Prof. Charles Franklin at pollster.com (and Political Arithmetik) has been following an aggregate of Bush approval polls with a lovely set of graphs. According to Prof. Franklin:
No time to write this up. Come back for that later. Bottom line: CNN at 36%, Gallup and Zogby at 37%. Trend estimate falls to 35.8% This is a stunning decline that doesn't yet seem to have reached bottom. Can the White House do anything to stop it?
Go here for the big picture.
Speaking of big picture, in the House poll post below, a note from SUSA:
But the consistency of the pattern suggests that the movement in these 4 contests may be driven by a nationwide trend affecting all House races, rather than by factors specific to the individual districts.
Bush's approvals, of course, are different than (but very closely tied to) GOP fortunes in November, and this appears to be the steepest decline in Bush's personal history. There's the source of the nationwide tend. So, what do you think? Can the White House do anything to stop it?
So, what do you think? Can the White House do anything to stop it?
I think they can try. But they're hamstrung by the bad news, the lack of options, and the fact that their President is an idiot who lowers his approval rating every time he gets on tv, as well being so cocooned that he probably doesn't realize that he's about to lose the Congress.
Lots of ships are going to the Mediterranean right now, and they may try a pre-emptive strike on Iran to change the subject. Whether this works in their favor, I don't know.
Other than that, they got nothing.
Posted by: merciless | October 17, 2006 at 13:23
Death, death and destruction for the Republicans this cycle.
Posted by: Jodi | October 17, 2006 at 13:35
Apropos of my comment on the last thread, here are the 3Q fundraising totals and COH figures for the top 50 races. Based on this and a couple of "micro" factors, I'd venture to guess that the 10 GOP seats that are effectively being written off are:
FL-16 (Open-Foley's)
NY-26 (Reynolds)
TX-22 (Open-DeLay's)
AZ-08 (Open-Kolbe's)
IA-01 (Open-Nussle's)
MN-06 (Open-Kennedy's)
NY-24 (Open-Boehlert's)
IN-08 (Hostettler)
NC-11 (Taylor)
PA-07 (Weldon)
Races not on this list where the Dem is ahead in COH are OH-02 (barely), PA-08, CA-50, CO-05 and WY-AL, and close in FL-13, IN-09, WI-08, and NY-29. In NE-03 Scott Kleeb is reportedly ahead also, though not on most lists.
Take the COH numbers with a grain of salt, as some candidates may have made big ads buys at the end of the reporting period, and others are able to lend or give themselves a large cash infusion.
Posted by: Mimikatz | October 17, 2006 at 13:36
And no, I don't think they can pull it out without a deus ex machina.
With the low approvals of the Iraq War (now 28% approval among women), I would hesitate to go along with a strike if I were in the military command, so watch for leaks. Maybe they think that if they lurk just outside the Straits of Hormuz the Iranians will try to sink one of our ships, and we'll have a Gulf of Tonkin-style pretext. But LBJ was popular then, and now all but 16% of the people think the what they knew before 9/11.
Posted by: Mimikatz | October 17, 2006 at 13:42
That was, all but 16% think the Bushies lied about what they knew before 9/11.
Posted by: Mimikatz | October 17, 2006 at 13:43
I say there's no way they can turn it around now. For one thing, we're too close to the moment of reckoning (in theater terms, half-hour has been called), and the degree to which they need to change perceptions is far too great for even a much longer period. Also, it srikes me that much of the DC establishment (The Note of course excepted) has apparently decided it's a matter of life and death that the Dems get one or both houses -- otherwise, there's no way you'd see such an endless stream of negative stories all tilting against one side (Woodward and Kuo the most obvious late qualifiers). Add to that the fact this may be the worst Iraq month in two years, and the chances of recovery to even less-toxic are slim.
I see some people are worried the Saddam verdict, apparently set for announcement November 5th, will help the GOP. Are they kidding? Two days before election, you want Iraq the main headline? I'd mail copies to every voter in the country.
Posted by: demtom | October 17, 2006 at 14:03
Now would be a good time for him to get Bin Laden. Other than that, I don't think anything he does right now is going to have much effect.
He could start bombing Iran, except that he can't do it. Internationally there's just NO support for that at this point. He can't even get Russia and China to agree to sanctions. How would they respond to unprovoked airstrikes because maybe in 10 years or so Iran MIGHT acquire nuclear weapons.
Right now there's zero evidence they are even trying to stockpile material for a bomb or even have a weapons program. That might not matter inside the U.S. with our trained-poodle media, but other countries aren't as stupid as we are.
Bush has a long way to go to even build up tolerance for a U.S. strike. He can't just suddenly unleash a surprise attack with no warning. It would be a total disaster internationally. (Of course any attack on Iran would be a disaster), but this would be an immediate disaster both domestically and internationally.
People are so suspicious and disillusioned and it's so close to the election that a majority would obviously believe that it was simply a political ploy. That argument alone would preclude Bush from gaining popular support for his war. And we'd be left with a war on our hands.
Bush will have to wait until after the election, but before Congress meets in January to unleash his new war. He may not even be able to do it then. A lot will depend upon the Russian and Chinese reactions to what he attempts. If they are outragesd and decide to side with Iran all bets are off.
Bush could succeed in re-igniting the cold-war for one thing.
That's such an idiocy that just after I typed it I can't believe it. Even a desparate Bush can't possibly be that stupid. They will try to line up Russia and China and failing that, will try and get them to stay neutral. They certainly can't have them giving material aid and support to Iran, which would be the case if Bush attacks Iran now.
Posted by: Cugel | October 17, 2006 at 16:36
Cugel- nobody liked the cold war either, so that won't help his popularity at all. And they can't 'get' Bin Laden, becuase OBL is in Pakistan, and our army is in the wrong goddamn country.
Posted by: smiley | October 17, 2006 at 16:59
He's not going to bring in OBL. I'm convinced that some deal was made with the house of Saud to save OBL. Probably right around the time of Tora Bora. Which makes the people involved in the deal traitors. With the Bush family history I'd have to say it goes to the top, but could have been pressed through corportate interest as well. I'd love to see a intreped reporter start looking into that.
This administration has no credibility left with anyone who has two wits to knit. And if they attack Iran, all hell is going to break loose on them. NO ONE wants that. That will turn the whole of the country against them, but then I doubt they care. If they do that it will not be for the elections, it will be because they know the elections are lost, and they will want to do it before Dems can get in office and hamstring them.
Finally, an intresting observation. Of course, most folks realize that gas prices being down is a political stunt. (I hear it from everyone regardless of affiliation), so that is the perception. Which then leads to the idea that our leadership is simply allowing big oil to butt bone us the rest of the time. However, I have one more data point that is interesting. I drive a diesel. Diesel is usually cheaper or at the lower end of the gasoline prices. The only two times that I've seen diesel HIGHER than even premium grade gasoline is right before the '04 elections and now. I think they buffer diesel prices up during pre-election periods to leave more room on the books for holding gasoline prices down. There are far less diesel drivers so thus less votes. I mean it's just so unreal the little stunts that your see if you pay attention.
Posted by: Dismayed | October 17, 2006 at 17:12
PS - Winning both houses is just the beginning. We have a long fight ahead of us if we ever want government returned to the people of this country. The next couple of months are so dangerous - A nut in the WH with a boner for Iran, and a high motivation to outright steal elections. DemFromCT - we've had this conversaton before. We should have our landslide. But I see two fuses, and we may be sitting on a powderkeg. Peace and Love - grow your hair.
Posted by: Dismayed | October 17, 2006 at 17:18
LOL
Peace and Love - grow your hair.
been there, done that (in 1968).
Posted by: DemFromCT | October 17, 2006 at 18:05
As to Minnesota Six -- Wetterling apparently is up and outside the Margin of Error in two fairly good local polls. However, I don't think they have exactly written it off, as they are sending Laura Bush in for a private fundraiser late this week. News of today locally is that the AP uncovered an invite to the secret event -- a breakfast on an estate.
Later that day Laura will appear in Rochester for Gutknecht. Walz is a little ahead inside the margin of error in one of the recent polls and is on an upward trend. That Minnesota First District Race may be one of the sleeper races. Anyhow the Rochester event is in public, not a secret event.
Wetterling is getting high attention from the Wellstone Organization -- they are putting together some huge phone banking efforts that will start up early next week. It is so great to see that team put it all together yet one more time. A few people shout out -- Wellstoneians to the Barracades -- and thousands sign up to do GOTV. Looks like they have enough to do doorhangers throughout the district on Monday Night pre election. That takes zillions of volunteers. Haven't heard if they are going to do the First too -- but at least in DFL heavy areas they should.
In lots of ways the spirit this year reminds me of the last days of the Wellstone Race in 1990 -- after being 30 points down, and getting into the single digits three weeks out, it just suddenly came together, with volunteers lined up for assignments, more phone bank workers than we had phones and lists, and people double parked to drop off checks. Everyone wants to be part of victory, and if you've been around campaigns for any time, you know the sense of it. It can all crash of course, in the sense that small planes do crash. But say that around a small group of Wellstoneians, and they just cry. That hurt is still very very deep around here.
Posted by: Sara | October 17, 2006 at 18:48
I just came back from LA, and a few late 20-somethings who I know in the film industry had much longer hair then just a few months before. They'd seen the 'US vs John Lennon' movie, and were letting it grow. Who knows, it may take hold again. As for me I also was growing hair in '68. I think my mom still has a lock or two in my baby book - Ha. Actually, I'm a little older than that, I remember Viet Nam. I so often wonder where is the outrage here. No draft, I guess that explains most of it, but I'm telling you, man - that may change if these dipshits go Khmer Rouge on Iran. This time the protests should skip the parks and just park on the interstates and get out. Shut down commerce and get the money men bent out of shape. Do NOT want it to come to that, but wouldn't it be something?
Posted by: Dismayed | October 17, 2006 at 21:34
Bush is dead meat, politically. There's nothing he can do to make himself popular with anyone outside his base, and no GOP candidate in '08 will want to be seen with him.
I'm not even sure he's motivated to help the GOP to protect his own worthless ass (which would be his only reason for helping them) because he's totally convinced he won't suffer any consequences no matter what happens. That's the story of his whole life, after all; why would he think differently now?
Posted by: CaseyL | October 17, 2006 at 21:52
It will be an interesting history moment.
Will Bush be treated as Winston Churchill was and later brought back to win the big one?
Will he be seen as a visionary? Or a puppet on a stick?
Posted by: Jodi | October 17, 2006 at 22:21
He IS a puppet on a stick. Problem is, he doesn't mind the location of the stick.
Posted by: Dismayed | October 17, 2006 at 23:43
Will Bush be treated as Winston Churchill was and later brought back to win the big one?
In the immortal words of John McEnroe (Wimbledon, 1981): "You cannot be serious!". The only logical reason for mentioning Bush and Churchill in the same sentence would be as examples of opposite extremes of relevant experience, management expertise, credibility, integrity, inspirational oratory, and statesmanship among Western political leaders.
Posted by: Chris Loosley | October 18, 2006 at 02:40