In otherwords, for Bush's overall approval numbers to fall, some Republican support will have to fall off of that mid-90's sheen. With Republican voices of opposition to the Iraq attack now happening, we may start to see this number move down.

But there are further complications.

Adventures In Iraq

The Republican Party has had a traditionally isolationist wing, with the Democratic Party being the more liberal in global intervention. In this, Bush is more aligned with Kennedy's Liberal expansionism than he is with the traditional roots of the Republican Party. Of course their motives --control of Oil & containment of Communism-- are much different, and so are their tactics. Their point of agreement --advancement of an global agenda-- met Republican opposition then, and today meets Republican disagreement. Global liberalism has been replaced by The Neoliberalism of Bush. This neo-liberal alignment includes tactic Democratic support: From the DLC, to Clinton, Gore, Lieberman, and the most recent convert, Gephardt. It's what BullMoose is pointing toward when stating the possibility of seeing Senate Democrats defend a Republican President on foreign policy against GOP dissidents (Learning from Lyndon, August 14th):

An Iraq attack gives Hillary the opportunity to both lose her liberal garb and triangulate in support of W. and confound her conservative enemies. Senator Clinton is loved by the left Democratic base so she has room to maneuver to the right on foreign policy.

And it would dumbfound the Clinton-haters to see Bush aligned with HRC. Just dealing with the politics of the matter; I'm sure that Bush and Rove have thought through the implications of using a congressional vote of support for their War against Iraq to divide the Democrats. An HRC triangulation would serve to raise the stakes of failure for Bush, and lower the chance of fallout for the Democrats.

Aside from the politics, I have little doubt that a War with Iraq would do nothing but further the Mid-East quagmire. Nevertheless, Bush would probably be given the bipartisan support of chest-thumpers in the GOP and passive hawks amidst the Democrats-- with moderate let's-not-go-it-alone Republicans in (by then) quiet dissent. Powell would be one, and he may wind up leaving the Bush administration over the matter.

It's telling just how far center-right the debate has tilted when considering the role of Greens, Left-Democrats, and Libertarians-- who are going to protest, but will be ignored, discounted, or written-off by the neo-liberalism that represents the bipartisan majority of the middle-mud-headed thinking that's so dominant today in US politics.

Replies: 15 comments

I am glad to see his numbers coming back to earth. If he is at about 55 on election day I think Republicans are going to suffer badly. I think that is why is doing all this saber rattling. I really think he aand Rove have a major October Suprise awaiting us, depsite their saying there is no planned attack in the near future. Even though I am convinced he will pull this kinda stunt I think it will backfire big time-as we Americans don't like sending out kids to war so Dubya can help Republican candidates win.

Posted by Ced @ 08/26/2002 10:10 AM PST

I disagree with the analysis that the Democratic and Independent approval of Bush will not drop further until the Republican approval drops. Bush is still the GOP Messiah, in their view, so I don't see his GOP approval dropping below 90% any time soon. For example, the Gallup chart shows a significant fall-off in DEM/IND approval even as the GOP approval has remained constant. On the other hand, the increasing drumbeat of criticism of Bush on the domestic and foreign policy fronts strongly suggests that Bush will retain the approval of half of Democrats and over half of Independents for only a short period of time. To be honest, I'm amazed that his approval among Democrats is still so high.

Posted by SVDem @ 08/26/2002 11:11 AM PST

I agree with SVDem. While GOP and Independent approvals are 5% higher than they were before the attacks, Democratic approval is still a whopping 20% higher! Oddly, most of Bush's margin of extra approval comes from Dems, not GOP or Indies. What's up with the Dems???

Posted by RParker @ 08/26/2002 11:55 AM PST

MyDD:

The Bush approval rating was down in the low 60s by mid August.

Posted by G.C. Raj @ 08/26/2002 12:07 PM PST

If u folks believe the polls ive got some ocean front property on Mars I can sell you.

The polls are rigged.

Bush is probably at about 35% and no more.

Posted by Real Michaud @ 08/26/2002 02:24 PM PST

Who gives a hoot about Bush's ratings. He is not running for the election anyway. MyDD should take note of the attached report. Even the GOP biased Cook Political Report is now saying that the year is shaping up well for the Dems, although when they peak could well be determined by the stock market and unemployment rates over the next couple of months.

What I expect is a Democratic sweep at the state and local levels. It would be clearly an earthquake registering 8.5 on the political richter scale. Whether it turns into a volcano and "pushes" over ten Dems net in the House and two Dems net in the Senate remains to be seen. One thing is clear that at the end of Bush's first term, there would be far fewer GOP in power at the state and local levels, confined mostly to the south, plains and upper rocky mountains. In Illinois the GOP may be headed the way of California unless something dramatically changes. Ditto for Vermont and Maine. They may get wiped out at the state level in New Mexico as well. A scenario not very different from where the Dems found themselves at the end of Clinton's first term.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/000057.html

Posted by G.C. Raj @ 08/26/2002 02:42 PM PST

Not much could the Democrat and Indy support drop without a shift in the Republican support. There is not that seismic of a difference to support that Republican support could remain at mid-90's while Democratic support drops to 40 percent or below; and Indy support below 50%. Anything that is going to drive Bush below 60 is going to come from impact within his party, not just from outside.

Posted by myDD @ 08/26/2002 03:46 PM PST

one is for sure, if all the votes are counted this fall, republicans are gonna be no where to be found.

the republican party wishes that we have forgotten about 2000, well guess what?... we havent

turnout will most likely be high this year for democrats and thats all we need to overtake republican control, georgie poo your next!!!

Posted by Real Michaud @ 08/26/2002 07:26 PM PST

Some uninformed punditry from my mountain aerie here in Denver:

1. Bush's popularity will get a temporary boost if he leads America into war. Americans generally rally around the president in times of crisis.

2. I am sorry to predict that the war will create a vast distaster, having serious repercusions for our economy and for stability in the Middle East. Within a year we will be bogged down in a mess that will make Afghanistan look tame. Many "moderate" (talk about misleading labels) Arab regimes will be overthrown or tottering.

3. Thousands of people will die on both sides. War isn't pretty. As much as Bush will try to conceal what's happening truth will out.

4. The disastrous war will send Bush's approval rating into a tail-spin. Whether he even runs for reelection in 2004 will be doubtful.

5. The Dems will give Bush a pass on the war, talking bravely about "process" and "balance of powers" yet cowardly falling into line behind him and his warhawks. Their complicity will bear a heavy cost in 2004 with a party split between the corporate/war party and the progressive/peace faction, a la 1968. Problem for the Dems: no likely RFK or Eugene McCarthy in the wings to challenge the candidates who supported Bush's war policies. Result: big opening for the Greens under Nader.

Bush and his chickenhawk advisors exhibit a prime combination of factors for disaster: arrogance and ignorance. I hope to God that I'm wrong and that Bush will back down, but I've never been wrong yet in judging this guy as a nebbish.

Posted by Colorado Pundit @ 08/26/2002 08:20 PM PST

"Problem for the Dems: no likely RFK or Eugene McCarthy in the wings to challenge the candidates who supported Bush's war policies. Result: big opening for the Greens under Nader."

This is exactly what the pundits said in 1990, and we all know what happened in 1992.

Posted by G.C. Raj @ 08/27/2002 07:06 AM PST

If he is at about 55 on election day I think Republicans are going to suffer badly. I think that is why is doing all this saber rattling. I really think he aand Rove have a major October Suprise awaiting us, depsite their saying there is no planned attack in the near future.

That will surely be the perception of some people. But military strategy pretty much dictates that IF Bush plans to attack Iraq before early 2004, the public push and build-up pretty much has to start now. If you are going to wage war in the Iraqi desert, you want to do it in the winter (January, February), just like last time. So, elections or not, we're in the right time-frame for all the requisite preparations.

Posted by ROC-Indy @ 08/27/2002 07:53 AM PST

"Not much could the Democrat and Indy support drop without a shift in the Republican support. There is not that seismic of a difference to support that Republican support could remain at mid-90's while Democratic support drops to 40 percent or below; and Indy support below 50%. Anything that is going to drive Bush below 60 is going to come from impact within his party, not just from outside. " - MyDD

I'm not sure I understand, MyDD. Is there any reason why Democratic and Indie opinion can't fall to levels similar to what they were immediately pre-9/11? That would bring Bush's ratings near 50% without any shift in GOP opinion.

Posted by RParker @ 08/27/2002 11:28 AM PST

As of now it does not look too good for the GOP. However, watch the confidence indicators, unemployment rate and the stock market.

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong2002.htm

Posted by G.C. Raj @ 08/27/2002 02:31 PM PST

RParker, I think there's about a movement amongst Indy's and Dems from pre-9/11 that will not evaporate, due to patriotism, the WOT and Iraq, and all that. I'd guess it's about 10%, which bases Bush out in the high 50%'s to low 60%'s (instead of the high 40%'s and low 50%'s).

The only way I see that budging is if it's some event that also has repucussions amidst the Republican supporters.

I could be wrong, but I just don't see how Bush's Republican support could stay in the mid-90's, while the Dems goes to below 40 and the Indy to below 50. Whatever is going to give further, is going to be across the board.

Posted by MyDD @ 08/27/2002 05:34 PM PST

Maybe you're right, but Bush's instincts (and what he learned from his father's term) are to satisfy his base at all costs, aside from the occasional geographic Ari pander. I would think these would alienate Dems and Indies while keeping GOP support high.

Posted by RParker @ 08/28/2002 01:29 PM PST