Posted on 01/23/2007 8:57:38 AM PST by Nasty McPhilthy
The headlines are abuzz today with the latest polls that seem to show George W. Bush with the lowest approval ratings going into a State of the Union speech since Richard Milhous Nixon in 1974.
Keeping in mind that a poll, based how it forms its questions, can acheive almost any desired result, for the sake of argument let’s take the poll results as accurate.
The crux of what is bound to be a continuing comparison between the approval numbers of the two men isn’t accidental. First, those molding Nixon together with Bush are attempting to create a synonymous relationship between the words “Nixon,” “Bush” and “crook.” Secondly, it gets you invited on morning television news shows.
Expect the comparisons to continue for the foreseeable future, at least until Bush’s ratings drop even further and end up hovering around “genital warts” on the approval meter, at which point the mainstream media will switch from “Nixon” to “Caligula.”
There are similarities in the two men. For example, both Nixon and Bush had and have people lobbying to not let them build their libraries on the premises. Duke for Nixon, and SMU for Bush.
Both men presided over “unpopular wars,” though history has yet to judge Bush’s “war on terror” even some have already performed a bit of Sunday afternoon quarterbacking before the game is even over.
Both men’s wives, Pat and Laura, were teachers. Nixon had the “V” sign (I almost said “peace sign” but Dick would have rolled over in his grave at the hippie reference) and Bush has the “Longhorn” sign.
As we’re all aware, both Nixon and Bush have made big news for various wiretapping ventures as well.
If this is all about why Bush’s approval numbers are so low, I suspect that a great deal of it has nothing to do with being a “crook,” a “liar,” or anything else. Bush’s failing is that he’s abandoned his base. Democrats aren’t going to give approval to a Republican, but when Republicans won’t either, the approval ratings take so many dives that they can only be recovered by Robert Ballard.
The media was obviously dying to get the words “Nixon” and “Bush” in the same headline going into the State of the Union speech, and they succeeded wildly — with a lot of help from Bush. But if Bush takes the bait tonight and tries to distance himself from the comparison by saying ”but I am not a crook,” I’m outta there.
Nah... I believe the poll. The problem is that he PO'd the conservatives by pursuing liberal policies. And it's getting worse by the day.
Of all the Presidents in my lifetime, Bush will have to await history's judgement before any view can be held. For better or worse, he's set too many forces in motion.
That's only a part of the problem. As Patton said, Americans hate a loser and Iraq isn't showing us any wins. People are weary over the war and the fighting about the war. They want to change the channel and see something new.
Lets be honest, Bush hasn't been the President most of us hoped he could be. On issues such as the border and spending he has been a great disappointment. His failure to use his veto pen to stop things like CFR has also been frustrating as have many of his cave ins to the wishes of liberal democrats. His heart is in the right place in the WOT but the execution has often been somewhat lacking. If asked this question i'd say that on the whole I disapprove of the job he has done. Not strongly because he has done some good things but on the whole I expected better out of him. Perhaps I was just foolish to listen to some of the rhetoric he ran on.
If that were true, you'd think the party would be moving further to the right to get away from him.
That's not the case at all. The party is distancing itself by moving to Bush's left.
Well let me defend you a little, smoothtalker. There were disappointments during the Reagan Administration too. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have voted for him. With Bush we got our tax cuts, the economy survived the recession he inherited and we got two good Supreme Court choices (better ones I think than Reagan left us). Also we stood tall after 9/11, tossed a couple of really awful Governments out of power in Iraq and Afghanistan, recovered WMD in Libya and made sure they weren't in Iraq. What did Clinton do in 8 years? Welfare reform? Only because Congress made him. You chose the best man running for the job at the time. Did you really want Kerry or Gore? No way. Be proud of your vote.
A mushroom cloud over Tehran would be new and exciting.
Nice post.
That's because we let the Democrats take Congress. The message...move to the left and win. Since we didn't hang together we will all hang separately.
I've often thought we should stop playing "prevent defense" in Iraq and take the show on the road.
"You chose the best man running for the job at the time. Did you really want Kerry or Gore? No way. Be proud of your vote."
And here in lies the problem. We've had some really poor choices the last several election cycles that haven't left people on either side excited about "their guy". The best thing going for Dole was that he wasn't Clinton. The best thing going for Bush and what motivated more Bush voters than anything else was that he wasn't Kerry or Gore. Bush was an unexceptional candidate but those two were terrible candidates. Wouldn't it be nice to go into the voting booth excited about who you are voting for? Voting for the lesser of two evils gets tiresome.
Many similarities, but there's a difference. Whereas Nixon was a domestic liberal/statist combined with an intellectually based foreign policy, President Bush has no domestic ideological philosophy or depth. For dissenters, that's being kind. I'd hate to think he did CFR, Part D, etc., from a calculated, philosophical bent.
Dumb comparison. Richard Nixon got in trouble because he was a criminal, not just because he had low poll ratings. I fully expect George W. Bush to serve until January 20, 2009.
I think we just went to the polls, voted for the lesser of two idiots, and hoped for the best.
"liberal policies. And it's getting worse by the day."
I think we've yet to see the grand finale of a total and complete betrayal.
We all know what that is.
"Bush has no domestic ideological philosophy"
Yes he does. It's called "Buenas dias, amigo!"
Voting for the lesser of two evils gets tiresome.
You're right. I haven't been happy with my Presidential vote since '88.
I would give you a "lol", except that it's too tragic. You're right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.