WASHINGTON, Nov. 11, 2006
Poll: Bush's Approval Hits All-Time Low
New Poll Puts President At 31%; 63% Dissatisfied With Country's Direction
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Bipartisan War Summit
Following their victory in Tuesday's midterm elections, the Democrats are making suggestions about the war in Iraq. The White House disagrees. Jim Axelrod reports.
-
Video
Bush Meets Top Senate Dems
The top Senate Democrats visited President Bush at the White House, making the same pledges top House Democrats made in their meeting with the president. Aleen Sirgany reports.
-
Video
Bipartisan Is Now The Word
Only On The Web: Bill Plante reports that President Bush will be meeting today with the Senate's top Democrats, Harry Reid and Dick Durbin. They'll be discussing a bipartisan summit on Iraq.
-
Photo
President Bush leaves the East Room of the White House in Washington after discussing his party's heavy losses in the mid-term election, Nov. 8, 2006. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)
-
Photo Essay
Winners And Losers
Images of some of the victors and vanquished from Election Day 2006.
-
Photos
Election Day '06
Images from around the country as Americans exercise their right to vote.
-
Interactive
Election Briefing Book
Info on the races, voting statistics, and more from the CBS News Election & Survey Unit.
At home and around the world, things aren't going his way. With Mr. Bush's legacy-building time running out, Americans sent a pretty clear message in Tuesday's election that they were angry at him and wanted change. Though Mr. Bush's name wasn't on the ballot, voters took revenge on the Republican Congress and put the Democrats in charge of both the Senate and House.
And if the vote counts weren't clear enough for the White House to hear, Newsweek announced a new poll to be published Monday which places President Bush's approval rating at the lowest it has ever been — 31 percent — while 63 percent of Americans said they were dissatisfied with how things are going in the country. According to the news magazine, Bill Clinton's lowest rating during his presidency was 36 percent; Mr. Bush's father's was 29 percent, and Ronald Reagan's was 35 percent. Jimmy Carter's and Richard Nixon's lows were 28 and 23 percent, respectively.
Perhaps most grim for the White House, Newsweek also reports that most Americans are writing off the rest of the Bush presidency. The poll shows two-thirds (66 percent) believe Mr. Bush will be unable to get much done, up from 56 percent in a mid-October poll. Only 32 percent believe he can be effective.
In an awkward bit of timing, Mr. Bush will be globe-trotting when Congress returns to town next week to open its lame-duck session, taking up business the White House deems vital.
Departing Tuesday, Mr. Bush will be away for eight days at a summit of Asia-Pacific rim leaders in Vietnam and stops in Singapore and Indonesia. Back just before Thanksgiving, he will jet off again a few days later for a NATO summit in Latvia and a stop in Estonia.
World leaders will be watching to see if Mr. Bush, politically weakened at home, acts differently on the world stage.
Across the globe, the president is on the defensive about problems ranging from the mess in the Middle East to the nuclear standoffs with Iran and North Korea. Even in his own backyard, there is a growing camp of leftists in Latin America, from Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez to Nicaragua's newly elected Daniel Ortega.
And then there is Iraq.
Four years into an unpopular war that has defined his presidency, Mr. Bush thought that by this point he would be bringing some U.S. troops home. Instead, he had to sack his gruff secretary of defense, open himself to a new Iraq strategy and worry about pressure to pull out before he thinks the war is won.
Leaving the polls, a majority of voters said they disapproved of the war and the U.S. should withdraw some or all of its troops from Iraq. Mr. Bush meets Monday with members of a blue-ribbon commission looking for a new way forward in Iraq.
Victorious at the polls, Democrats put the White House on notice to expect tougher scrutiny of the war. "Let's find out what's going on with the war in Iraq, the different large federal agencies that we have," said Sen. Harry Reid, the incoming Senate majority leader. "There simply has been no oversight in recent years."
The election was a sobering splash of cold water on the president and political strategist Karl Rove, both of whom had insisted Republicans would win.
On election night, Bush had a dinner of beef loin and squash with Rove, Republican National Committee chief Ken Mehlman, chief of staff Josh Bolten, and friends Brad Freeman, a California venture capitalist, and Don Evans, former commerce secretary. Other officials joined later. The mood was businesslike as people read their Blackberrys and took cell phone calls, one participant said.
Mr. Bush is not a man given to second-guessing, self-analyzing or doubts. By the next morning, associates said, he was bouncing back.
"He's not one to get mired in kind of the shoulda, woulda, couldas," said Bush counselor Dan Bartlett. "I saw him coming to grips with it that night and by the time he came walking into the Oval Office Wednesday morning he was looking forward. We had to hold him back from calling Nancy Pelosi (the incoming House speaker) because it was still 6:55 in the morning."
"Why all the glum faces?" Mr. Bush said, opening a post-election news conference where he said he shared blamed for the Republican losses.
Later that day, Bolten pulled together several hundred White House staffers in the Old Executive Office Building for an unannounced visit by the president. Mr. Bush revved up the troops, told them they were there not to mark time but to get things done, Bartlett said.
"Obviously he's disappointed," Bartlett said, "but his mind's already racing forward, saying, 'All right, we've got to come at the same problems but from a different angle.'"
The big question is whether Mr. Bush, after six years of largely ignoring Democrats, really will be willing to work with the political opposition. Or whether his last two years will be clouded by partisan gridlock. Mr. Bush invited the new Democratic leaders to the White House and both sides pledged to cooperate.
"I think he's doing the right things now, right tone," said Republican strategist Ron Kaufman, who worked in the White House under Bush's father. "We'll see how long it lasts on both sides."
Kaufman and others recall how Mr. Bush, as governor of Texas, took a bipartisan approach to work with a legislature controlled by Democrats. Of course, many of them were conservatives and saw eye to eye with Mr. Bush.
"I think he liked the way he governed in Texas," Kaufman said. "I think he really enjoyed it. And somehow he's gotten away from that. ... I think he'd be relieved to go back to that."
Leon Panetta, a former Democratic congressman who was chief of staff in the Clinton White House, said Bush would have to change the way he does business if he wants to succeed.
"He's going to have to understand he can't do this by the old playbook," Panetta said. "The Rove playbook is not going to work. If he's going to govern, it means he probably has got to go back and remember what it was like to govern in Texas with a Democratic legislature and the deals that he had to make."
There are doubts Mr. Bush will bend on issues dear to conservatives. "The fact is, to work with the Democrats requires him ... to basically say to a quarter or a third or more of his party, 'Sorry, you're out,'" said Norm Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
©MMVI, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Video and Galleries from Politics
-
Video
The Debate Over Healthcare
-
Video
U.S. Global Military Efforts
-
Video
Obama Wishes Happy 4th
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 7
- next
See all 306 CommentsHe asked for it, he got it. It was he that was supposed to run this country, not rove or anyone else.
On a human level, I must confess to feeling sorry for GWB... here is a man that turned optimism into an art form... who allowed his presidency to be hijacked by extremist ideologs, who has been repudiated by the voters and whose foreign policy legacy has become an academic case study in what not to do...
There was a time this President stated that you are "with us or against us"... coalition building (essential to effective foreign policy) was seen as an obstacle to the vision... bullish & emboldened from success in Afghanistan, he launched "shock & awe" in Iraq, overthrew Saddam in record time & announced mission accomplished!
Yet today, GWB announces that he is "open to ideas" as his shambling policy of "stay the course" in Iraq.... lurches from one strategy for victory to the next.... whilst at the same time sinking deeper & deeper into the quagmire that he has created...
All but for a little transparency & humility, Mr President... you have only yourself to blame... & it will get worse... the day of reckoning is fast approaching... the long-awaited investigations into the war will be the final fatal blow.... for they will reveal what we have long-suspected... that the blood of thousands has been shed for lies....
Who was it that said politics is the art of compromise... I think much of his domestic agenda will be managed through artful compromises on both sides... the elephant in the room is Iraq... I am not sure where the compromises are to be found here? Apparently the only thing that GWB will not agree to do is withdraw...
For political expediency I think the Dems will baulk at calling for a withdrawl or cutting off appropriations for the war... what we are then left with is "stay the course lite"... (timetables & milestones with limited sanctions thrown in the event of slippage)... effectively a kind of two year meander into the wilderness...
That is the whole point right there. The people wanted the administration to consider new angles, new ideas.
However, the administration has clearly demonstrated their disdain for the people in many ways.
This administration has clearly been stuck in the mud, "staying a course" that obviously wasn't working. And making no secret of the fact that they were not working for the people and didn't care what the people thought or wanted.
That is one definition of insanity. Doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.
It's almost pitiful to watch the implosion.
www.ericblumrich/gta.html
(speakers on)
Since 09/11 the US has been a safe place to live thanks to Bush. Now it seems to me this safety is over. With the dems there will be terrorists building training camps all over the world.
I hardly can wait to see how the democrats will deal with people like the hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, the Iranian president Ahmadinejad , The Syrian president Bashir al Assad ,the members of al qaeda and a lot of bad guys who want to kill americans.
If the dems don4t know, Hassan Nasrallah is that guy who install rockets launchers among civilians houses just to atract the Israeli fire and when the city is all flatenned still claims victory. Ahmadinejad is that guy who wants to fabricate nuclear bombs to provide the terrorists with it in order to wipe Israel from the map and stop advance of freedom and democracy in the region.Assad is that guy who helps terrorists in Iraq to fabricate IED and roadside bombs.
I can4t wait to see what the dems will do to fight the guys who use the name of god and slam to kill everyone who disagree of them and i can4t wait to see what the4re gonna do that Rumsfeld and Bush haven4t done.
The Bush regime fascists and their Democrat Party collaborators have given away willingly, far more than any "terrorist" could ever take from us, and the Bush apologists have cheered them on all the way.
The Bush regime fascists and their Democrat Party collaborators have given away willingly, far more than any "terrorist" could ever take from us, and the Bush apologists have cheered them on all the way.
They don't offer solutions, they only offer criticism of the Democrats who haven't even taken up their new positions yet.
They continue to defend the policies of Bush, even though Bush's policies, particularly in regards to Afghanistan, Iraq and the "War on Terror" simply have not worked.
Talk about being indoctrinated - they actually believe that Bush has done nothing wrong with his policies and actions - and yet, the majority of the people have spoken - and they believe that Bush has failed the American people.
They even criticise the Democrats for their election campaign, even though the Republican campaign was run in a similar fashion - (although I feel that the Republicans especially relied on dirty advertising campaigns).
Apparently reality is just something that Republican hardliners can't fathom.
I hope that you are right, but it sounds like the Democrats have already made it quite clear that "impeachment is off the table". What?
The Democrats voted for the illegal invasion of Iraq, for NAFTA, for the "Help America Vote" fraud program, and for the fascistic PATRIOT Act and Military Commissions Act.
Don't get me wrong, I am happy to see the fascist extremists that have taken over the Republican Party get a nice kick in the teeth, but I have zero confidence that they will roll back any 'police state' legislation, or that they have any idea about what to do in Iraq.
What's more, the Bush regime has created an inevitable financial disaster for this country, and I promise you that when things turn really sour, the Republicans will say "see what happens when the Democrats are in power?"
Hopefully, with the Republicans becoming less relevant by the day, we can hope to build a true opposition Party to take on the Democrats.
Fritz
http://heathenmiddle.com
A Flash presentation summary of the main 2000, Florida vote fraud effot can be viewed at:
www.ericblumrich/gta.html (speakers on)
I posted a mre comprehensive list of references on the "Florida Recount" thread.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/11/cbsnews_investigates/main2174376.shtml
I'm not sure what a "libs" is, but I want everyone to feel free. There is way too much hatred and fear going around, and it is causing many people to surrender our hard-fought freedoms. It is a shame and it is getting us nowhere that we should want to go.
http://www.theweeklydonut.org/index.php/2005/11/09/doctor-donut/
* The 9/11 commission gave a failing report card about steps since 9/11 that the government has taken to protect Americans. That infuriates me.
* The CIA's own NIE report has stated that the war in Iraq has become a "cause celebre" for jihadists, who are growing in number and geographic reach. That is, because of the perceived notion worldwide that US attacked Iraq without any valid reason, then this has caused much hatred toward Americans and has inspired many to take their hatred to the extreme.
* I have no doubt that terrorists are planning something big. I would have preferred that we would have spent $300 billion over the last 3 years on snuffing out terrorists rather than spending that money on invading Iraq which has now left Iraq to be like Afghanistan under the Taliban... a breeding ground for potential terrorists.
* And finally, for those of you who want to defer accountability of 9/11 as Clinton's fault, you are obviously not aware of the steps (or more specifically), the lack of steps taking by the Bush administration leading up to 9/11. I would recommend watching http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jtfGtWKqh4&NR
No attacks? Have you forgotten about the anthrax nonsense? It appears that most everyone else has.
infantile glee of the President's enemies.People do want a change.No doubt about it.And we will shortly see what that change is.Better reserve your judgement till then.
A perfect example of how Bush manages was with postwar Iraq, where the person originally assigned for handling the planning was Jay Garner. Jay Garner originally estimated 200,000 - 300,000 troops required for postwar Iraq and so he recommended not to disband the Iraqi army. He also suggested to put Iraqi faces in front of the reconstruction to make it seem more of an Iraqi effort. Instead, Bremer came in, disbanded the army, and made sure that everyone knew that it was the US who was the focal point of the reconstruction.
One of the most frightening parts about Bush being the "decider" is the exchange that occurred in the preliminary meetings with Jay Garner. Instead of intelligent discourse about postwar Iraq, Bush was trying to figure out Garner's accent. At the end of the meeting, there was no evidence that Bush was paying any attention to what Garner was saying. It sort of reminds me of a kid in a class who can't focus on what the teacher is saying.
More information is available here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15075326/site/newsweek/print/1/displaymode/1098/
We need to support any advocates for constructive change in the way our politicians do business. The national agenda need to move away from desperate, fearful politics fueled by narrow, monied interests toward a government which takes its own people and their interests fully into account.
Don't wait for somebody else to deliver a solution. Tell those you voted for to take the money out of American politics by reforming campaign financing. The time is now-- the tide of public opinion strongly favors reform. Become part of this critical American revolution .
3. Congressmen and Senators Can Make a Difference
New limits on campaign spending through total public funding not only renews focus on the real issues, such reforms also free congressmen to devote their attention to the very people they are supposed to represent, instead of having to run for office and raise funds for next term. Most congressmen polled say they spend far more time fundraising than they wish, and want to spend more time producing good legislation and meeting the day-to-day needs of their constitutents.
GOP position-- GOP members of House and Senate complain equally with others about the distraction and burden of fundraising. They also insist that good legislation takes time to develop-- they cannot proceed wisely when a yearly federal spending bill a few feet thick arrives on their desktop only hours before a vote. (This actually happened during the Tom Delay regime in congress.)
GOP Position-- Limiting campaign spending abridges free speech. GOP Position in Practice-- "Unlike others, we raise money easily, and barrage voters with saturation advertising. Like selling soap, saturation, noise and repetition usually works, even when our ideas do not."
2. Less Campaign Noise, More Ideas
Campaign reform bills seek to limit the flood of advertising that most Americans ignore and say they do not want. The restructuring of campaign advertising rules to favor ideas and content over noise and repetition will be welcome to most voters.
GOP position-- Adopt a message, develop the ad, and pay for it. GOP Position in Practice-- Disavow responsibility for the irresponsible actions of "third parties" to whom the GOP money is given. According to Karl Rove and his disciples, attack ads are not only effective but essential to winning a contest. GOP spending in 2006 heavily indulged in attack ads insinuating sexual immorality and minority-bashing themes. The GOP will cry foul when reformers seek to end the blizzard of attack ads which demean public discourse and drive away voters.
After the 2006 election, there is new hope to repair damage to the American multi-party system of government. But the GOP (and the Democrats) must foster, not obstruct, the wave of reform, particularly where reform lets voices without money or powerful backers have an important role. This novel approach may succeed in making the American experiment more truly representative and democratic (following the will of the people). It will be a change Americans have not seen in at least a century of faltering reform efforts.
Things to watch for--
1. More Voices in Government
Today, it is more expensive than ever to run for and hold office. As a direct result, many voices with worthy ideas simply cannot be heard. And those who are heard must "compromise" with sources of money. This makes a small number of monied individuals the actual brokers of political agenda and power. Only by limiting the amount of money spent on a campaign can all voices have a more equal chance to be heard. This proposal for leveling the playing field is called public funding of elections.
Traditionally, the lame duck term is a window for departing American presidents to strike a pose-- and perhaps actually do statesman-like things for the good of the country, not merely rationalize their own failings and scramble to hold onto power.
Despite all Bush talk of "bipartisanship", however, we should remember he has said these things before. Bush is the same individual who, at 911, understood America had given him a huge and truly bipartisan grant of political power to go after the 911 terrorists. Yet, Bush is also a reborn opportunist who promptly misinterpreted, misconstrued and misused that authority as carte blanche for his own political agenda, foreign and domestic, and never looked back.
Criticized, Bush called his critics "unpatriotic" for daring to challenge him. That posture wore thin and transparent early, as Bush tried to rule by virtual fiat with GOP control of all branches of government. The American experiment in self-government devolved into a banana-Republican kingdom of one-party rule, imploding in massive scandals of political and personal corruption.
looks like you have selective memory...clinton did leave detailed information on al queda when he left office...as for his affairs, who cares? republicans that's who, that's how they destroy people and hide behind their own hypocracy...and as for bush...he cares about America? i don't think he does, he cares that his friends make a lot of money and as for partying, you know he's an alcoholic and former? cocaine user don't you??? and he met every monday with the meth addicted gay-bashing **** evangelist we all just got an eye full of...please get your head out of your poop shoot!!!
ozonmojo said, "It is foolish to read more in all this stuff than the infantile glee of the President's enemies.People do want a change.No doubt about it..."
-------
On the contrary, what you witness everywhere comes from people who want not only want change, they also want no more of Bush. Theirs is a mature, thoughtful glee, refined over the past six years despite infantile gloating from Bush and his herd of neocon children.
Now, the era of acid-laced personal attack ads is over, and yes, the American people always deserved better. If the nation has figuratively "fallen into a hole", it is not up to only the Democrats to save us, but to each of us to work constructively for something better. Bush dug the hole, but all of us-- GOP, Democrat or independent-- must join in the same cause.
A good example is the legion of Republicans who in the past year or two took open exception to the foolish and shortsighted policies of Bush. They did not defend them simply because Bush stamped them "GOP".
Limit of $2,000 per Corporation per year per candidate or Party
Limit of $5,000 per individual per year(over 18) per Candidate or Party
Funds cannot per transferred via another party
On-going Public matching funds if Candidate receives over 10% of the public support (as measured by independent polls during the campaigns)
PLACE THE POWER BACK IN THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE.
Those who oppose Public Financing of Elections - REMEMBER THE PUBLIC ALREADY PAYS DEARLY - Public already pays many more times than public support would ever cost.
Everytime a Corporation dols out the money, the public pays dearly in unecessary *paybacks*, earmarks, health care costs, thwarted health and safety legislation - list goes on
Posted by ANGRYliberal at 08:10 PM
You know, it would be nice if the people doing the Democrat-bashing would at least wait until January and let the newly-elected crew get into office before they started raising hell. Even then, the changes cannot be made as soon as they take office. They have to go through the same protocol as any other bills. Can't you guys give them that much time, or are you so dense as to think things can be changed by wiggling their ears or noses?
Bush was no more qualified to be president than Barnaby.
These guys WERE experts at lying and covering it up, but, after six long years, Americans FINALLY caught on. I don't know what took so long; the lies were obvious.
Anyone who doesn't understand how this happened should read "The Greatest Story Ever Sold" by Frank Rich.
-------
"These democrats"? Why do we immediately sense you are a Bush booster? Only a graduate of the Limbaugh School of Logic would demand Democrats immediately repair six years of abuse and folly from Bush and the GOP.
It will take much longer than that, because Bush and people like you took partisan liberties with the interests of the country. Our grandchildren, for example, will refuse our calls because of all the deficit your "conservative" Lawbreaker-in-Chief put us through.
Besides, I count on you to stymie most efforts to put the ship of state back on course.
I don't think impeaching Bush will do any good... Clinton was impeached and nothing happened; Gore was not President afterward was he?
I personally think our best course of action right now is to fix Iraq, if that is even possible since the other side screwed it up so bad.
America needs first and foremost to set the country back on-track. Let history take care of Bush/Rove and company, and TRUST ME, HISTORY WILL NEVER SMILE ON HIS PRESIDENCY!
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 7
- next
See all 306 Comments