Obama Less Popular Than Bush After First Month in Office

Obama Less Popular Than Bush After First Month in Office

By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
February 24, 2009 - 22:51 ET

As Obama-loving media gush and swoon while they report the new President's popularity, an inconvenient truth emerged Tuesday that seems destined to get ignored: after one month in office, George W. Bush was more popular than the current White House occupant.

Impossible, you say?

Well, before Obama stepped in front of Congress this evening, Gallup published the following:

For the first time since Gallup began tracking Barack Obama's presidential job approval rating on Jan. 21, fewer than 60% of Americans approve of the job he is doing as president. In Feb. 21-23 polling, 59% of Americans give Obama a positive review, while 25% say they disapprove, and 16% have no opinion.

Almost exactly eight years ago, then newly-elected President Bush's numbers were 62 percent approving his performance, 21 percent disapproving, and 17 percent having no opinion (scroll about 3/4 down this Polling Report link).

As such, regardless of how hard media are working to foster this view that this is the most popular president in the modern era, such is not the case.

In fact, even ABC's director of polling reported Tuesday that Obama's current numbers are actually quite average with George H. W. Bush, John F. Kennedy, and even Jimmy Carter being more popular after just a month in the White House.

I somehow doubt this will get a lot of attention from the teeming hordes of press members who worked so diligently to get him elected.

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Hee hee !

February 24, 2009 - 23:02 ET by Gary Hall

Hee hee !

got to love it. (;~> gary

Obama is going to be a flaming disaster for this nation

February 24, 2009 - 23:21 ET by R D Helm

He is going to make Jimmy Carter look competent by the end of 2009.

Hell, as far as I am concerned, Obama is making Carter appear competent right now.

By the end of 2010, the 12 Americans who actually still have jobs inthis country will be busy carving Jimmy Carter's face into Mt. Rushmore.

God help the United States of America.

-Dave

Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.

Expect a spike

February 24, 2009 - 23:36 ET by KC Mulville

He's likely going to get a jump after tonight, but it won't last long. In any case, it doesn't matter. Few races are won in the first furlong. He's going to have his ups and downs.

I'm guessing that Obama isn't going to face any major foreign policy incidents in his term. Why would our enemies stir things up, when they can just coast to success anyway? Obama isn't the type to confront. He votes present, remember? Obama is more likely to negotiate away what they want, so why rock the boat? North Korea is in transition, but they're likely to sneak along quietly. As long as they don't make a fuss, Obama won't confront them. As for the Islamic world, who has a lot of money to finance an operation anyway? Oil revenues are down, and so the Islamic fanatics are on the cheap. Obama won't confront Iran or gamble anything in Afghanistan or Pakistan.

The only people I'm worried about, frankly, are the Chinese. They're holding a lot of IOUs on us, and they need the US economy to be healthy enough to pay those IOUs.

But the Chinese attitude is like a common mafia loanshark ... sooner or later, he's going to want to be paid, no matter what. Holding that much money on us can't be a good thing.

Basically, I can't see anyone in a position to cause him much trouble. Which means that Obama won't have any macho foreign policy successes to brag about. Four years will pass, and Obama will have accomplished little. That's why I think he's going to be an inconsequential president. He may be personally popular, but he won't have mattered much in the long run.

Bush was popular????

February 25, 2009 - 00:28 ET by bpjam

I'm an avid watcher/reader of the news and I never recall hearing a story about Bush being popular. I only remember stories about him having the lowest approval rating of any President coming into office in US history.

Of course, the media got to spend an entire month prior to his inauguration covering stories about how he 'stole' the election and how he had already polarized the country and how 'he had no mandate'. And even after he won in 2004 they kept talking about how he was the most unpopular President ever to win re-election and how, again, he didn't win a mandate for anything (despite having a margin of victory only a couple points different that The Messiah)

Polls of 'adults' are largely crap anyways. Unless its registered voters like it will be during the election season, it just give the public a distorted view of the actual popularity of a public figure. Non-voter polls always favor democrats and big government ideas because it includes far more people who have absolutely no stake or responsibility in the country. If every single in America were forced to vote by law, we would be France. Half of America is either underaged or in some other way too immature to be responsible for deciding the fate of the country. If you can't name the member of the Supreme Court, you shouldn't be voting for the people who will appoint or approve them.

I Suspect...

February 25, 2009 - 20:20 ET by Wildcatter1980

...Bush was even more popular shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, too, than Obama will ever be. In fact, when do you think that we will start hearing background grumblings about The Obamessiah needing a major action (war?) to distract from the poor job he is doing with the economy?

--
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price. - Ronald Reagan from his first inaugural address

These Numbers are Wrong

February 25, 2009 - 02:05 ET by slickwillie2001

Folks, we have to remember that the Bradley-Wilder effect is still in play. Just because Obammy won the election doesn't make it go away. Some respondents called by pollsters will be terrified to say that they don't approve of The One, because that would be RACIST. If they think the caller might be black they will be even more likely to lie. We have to discount these polls by (just guessing) around 5 to 10 percent to get a believable number.

So his approval rate is at 58% today. Does anyone with a brain really think if the election was redone, that Obammy would win? What does that tell you about the 58% number?

Please stop. There is no

February 25, 2009 - 04:20 ET by ckc1227

Please stop. There is no Bradley Effect. It's nothing more than an excuse to call white people racist when a black person loses an election.

OBAMA-RAMA...

February 25, 2009 - 07:51 ET by danybhoy

Let's be honest, by the midterm elections his approval ratings will be through the floor & heading to the core of the earth. His ratings will be close to congress is now. He may leave with ratings lower then Bush43. Think about it, if the crap "stimulus" bills he keeps signing off on don't work-& THEY WON'T,& he nationalizes everything in sight-& they suck worse then they did before, he will be lucky to be over 20%.

"The Fairness Doctrine = Jim Crow laws for Conservatives". Jim Quinn from "Quinn & Rose"

Next time

February 25, 2009 - 07:58 ET by 10ksnooker

The Democrats should try electing an American.

Good one - WHEN do you suppose we will ever find

February 25, 2009 - 20:49 ET by Cape Conservative

out the truth about his college/passport used for travel/and, of course, a birth CERTIFICATE, not a Certificate of Birth! Just how long can 'the one' and the courts strongarm us?

It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams

Illegal Alien President

February 25, 2009 - 20:54 ET by Sergeant ROCK

It seems like a most reasonable request to me. Why can't he do it?

My fingers are crossed that someone is busy collecting the evidence to expose this fraud and cause his removal immediately.

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

Bolton/KEYES 2012

10s, CC and Rock... Seems

February 25, 2009 - 21:03 ET by bigtimer

10s, CC and Rock...

Seems some in the military are questioning this now too.

I posted this somewhere else too not long ago, so if you already say this, I apologize...I'm not here every minute, just saw your posts.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89941

Treasonous

February 25, 2009 - 21:13 ET by Sergeant ROCK

That's awesome. That takes some real guts.

As for these courts dismissing these cases, I find it somewhat treasonous on their part. After this could proven to be fact, I would see to it to impeach these idiots.

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

Bolton/KEYES 2012

Does Obama or his Advisers know what is ailing the US Banks?

February 25, 2009 - 09:04 ET by KLAPTON

No amount of lofty speeches and rhetoric read from speeches choreographed by a squadron of speech-writers (including when to pause for the expected standing ovation from the audience) and scrolled on teleprompter will lift the country out of the financial abyss into which it has fallen unless the root causes of this calamity are diagnosed. But it appears that neither President Obama nor his army of advisors (who are, after all, the same people who were sleeping at the switch when the roof was caving in over their heads) seem to have acquired any meaningful insight into the underlying problems facing the financial institutions. In the midst of all the hue and cry about the astronomical losses being reported quarter on quarter by leading banks to the point of their possible extinction in this country and also in the rest of the world, no one has come out so far with a clear, intelligible and cogent explanation for this catastrophic phenomenon, which a common man/woman on the street can easily grasp and understand. There is indeed a virtual Babel going on over the whole issue. Is it not a bit strange that, in a country which boasts of having won a lion's share of Nobel prizes for Economics, there is not a single "expert" who really knows what caused the downfall of the so-called titans in the financial world. The Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke keeps on changing his prognosis every time he appears before a Congress panel and indeed presents a pathetic picture of a fumbling and mumbling figure! And, whenever the new Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner opens his mouth, the Dow Stock Index takes a nose dive! The financial institutions seem to be all suffering from a strange virus infection. Unless the virus is isolated and identified, no effective cure can be found and all the money that is poured into any stimulus plan will be just draining into a bottomless pit. The admittedly abnormal trend in defaults in payments on sub-prime (and even prime) mortgages and the consequent foreclosures alone could not have been the sole cause of this infection. Some other vices the institutions might have been surreptiously indulging in might have also had a crucial role . Is it possible that the banks and other financial institutions had been lending money they did not have (driven by insensate greed of the bank executives to earn fat bonuses) in the Micawberish hope that something would turn up to set things right in the end as long as they maintained the false façade of adequate liquidity in the system and that it would be a remote chance that they would be caught with their pants down as it has happened now? This would be the banking equivalent of naked shorting in stock trading (in which you sell stocks which you don't have and which you have not borrowed from somebodyelse either in the hope of buying them back later at a cheaper price). This scam, if perfected, would be a Mach 2 version of the Ponzi schemes which Madoff and Stanford are accused of. Given the opaque and non-transparent nature of most of the transactions in the rarefied atmosphere of High Finance and the paranoiac secrecy with which the banks generally conduct their affairs and also given the callous and cavalier way in which the concerned regulatory authorities all over the world have been carrying out even their routine fiduciary responsibilities, anything would have been possible!

Paragraphs.

February 25, 2009 - 10:12 ET by Doc_Navy

KLAP,

One word, Bro... Paragraphs.

Seriously, you have a lot of great things to say, but it's just hard on the eyes when you see a big block of no break writing. Seriously.

K. Flame over. ;P

Doc

2008: The year that the great LIE died.

How we know that they know that they are Lying.

Friedrich Nietzsche summed up how I feel about the MSM in this quote:

"I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you."

Ditto what the Doc said...

February 25, 2009 - 10:35 ET by JPR1

Great thoughts and phrasing, but break it up. Even if they're not full-blown paragraphs. Makes for a much faster read.

What caused the downfall?

My simple take: the cultural tolerance for slackers and cheaters. It seems that at most any level of society people get away with behavior that just wasn't widely accepted fifty years ago.

What's that old saying about if you have a society where "Anything Goes"...sooner or later everything will?

Gallup poll

February 25, 2009 - 11:32 ET by east tennessee john

I suppose now Al Gore will write a book about this, and the fact it's being downplayed, and call it An Inconvenient Truth. There are no poll numbers only on created opinion and lies.

Change you can believe

February 25, 2009 - 12:55 ET by wiwf

Change you can believe in!

The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy

I'm the O to end all O's

February 25, 2009 - 13:56 ET by NorthCoaster

I'm the greatest to ever come along! ----The O,

and the polls say;

Nope, you're following George W. Bush at this point in your Presidency according to our data.

ROFLMAO

Where are the lefties shouting IMPEACH OBAMA?

February 25, 2009 - 14:10 ET by LionKing

Gitmo abuse has increased since Barry has taken office.

Why aren't the same liberals that called for Bush to be impeached doing the same for Obama?

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.

lion king

February 25, 2009 - 14:27 ET by east tennessee john

for the same reason they aren't calling Barry a killer for the deaths of civilans in Pakistan. There are reactionary forces left over from the previous administration doing these things to cause embarassment to the new regime of Comrade Obama.

Thanks for the link, LK - I loved this comment:

February 25, 2009 - 21:03 ET by Cape Conservative

"Certainly in my experience there have been many, many more reported incidents of abuse since the inauguration," added Ghappour, who has visited Guantanamo six times since late September and based his comments on his own observations and conversations with both prisoners and guards."

I suggest this person volunteer to spend the next 6 months assisting the military guards during their rounds...if he goes first, maybe they'll hit him with their feces/urine etc instead of subjecting our service members to unspeakable abuse!

You want to talk about ABUSE, Mr. Ghappour? I say that you need look no further than what is being done to us, not them!

It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams

Hay, where's my hattip?

February 25, 2009 - 18:24 ET by CobraMan

Hay, where's my hat tip? I posted the results of that poll, and a link to it, in a NB article showing Obama with a 62 percent approval rating. I believe the Topic of my post was Obama in decline.

On edit: Here's my post, note the timestamp.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities
of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

CobraMan, LOL-Noel only passes those out...

February 25, 2009 - 18:29 ET by R D Helm

...if he actually sees your post.

I think I have gotten two since I have been here.

LOL-Welcome to the world of NB peons. :-)

-Dave

Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.

Bummer!

February 25, 2009 - 18:33 ET by CobraMan

Oh well, I was the first to post it. Woo Hoo!

BTW, I read about that poll about 10 am yesterday. I got it from a Washington Times news article. They didn't provide a link to that poll, I had to seach for it, those lazy ba-, well, you know.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities
of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court