wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

P Fritz wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9672058/


Big deal......look at the last several president's lowest numbers.

Table 1. Presidential Approval Ratings, 1953-1999 (11)

President Average (%) High (%) Low (%)

Kennedy 70 83 56
Eisenhower 65 79 48
Bush 61 89 29
Johnson 55 79 35
Clinton 54 73 37
Reagan 53 65 35
Nixon 49 67 24
Ford 47 71 37
Carter 45 74 28


http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...109025096/pg_4

Good point for once, **** for brains! The only two anywhere NEAR are
Nixon, and Carter!!!

Clinton was at 37% at one point in his Presidency...which matches
CBS's
current number.

Oh, so now in order to spin, you find lowest of the low numbers from
any poll, then match them to the highest low number for Bush from any
poll. Nice.




The lowest Bush approval rating in *any* of the polls is 37%...and it
came
in a CBS News poll.

The lowest Clinton approval rating according to *Gallup* was 37%. If you
want a true apples to apples comparison, then let's look at Gallup's
lowest-ever number for Bush: 40%...which is three points higher than
Clinton's lowest approval rating.

A "true apples to apples comparison" would be each and every poll for
Clinton, through his first and second terms, compared to each and every
poll for Bush, through his first and second terms.

Of course. But lacking the necessary data, we have to work with what we
have.

According to Gallup:

Bush's lowest-ever approval rating was 40%.

Clinton's lowest-ever approval rating was 37%

wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:


Here, why don't you lap THIS up:

http://tinyurl.com/9za2n

You sure do visit some strange sites there bassie. I never knew you had a
homoerotic fetish.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Here, why don't you lap THIS up:

http://tinyurl.com/9za2n


Looks like it could be a pic of you, just before you got the monkey fist
from your Father in-law.

Did Monte get one too?

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:47:53 +0000, NOYB wrote:


The lowest Bush approval rating in *any* of the polls is 37%...and it
came in a CBS News poll.

The lowest Clinton approval rating according to *Gallup* was 37%. If
you want a true apples to apples comparison, then let's look at Gallup's
lowest-ever number for Bush: 40%...which is three points higher than
Clinton's lowest approval rating.

Spin it any way you want, but let's look at Bush's data historically. Any
President has normal gains and ebbs in their approval. A gradual rise,
means that people who at one time disapproved, are now approving. The
rises are gradual, as we each make our mind of at different rates. The
opposite is also true, approval turning to disapproval. Spikes, on the
other hand, are generally major events, that change peoples mind rapidly.

Here's Bush's historical data graphed:

http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm

You'll notice, there aren't *any* gradual upturns, only spikes. The
gradual trend is down, down, down. People who once approved of Bush are
turning away. The only question is, when his base finally kicks in. You
know the base, people like you, NOYB, those with unfaltering loyalty to
this President. The curtain is open, the honeymoon is over, where is
Bush's base. I'm guessing, somewhere between Carter and Nixon.

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:


Here, why don't you lap THIS up:

http://tinyurl.com/9za2n

You sure do visit some strange sites there bassie. I never knew you had a
homoerotic fetish.

What would make you think that I've got a homoerotic fetish, nitwit?
Because I've got enough brains to go to google and enter "hairy ass" to
get a picture to post to tschnautz to "lap it up"?

Harry Krause wrote in message
...

In the end, Bush will be done in by his incompetency.

Your hero.

Tough darts.

In any event, Bush will be done in by the expiration of his term. Time to
start thinking about a successor, from both sides or more.

I heard an interesting statistic this afternoon. Paul Harvey, I think.
Last year the US graduated 70,000 new engineers. Japan graduated 350,000
and China graduated 650,000. Related, more money was spent in the US on
liability lawsuits than on new technical research and development. Seems
this country has taken it's eye off the ball, and I personally believe it
has a lot more to do with loosing traditional values than it does due to the
policies of any particular politician.

Eisboch

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:07:16 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Bush's lowest-ever approval rating was 40%.

Clinton's lowest-ever approval rating was 37%

Yeah, but Clinton's lowest numbers were in the early days of his first
term. I'll guarantee Bush wishes he had Clinton's second term numbers,
Monica and all.

http://www.pollkatz.homestead.com/fi...7_image001.gif

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:47:53 +0000, NOYB wrote:


The lowest Bush approval rating in *any* of the polls is 37%...and it
came in a CBS News poll.

The lowest Clinton approval rating according to *Gallup* was 37%. If
you want a true apples to apples comparison, then let's look at Gallup's
lowest-ever number for Bush: 40%...which is three points higher than
Clinton's lowest approval rating.

Spin it any way you want, but let's look at Bush's data historically. Any
President has normal gains and ebbs in their approval. A gradual rise,
means that people who at one time disapproved, are now approving. The
rises are gradual, as we each make our mind of at different rates. The
opposite is also true, approval turning to disapproval. Spikes, on the
other hand, are generally major events, that change peoples mind rapidly.

Here's Bush's historical data graphed:

http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm

Do you have a link for any historical data graphs of other recent
Presidents?





You'll notice, there aren't *any* gradual upturns, only spikes. The
gradual trend is down, down, down. People who once approved of Bush are
turning away.


Ironically, his numbers fell right after he pitched the $200 billion for New
Orleans, and then again after the Miers' nomination. Abandoning his base
has hurt him much worse than when he sticks to his guns.



The only question is, when his base finally kicks in. You
know the base, people like you, NOYB, those with unfaltering loyalty to
this President.

His base is there when he needs them. It's just that right now they're
showing their displeasure with his "caving in" on several important issues
to most Conservatives.


The curtain is open, the honeymoon is over, where is
Bush's base. I'm guessing, somewhere between Carter and Nixon.

See above.

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

wrote in message
ups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

P Fritz wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9672058/


Big deal......look at the last several president's lowest numbers.

Table 1. Presidential Approval Ratings, 1953-1999 (11)

President Average (%) High (%) Low (%)

Kennedy 70 83 56
Eisenhower 65 79 48
Bush 61 89 29
Johnson 55 79 35
Clinton 54 73 37
Reagan 53 65 35
Nixon 49 67 24
Ford 47 71 37
Carter 45 74 28



http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...109025096/pg_4

Good point for once, **** for brains! The only two anywhere NEAR are
Nixon, and Carter!!!

Clinton was at 37% at one point in his Presidency...which matches CBS's
current number.

Oh, so now in order to spin, you find lowest of the low numbers from
any poll, then match them to the highest low number for Bush from any
poll. Nice.




The lowest Bush approval rating in *any* of the polls is 37%...and it came
in a CBS News poll.

The lowest Clinton approval rating according to *Gallup* was 37%. If you
want a true apples to apples comparison, then let's look at Gallup's
lowest-ever number for Bush: 40%...which is three points higher than
Clinton's lowest approval rating.

HeeHee....kevin caught by his own illogic.

And he wonders why he is the "King of the NG idiots"?????

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:44:54 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Do you have a link for any historical data graphs of other recent
Presidents?

Yup, I was going to be a wise ass and leave it at that, but . . . These
aren't as precise, but they show the trends of Presidents going back to
FDR.

http://progressivewritersbloc.com/DC...lon-Velcro.htm


Ironically, his numbers fell right after he pitched the $200 billion for
New Orleans, and then again after the Miers' nomination. Abandoning
his base has hurt him much worse than when he sticks to his guns.

A counterpoint to that, he was trying to stop the bleeding. It didn't
work. Face it, Bush's base isn't large enough to rule this country. He
needs the moderates, and he hasn't been doing well there.

His base is there when he needs them. It's just that right now they're
showing their displeasure with his "caving in" on several important
issues to most Conservatives.

See above.

The curtain is open, the honeymoon is over, where is Bush's base. I'm
guessing, somewhere between Carter and Nixon.

See above.

Yeah, but . . . IMO he's still searching for bottom. He has three years
to find it, and I expect he will.