(CNN) -- A majority would vote for a Democrat over President Bush if an election were held this year, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll released Tuesday.
In the latest poll, 55 percent of the respondents said that they would vote for the Democratic candidate if Bush were again running for the presidency this year.
Thirty-nine percent of those interviewed said they would vote for Bush in the hypothetical election.
The latest poll results, released Tuesday, were based on interviews with 1,008 adults conducted by telephone October 21-23.
In the poll, 42 percent of those interviewed approved of the way the president is handling his job and 55 percent disapproved. In the previous poll, released October 17, 39 percent approved of Bush's job performance -- the lowest number of his presidency -- and 58 percent disapproved.
However, all the numbers are within the poll's sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points, so it's possible that the public's opinion has not changed at all.
Ever hear the media cite "margin of error" when Bush's poll numbers go down?
Yeah, me neither. Not to mention that the fact Bush's poll numbers have jumped three points is buried in the article.
I mean, you almost get the idea that these people have it out for the President or something.
You can read more from Rob Port at SayAnythingBlog.com
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 17
Who did you think I meant?
When the President's actions are so consistently wrong (on every front) it's hard for even the best folks not to get a bit carried away.
Allan
Huh?
So then...it's ok for the media to slant their stories as long as they're hurting somebody you disagree with?
Well, of course, they can hurt those I don't like. But my point is that when the evidence is overwhelming that someone is off-kilter, it might be hard to overcome the motivation to kick the poor sucker just a bit. In the grant scheme of things, I'm not sure it doesn't help make Bush feel like a victim and get some sympathy. Which, of course, is really what the rest of us need since we are the victims of his mistakes.
But relax. Mostly I'm just teasing you because you do so visibly wear your conservative beliefs and even I can't help taking a jab or two.
I have a feeling that, were this John Kerry in office, CNN would be reporting this much differently. But that's just me.
I appreciate that. And please don't take my direct tone as me being angry. I get so many comments over at my main blog that I've become very short in my comments. Not because I'm angry or anything, but just because I don't always have a lot of time to dedicate toward responding.
Anyway, I am a right winger. Admittedly. Though I do have an open mind, and I am not (if you read my blog) a knee-jerk supporter of Bush. I am a principled conservative who tries his best to call them as he sees them.
Amen to that Jim. I think the media sees more ratings in editorializing than reporting, so that's the way they're going. I wish the media would either drop the "unbiased" mantle and wear their partisanship on their sleeve or just go back to reporting straight facts.
If there ever was a time when the media did that.
"Bush supporter" is the wrong term for me. I'm very conservative/libertarian, but there are a lot of things that make me angry about Bush too. It's just that the things that make me angry are different from the things that make the libs angry.
The ratings were a concern I raised with Gather when they asked me to write here. Clearly, some small-minded people are going to give articles poor ratings based on whether or not they agree with the opinion the author is expressing rather than how well the author expressed it. Gather's answer was that their algorithims would be able to take that sort of thing into account. How? I have no idea.
But it doesn't really bother me. I write because I enjoy it. I cross-post here because I think Gather is a neat concept and want to do what I can to support it.
We put far too much emphasis on how politicians look and speak. We should be concentrating on what they do.
Good job George.
What else could we have used that cash for...??? hmmm .. let's see.
www.costofwar.com