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.
NEW YORK, April 6, 2001
(CBS) President George W. Bush's presidency is encountering rough seas, as evaluations of his handling of the economy, the environment and foreign affairs - as well as his overall job approval - have all declined in the past month.
AP President Bush
Concerns about the economy continue, largely fueled by the volatile stock market, but the public has yet to widely support tax cuts as the solution to economic and stock market instability. And the public feels their own views run completely counter to Bush's on issues related to the environment.
STATE OF THE ECONOMY
Although most Americans remain positive about the economy, a growing number hold a negative view. In this poll, 68 percent say the economy is very or fairly good, while 30 percent think it is very or fairly bad. Since last December (before Bush took office), the percentage saying the economy was in good shape has declined nearly 20 percentage points.
EVALUATION OF THE ECONOMY Now 3/01 12/00 Good 68%
74%
86%
Now 3/01 12/00 Bad 30%
24%
13%
The culprit behind this increasing pessimism is the stock market. After watching the fluctuations of the past month, a growing number of Americans view the market negatively. Now, only 38 percent think the market is in excellent, very good or fairly good shape, and a majority - 53 percent - thinks it is fairly or very bad. Those figures represent a recent reversal in opinion about the market; earlier this year, majorities felt the market was in good shape, and about a third or less felt it was bad.
Unemployment doesn't yet appear to be causing any major concerns, despite news of layoffs by many American companies. Now, 22 percent say an adult in their household has been out of work and is looking; that's actually fewer than was reported six years ago. In polls conducted in the early 1980s, about one in three Americans reported there was someone out of work in their household.
And, concern about layoffs in the coming years is lower than it was just one month ago. Now, 41 percent are very or somewhat concerned that they or someone in their household will lose their job in the next few years; this is down from 54 percent in March.
But fears of an economic recession remain, although at nowhere near the levels of the early 1990s: 42 percent think the U.S. is currently in a recession, and an additional 27 percent think we're nearing one. Only 25 percent think we aren't either in or near recession. These figures aren't much different from February. But it should be noted that throughout 1991, about three-quarters of the public said we were in a recession - far more than say the same today.
Some concerns about the economy may be causing Americans to tighten their belts; 41 percent say they have changed their spending habits because of concerns about the economy. This hasn't changed much in the past few months.
In terms of the near future, there is a growing view that the economy is stagnating at best, even deteriorating, rather than improving. Forty-three percent think the economy is getting worse, 44 percent think it is staying the same, and only 10 percent believe it is getting better. Those figures are not much different from last month.
There are somewhat different expectations for the stock market, perhaps because of its recent declines. The public sees some light at the end of the tunnel; 59 percent expect the market to go up in the next year or so.
TAX CUTS
Is a large tax cut the solution to current concerns about the economy? There is no public consensus on the issue. Thirty-eight percent think a large tax cut would be good for the economy, 20 percent think it would be bad, and 37 percent think it wouldn't make much difference. That's a little less enthusiasm than was seen in last month's poll, when 43 percent felt a large tax cut would be good for the economy.
EFFECT OF TAX CUT ON THE ECONOMY Now Last Month Good 38%
43%
Now Last Month Bad 20%
20%
Now Last Month No Difference 37%
33%
There are partisan differences in opinion on the impact of tax cuts. Sixty-two percent of Republicans see a large tax cut as good for the economy. But to many Democrats, the tax cut is neutral; 41 percent think it will not make much difference.
Nevertheless, support for President George W. Bush's proposed $1.6 trillion tax cut still outweighs opposition. Fifty-one percent now favor it, while 37 percent oppose it. That's slightly less support than Bush received two months ago.
BUSH'S PROPOSED TAX CUT Now 2/01 Favor 51%
55%
Now 2/01 Oppose 37%
34%
Reaction to the counterproposal made by Democrats in Congress, for a smaller scale tax cut that would take effect this year, gets somewhat less support, but fewer Americans have any opinion on this proposal. Forty-three percent favor it, 37 percent oppose it, and one in five don't know.
But when asked which proposed tax cut would be fairest to people like them, the Democrats now hold a clear advantage, a change from last month. Forty-five percent say the Democratic tax cut would be fairer to them, and 38 percent name Bush's tax cut.
There are a number of possible reasons why Bush's proposed tax cut plan has lost a bit of luster. The public is still skeptical about the affordability of his tax plan. Americans are now divided as to whether it is possible or not to preserve Social Security, increase spending on education and implement the $1.6 trillion tax cut; 44 percent think this is feasible, and 44 percent think it is not. In March, slightly more felt it was possible to do all these things.
And about two-thirds say it is likely that implementing a tax cut will lead to a decrease in the amount of money spent on government programs; 31 percent think this is not likely.
As was the case last month, most Americans do not expect Bush's tax cut to provide them with more spending money. Thirty-six percent say the tax cut will make a significant difference in the amount of money they have after taxes, but 58 percent say it won't. Few expect to see much added money this year; 31 percent think that will happen next year or sometime after that. Just over half of the public continues to believe that rich people will benefit from Bush's tax cut; still, more than half of those with incomes of more than $50,000 a year don't believe they will have extra money as a result.
Most Americans aren't waiting to see what happens with the tax cuts to file their income tax returns this year; 64 percent have done their taxes already, and 23 percent expect to do them in the next week or so.
Although an increasing number of Americans now would like to see the budget surplus used to reduce taxes, support for this is still far lower than public support for applying the surplus to Social Security and Medicare. Forty-seven percent want the surplus to go to those organizations, while 21 percent want it used for a tax cut and 14 percent want it used to pay down the debt.
The Economic Impact on the Bush Presidency
In part because of concerns about the economy, but also as a result of the crisis in China and his recent environmental policies, George W. Bush's presidency is experiencing a dip in public opinion. Fifty-three percent approve of the overall job George W. Bush is doing as president, but 35 percent disapprove. Just last month, 60 percent approved and 22 percent disapproved.
BUSH'S JOB APPROVAL Now Last Month Approve 53%
60%
Now Last Month Disapprove 35%
22%
Ratings of Bush's handling of the economy are especially grim. Forty-seven percent approve of the job he is doing in this area, but almost as many - 40 percent -- disapprove. One month ago, positive assessments of the job he was doing with the economy outweighed negative assessments by two to one.
And the first evaluation of his handling of the environment is nearly evenly divided; 40 percent approve, and 37 percent disapprove. Negative ratings of Bush's handling of foreign policy have doubled in the past month, from 18 percent to 34 percent.
Regardless of any attempts Bush has made to reach out across party lines, views of the job Bush is doing as president are highly related to partisan affiliation. In all cases, Republicans overwhelmingly approve of the job he is doing, and Democrats disapprove.
THE ENVIRONMENT
The public is clearly at odds with George W. Bush when it comes to environmental issues. Sixty-one percent of Americans believe it is more important to protect the environment and 29 percent think it is more important to produce energy. But the public believes that Bush's view is just the opposite - 65 percent think Bush believes producing energy is more important, and only 9% think he favors protecting the environment.
And 59 percent of the public opposes Bush's recent decision not to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, which are thought to be one of the causes of global warming, because of concerns about energy shortages and the rising cost of energy. Only 29 percent favor his decision on this issue.
This poll was conducted among a nationwide sample of 660 adults, interviewed by telephone April 4-5, 2001. The error due to sampling could be plus or minus four percentage points for results based on the entire sample.
(c) MMI Viacom Internet Services Inc. All Rights Reserved.
For Education And Discussion Only. Not For Commercial Use.
Thanks for the barf alert. When CBS is cited as source, it's getting to be that the barf alert is assumed.
It seems to me that whenever Clinton's PERSONAL (not job)approval rating was above 50%, the news media touted this as giving him infite legitimacy. Perhaps I am missing something. Then again, this is a See BS article. There was a similar hit piece on PMSNBC last night.
Oh, BARBRA STREISAND! (Hi, JH)
Good evenin', Billie =^)
The last part of this poll actually contains very good news indeed. If 29 percent of Americans really believe that protecting the environment is more important than generating energy, then all we have to do is identify those people and cut off their electricity. The power shortage would be solved instantly, and pollution from power generation could be cut by nearly 30 percent! Everybody wins!
CBSNEWS' liberal spin-doctoring aside, there's little here for liberals to rejoice over.
For one thing, the President's approval rating remains solidly positive -- even better than Clinton's numbers at this point in his first term -- and this despite the avalanche of negative coverage over Kyoto, alleged "flip-flopping" on CO2, a violently imploding stock market and the torrent of bad news on the state of the economy.
However, CBSNEWS shouldn't be popping those champagn corks just yet: While Bush's approval rating over the last month might have edged down somewhat, history shows that is nearly always the case for a new administration.
Here's what CBSNEWS intentionally omited in this piece: The 60% approval rating in their previous poll came straight off the heels of Bush's widely praised and better-than-expected 'State-Of-The-Union-Address' (or, National address on the federal budget). The annual ritual typically inflates Presidential approval ratings, if fleetingly, as the nation's chief executive is afforded the rare opportunity to reach the huge audiences of prime-time TV viewers with his message.
If anything, Bush's approval rating has settled into normal terrain.
Further, assuming a successful resolution to the current US-China standoff -- and there is every reason to believe one is forthcoming -- expect Bush's standing in the polls to rocket back up into the to middle and upper 60's, or higher.
If 29 percent of Americans really believe that protecting the environment is more important than generating energy, then all we have to do is identify those people and cut off their electricity. The power shortage would be solved instantly, and pollution from power generation could be cut by nearly 30 percent! Everybody wins!
I like your idea! Please forward it to Gray Davis at your earliest convenience!
You forgot to mention that the poll was created by Dan Rather.
You forgot to mention that the poll was created by Dan Rather.
And that he was "polling" at a Democrat fundraiser.
Excellent idea my friend.
Polls, schmolls. Doesn't mean much.
If we can get a few more governors, senators and secretaries of state, along with the Supreme Court, we're never going to lose again.
The numbers will go up and down. Relax. It's all under control.
Thank you. It's the same solution I used to suggest during the Gulf War when I would see a group of idiots gathering to chant "No war for oil!," and would ask how many of them walked or bicycled there and how many of them came in cars. Since this was in Dallas, of course, all of them came in individual cars. I suggested that if everyone who was opposed to the war would just give up their cars, that would leave plenty of oil and gas for the rest of us, and nobody would have to go to war. No takers.
So they did want the oil and gas, they just didn't want to have to do what was necessary to obtain it. The technical term for these folks is "willfully ignorant spoiled brats."
Oh yes, that fundraiser in Texas that he didn't really know was a fundraiser!!!!
That's Right See BS! GW was able to single-handedly ruing the US economy in a matter of days!
Meanwhile, as the economy in New York State heads into a recession, Sen Shoplift had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with her States economic downturn.
JohnHuang2, good morning. After so many instances of CBS and their employee and staff love affair with the Clintons and anything democrat/liberal/socialist/commie it is so very hard to give this poll much value, particularly when only 660 people were interviewed.
Moreover, after hearing that Tim Russert is gleefully teaching Democrats how to confront Republicans and destroy President Bush's programs is just another indication of the overt bias of the mainstream media. We all know that the media in general gave the Clinton Era a pass when it came to objective analysis and reporting. I am stunned continuously by how much has really been masked and hidden by the media just to protect and enable the Clinton's to appear favorable in light of some of the terribly serious problems that our Nation has been headed to for quite some time due to neglect, corruption, avoidance, or sheer inability or capability of the Clinton Administration to handle the problems that President GW Bush is left to clean up and handle.
These polls are proof that our education system needs a complete overhaul...ASAP!
These polls are proof that our education system needs a complete overhaul...ASAP!
What I find interesting and refreshing is the fewer number of polls even being taken since the Innauguration. The previous administration lived and operated on a constant and daily stream of polls. This one doesn't.
I find that the most telling bit of polling data. I am sure that polls are being taken, but the results haven't been what the liberal media want to broadcast, so they just get filed.
Dear FreeWhiteRepublics, I just want to say that that the Media is NOT left leaning...If anything, it is right leaning. And mo matter, how you spin the polls, it shows that Americans are losing confidence in bush...now why don't you get over it... Let the flame emails begin...
Why don't you just go back to democrats.com where you belong?
Why would I want to leave...do you disagree that bush's approval rating is going down?...or Do you think more and more people are happy with him?
I'll have you know that not everyone on this website is white!
And learn how to spell before you post again! (end rant/)
>I'll have you know that not everyone on this website is white!
>And learn how to spell before you post again! (end rant/)
1) Glad to hear there's a modicum of diversity here.
2) It was obviously a typo. Learn the difference before you accuse again.
3) Closing tags begin with a '/', not end.
We libs would be mopping the floor with you righties if we didn't have to spend so much time correcting you.
more manufactured polls?
Only 95% are white...the other 5% just act like it...
The polls are significant as propaganda checks....it's a media organization's way to find out if their slant/spin is taking hold with the population.
They are opinion shapers, not news reporters.
The truth would include some attempt to understand if people knew the economy was worsening as Clinton left office. Since there's no attempt in this regard at all, then one's left with the only conclusion that the media is propagandizing and not reporting.
You are hillarious! Dream on, loser, dream on!
No proof that the ecomony has gone down since Clinton has left office?!?!?! This board is hilarious! Are you guys for real?
http://www.magnetbox.com/sorry/
What's ridiculous is your blindness! Leading economic indicators had the economy slipping before Clinton left office. Bush was careful to point that out.
Bush has been in office a mere 78 days. To somehow say that he's connected to data from the last quarter of the Clinton administration that is just now being released is pure propaganda. In fact, no one connects Bush with the economy's performance in the 1st quarter of 2001 either. Jan, Feb, Mar of 01 simply have very little to do with the current administration. The data is inflation, profit, employment, etc. numbers that relate to the previous administration.
This is the Clinton/Gore recession. Get over it. It's just economic fact.
You are clearly spinning. Answer this simple question: which major network anchor was at a democratic fundraiser?
And I suppose thinking for myself is acting white. Give me a break.
Are you for real? ...I will answer the question...I think you are talking about Dan Rather...but there are more Conservative reports & talking heads in the main stream media than true “liberals”...and you know it. Again, the bottom line is that confidence in bush is going down (except maybe the China issue)...how can that be spin?...is it because you do not want to accept it.
No...I am just assuming that most Republicans do not think...look who they voted for...
You sound like a pretty stand-up kind of guy, although you are spinning at the moment?
Honest question: As a liberal, do you think that the results of the slowing economy in Clinton's last quarter, before Bush became president, is Clinton's responsibility?
2nd Honest question: Do you think the results of the economy in Bush's first quarter, and he's not even been President for an entire quarter, is really the result of economic policy by the previous administration?
I'm just curious to know what your true opinion is on these questions, so please answer as you truly see it.
Thanks
Thanks for your comments and I will try to answer your questions without spin :-) #1: The stock market and the economy started to go down in the last quarter of the Clinton administration. I do not see it as his fault due to the previous 8 years of growth and (It had to go down sometimes) #2: I do not blame him for the down turn in the economy. However, I do not think he is not doing anything constructive to increase confidence in the economy. His tax plan, if it will ever get passed, does not do anything for the present economic...and it is debatable if it is good for the long-term economy. Hopefully, I answered your questions without too much spin :-)
#1: The stock market and the economy started to go down in the last quarter of the Clinton administration. I do not see it as his fault due to the previous 8 years of growth and (It had to go down sometimes)
I agree with your point that it had to go down at some point. You would suppose that I give a lot of credit to a more conservative Congress for the 8 good years. But I also give credit to Clinton. He was the President and there was prosperity. It'd be silly to cut him entirely out of the credit as if he didn't exist.
I think Greenspan announced about 2 years ago that he was going after the Nasdaq because of unrealistic "exhuberance." He considered it inflated, dangerous because of a wildly speculative bubble, and in serious need of remedy. The down economy is due to its cyclical nature, perhaps, but also to steady interest increases for multiple quarters by the Fed.
#2: I do not blame him for the down turn in the economy. However, I do not think he is not doing anything constructive to increase confidence in the economy. His tax plan, if it will ever get passed, does not do anything for the present economic
Good honest answer. I think he needed more frontloaded than he did. But at the same time, I'm gonna end up with a very large overall cut when all is said and done. It MORE than compensates for the investment I made in his campaign pledge to cut taxes. It'll save me a couple thousand a year. That seemed a good economic decision to me so I donated a percentage of the savings to the Bush campaign.
No spin on your part. Thanks. Hope we can talk again in the future. :^)
I wish I could say the same thing. I am single, no children, and I do not own a home...and I just did my takes...ouch
I agree with your point that it had to go down at some point. You would suppose that I give a lot of credit to a more conservative Congress for the 8 good years. But I also give credit to Clinton. He was the President and there was prosperity. It'd be silly to cut him entirely out of the credit as if he didn't exist.
I would give Clinton credit for not doing much to obstruct the economy. However let's not forget that he went along with 7 of 10 Contract with America platforms.
We've had a 2 decades overall boom with some dips and blips, not unlike what we are experiecing now. However we have not experienced anything remotely like the Carter years economically and most of that credit goes to Ronaldus Maximus and a more conservative Congress as well as the baby boomer earning power bubble and stable(relatively) energy prices.
Clinton and Co.'s real damage has been cultural. Social engineering and divisiveness and the complete sellout of the Dems to minority and victim oriented special interests are his legacy. And a rather large dose of cynical "win at all costs" pandering and corruption to boot.
You are answering a RED CHINESE #31. Don't bother.
Dear FreeWhiteRepublics, I just want to say that that the Media is NOT left leaning...If anything, it is right leaning. And mo matter, how you spin the polls, it shows that Americans are losing confidence in bush...now why don't you get over it... Let the flame emails begin...
All you're doing is what we in the political commentary business refer to as 'baseless assertion.' You cite no facts and engage in no reasoning, you simply state what you want to believe, and demand that we believe it, too.
If anything, your post energizes us, because it shows us that the most expressive opposition we face is from someone who doesn't know how to correctly use grammar or punctuation.
Wait a minute...baseless accusations...that sounds like a Republican tactic :-) It seems to me it is the claim of Republicans and ditto heads that the media is liberal. Where is that proof? In the past 2 years, I have not seen it. What news shows are "liberal"?...Meet the Press?...Washington this Week?...The Factor? I can give you proof, but I doubt you will accept it. As to my style of writing...I like it...that is why I use it.
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.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |