Gallup's Majority Report: Future Poll

by DemFromCT

According to Tom Cruise Gallup (no longer CNN's partner - see Mystery Pollster for more on ORC), Bush's polling numbers are at risk.

George W. Bush's job approval rating is already the lowest of his administration (36% in Gallup's latest poll), and is down 13 points from last July. Several events have conspired to drag down his rating, including Hurricane Katrina, the abandoned Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination, the Dubai ports controversy, and the Iraq war. Now, the prospect of gas prices averaging more than $3 per gallon nationwide this summer could cause Bush's rating to sink even further.

We, and everyone else, were aware, but it's nice to see the historical numbers laid out.

In the past, presidents have not fared well when gas prices were high. In fact, some of the lowest presidential approval ratings Gallup has ever recorded were measured at times when the nation faced a gas crisis. High gas prices hit Americans in their pocketbooks, and the tendency has been for them to take out this frustration on government leaders.

Here is a rundown of presidential approval ratings during times when high gas prices were considered to be major crises for the United States. Bear in mind that high gas prices were often accompanied by, or perhaps a cause of, economic recession, high unemployment, and high inflation at these times:

• In October 1973, OPEC imposed an embargo on oil to the United States in response to U.S. support for Israel in the Yom Kippur War. Richard Nixon, already seeing his ratings drop because of the Watergate scandal, saw them slip from the mid-to-low 30s in September to below 30% in October and November, immediately after the embargo led to gas shortages in the United States.

• In the spring of 1979, the world oil supply took a hit because of the political unrest in Iran. Jimmy Carter's 40% April job approval rating fell to 32% by late May, and as gas prices stayed high over the summer, his approval rating sank to as low as 28% in late June and early July.

• In September 2005, gas prices spiked to an average of more than $3 per gallon following the damage caused by Hurricane Katrina. The high prices were temporary, but likely took a toll on Bush's ratings, dropping him from the mid 40% range immediately following the storm to 40% in mid-September

Gallup has one of the longest historical trend databases to review, so although these days there may be a 'house effect' favoring Bush by a few points. Even so, the difference between 31 and 34 doesn't matter as much as the difference between below 30 and above 30 as it's (going to be) reported.

demtom makes an astute point here about the potential effect of Gallup being used as the CNN house poll all these years. But at this juncture, it's going to take more than a house effect to garner positive press for the Bush WH. You can go with 'isn't Bolten wonderful and on the ball?" stories only so long before reality hits yet again.

Gallup is right. Gas prices affect Bush's base, they're leery of him on immigration, and YA round of gay marriage bashing from Rove's bag of tricks won't save them.

Comments

[orionATL]

i don't pay much attention to poll numbers.

they go up.

they go down.

if they are really down,

they will eventually go up on little substantive change,

and that increase will be subject to ecstatic hyperbole by bush's sycophants and propagandists in the media.

they are entirely influencable, within a range, by question wording.

they often represent nothing so much as impressive citizen ignorance or impressive lack of skepticism.

what i am pleased to see

is that, for once,

the bush administration is having to pay a political price for its failure to anticipate the future.

in this case,

it was predictable that oil supplies would become tight.

major populations in china and india are no longer agrarian.

for some time there has been a question about supply, e.g., whether the largest (Saudi) of the world's oil fields may have peaked in production.

furthermore, even if we had more oil

or turned coal into oil,

a technology that's been around a long time,

we still would be left with the consequences of putting millions of years worth of the carbon from decayed plants back into the atmosphere in a few decades.

that act can't possibly be without consequences.

where was the bush administration on this issue when they took office 6 years ago?

--no need for energy conservation.

--no need to improve vehicle gas mileage.

--no need for a gasoline tax with proceeds to mass transportation or other alternatives

--no need to encourage alternative to combustion engines as a power source for cars.

--a war in the major oil producing regions of the world

that has produced nothing but uncertainty and reduced supply

and has consumed large amounts of oil itself to prosecute (it's gallons/mile for tanks).

-- no policy for alternative energy sources solar, wind, wave, fusion.

-- no leadership for a symbolic, we-can-do-it-together, home and community conservation program.

polls or not,

up or down,

how much more incompetence and obliviousness

on a major issue of economic survival for the u.s.

could an american presidency pack into a six years span?

[emptypockets]

Speaking of "house effects," these questions from a recent Fox News poll:

Considering that over the past twelve months the stock market is up, employment has increased and the disposable income of U.S. workers has increased, do you think the news media has generally done a good job or bad job providing accurate news about the nation's economy?

Originally seen on doonesbury.com but thanks to carpetbagger for keeping it where I could find it.

[fireback]

testing linking in blogs

here

Name of link