British Expatriate Network

What do you think is the lowest that the President's approval ratings can go?

Reason I ask is that I have friends whom we ate breakfast with. They still maintain that the president is not only supportable, but doing a great job. They are truly mistified by any negativity towards him. So it would seem clear that he will always get some support. But how many people is that? Today's new ABC poll shows that only 39% of people support him.

http//abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=1278080

Earlier this week there was a CBS poll showing that only 33% support him, and only 19% (!!!shock ) think favorably of Cheney.

http//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/02/opinion/polls/main1005252.shtml

I was reading one of my favorite bloggers who thinks that there are always a number of people who will support a candidate. He puts it down to to a "crazification factor" and puts the number at 27%

http//kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/10/lunch-discussions-145-crazification.html

John Hey, Bush is now at 37 percent approval. I feel much less like Kevin McCarthy screaming in traffic. But I wonder what his base is --

Tyrone 27 percent.

John ... you said that immmediately, and with some authority.

Tyrone Obama vs. Alan Keyes. Keyes was from out of state, so you can eliminate any established political base; both candidates were black, so you can factor out racism; and Keyes was plainly, obviously, completely crazy. Batshit crazy. Head-trauma crazy. But 27 percent of the population of Illinois voted for him. They put party identification, personal prejudice, whatever ahead of rational judgement. Hell, even like 5 percent of Democrats voted for him. That's crazy behaviour. I think you have to assume a 27 percent Crazification Factor in any population.

John Objectively crazy or crazy vis-a-vis my own inertial reference frame for rational behavior? I mean, are you creating the Theory of Special Crazification or General Crazification?

Tyrone Hadn't thought about it. Let's split the difference. Half just have worldviews which lead them to disagree with what you consider rationality even though they arrive at their positions through rational means, and the other half are the core of the Crazification -- either genuinely crazy; or so woefully misinformed about how the world works, the bases for their decision making is so flawed they may as well be crazy.

John You realize this leads to there being over 30 million crazy people in the US?

Tyrone Does that seem wrong?

John ... a bit low, actually.


Oh - and lets say that again. Cheney has a lower approval than Alan Keyes. shock

Thats the strength of the Republicans convincing people that

a)we're right and the whole world is wrong
b)However bad we are, the Democrats are even worse.

There is an erroneous assumption here, that voters are making up their minds on a rational basis. Some people vote for the name they like best, the name they recognize best, any reason but a good one. Same way I have seen people bet on a horse because the jockey's colours look good.

Surely the amount of people that do this should even out between parties across the country?

Even Hitler had many supporters amongst ordinary Germans in 1945.

The following is the final quote from a list of similarities between Hitler and Bush.
http//www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles3/Jayne_Hitler-Bush.htm

Of course countless differences may be listed between Hitler and President Bush, most of which are to the credit of Bush. Nevertheless, the resemblances listed here are striking, especially since Bush’s first term in office must be compared with Hitler’s performance as German Chancellor through the year 1937, preceding the chain of events immediately preceding World War II. In any case, George W. Bush seems the worst and most dangerous U.S. president in recent memory (for me since Roosevelt)--if not in the entire history of the United States.

Edward Jayne is a retired English professor with experience as a '60s activist. He can be contacted at edward.jayne@wmich.edu.

I think you've broken the golden "never mention Hitler" rule there - especially if it's a "he's not like Hitler but..." statement. I just think that as an argument it just doesn't stick. It's up there alongside "never call someone a Nazi" rule because you disagree greatly with them.

But I did find this hilarious thing though - it's what they think the approval rating floor would be after the President did something ludicrous like killing Wilfred Brimley on tv-

http//www.thepoorman.net/2005/08/22/america-has-been-brainwashed-by-far-left-extremists/

"BTKWB (the President’s approval ratings the morning after he pre-empted Monday Night Football in order to Bind, Torture and Kill Wilford Brimley for his own sexual gratification) has generally been taken to be somewhere in the 32-36 percent range, depending on the theoretical models used, and depending on if he uses up the MNF timespot completely, or just pops in during halftime.

It is generally assumed that between 68-64 percent of the general public would disapprove of Wilford Brimley being sadistically murdered on national TV while the President of the United States leered and drooled in a blood-drenched homoerotic fugue that they would be willing to undermine the troops in the field by saying so, and would continue in their disapproval even in the face of such arguments as “the President needs a way to unwind from the pressures of his job”, “there was no other way to be sure he wasn’t a terrorist”, “many terrorists have mustaches, you know”, and even “he might have been hiding Saddam’s WMD in his Quaker Oats.""

Excellent article, it comforts me to see others are aware of whats going on here!!! This is another article but not as detailed and I believe the author is a college professor as well.
http://www.new-enlightenment.com/nazific...step4.htm.

The scary thing is that after Hitler started to get to be a problem the Allies were there to put him in his place at a high price, who is going to stop Bush?

I read Friday the E.U. wants to question the US about "secret CIA gulag style prisons" in eastern europe. Thats scary. PEOPLE WAKE UP. You are slowly watching the unfolding of a mirror image of nazi germany in it's infancy, give it time then it may be a little bit more obvious.If you don't think it can't happen here it's already started.

Kennedy must have been a more dangerous President than Bush - after all, his own government agencies allegedly "removed" him from power.

I suppose Bush is more dangerous to the rest of the world but his own country and agencies more or less seem to be accepting of him.

and after you spat out your cornflakes, did you not ask them why they thought this?
what is he doing that is so superb?

I'd love an answer.

In short, he maintains the status quo for various groups.

The gun industry/lobbyists/shooters like him because he's not anti-gun and signs their bills when they make it to his desk.

The religous types like him because they think he is one of them and generally he goes along with this.

Big business and industry like him because they believe he is working for their best interests first - the war in Iraq, Alaskan oil drilling, reduction of pollution standards, reduction of the policing done by the SEC and other watchdogs certainly seems to back up this supposition.

All in all, it is a masterful "act" but he is always going to appeal to certain types and they hold more power than most, most of the time except when it comes to election time.

Its the liberal media. Everything's going swimmingly in real life. :grin:

Unsuprisingly yes they do lay alot of blame at the feet of "liberal media." As devout presbyterians they a) consider the Republican party the party of God, b) think Democrats are a part of that whole "test of faith" thing, and c) really see Bush as a get things done guy. I asked what it was they thought he did well and their answer was more a "Well, the things people say he did badly aren't his fault." They don't think he did anything wrong on Katrina, is entirely blameless on gas prices, think Delay and Scooter are victims of partisan smears, the whole nine yards really. They really love the tax cut issue, thought Harriet miers was a great pick, were motivated by the gay-marriage amendment proposal, and really think Bush will be the guy who'll start to overturn Roe. And the realt tell is they really really like Bill O'Rielly.

I guess a way to understand them is go read Powerline for an hour - everything that is bad can be explained away. All the arguments are intellectual, made by educated people, and somehow manage to show that there isn't a problem, and if it looks like there is, then you've been listening to NPR buddy.

Bush may have his fairly good base support in the US, but his administration has over his presidency turned the USA into a rogue country.

In the past administrations have often used covert means to bring about change in other countries. The Bush administration has resorted to just plain old force, as the other guy did in the 30's. But like past conquerors he is beginning to run out of the troops required to sustain long term occupation.

The rest of the world can only hope that in the next 3 years we don't see anymore violent reactions from the US. The real culprits are as they have always been, non-elected members of the administration with big business connections.

I like the way that Fox News and Forces Radio treat NPR as if its the 'balance' opposite the right wing loons. From I've heard, NPR seems to be pretty balanced, though I would think that if you're listening to Oxycontin Limbaugh all day, it would seem 'liberal bias'ed.... :roll:

I actually wonder whether Republicans are ever so slightly...well..mad.