In Today appearance, Matthews overstated Bush's "likeability" among public, "loyal[ty]" among troops
SUMMARY: Appearing on NBC's Today, Chris Matthews suggested that President Bush had personal likeability numbers "going for him" until a recent CBS News poll showed them in decline. In fact, Bush's favorability ratings have been low for some time; they were low when Matthews said in November that "Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left."
Appearing on the March 1 edition of NBC's Today, MSNBC host Chris Matthews falsely suggested that President Bush had personal likeability numbers "going for him" until a recent CBS News poll showed them in decline. In fact, Bush's favorability ratings have been low for some time; they were low when Matthews said in November that "Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left." Matthews also said that members of the military are "very loyal" to Bush, despite a recent Zogby International poll showing that most troops disagree with Bush's Iraq policies.
Matthews noted on Today that the CBS News poll, conducted February 22-26, found that only 29 percent of respondents said they have a "favorable" or "positive" view of Bush, compared with 53 percent who have an "unfavorable" view of the president. But while Bush's favorability ratings have been low for some time -- they have been in the mid-30s in the CBS poll since October, and most major polls have shown that consistent pluralities and, at times, the majority of Americans hold an unfavorable view of Bush -- Matthews suggested that the latest CBS poll result was "a staggering blow" that eliminated an issue that had until recently been a major asset to Bush:
MATTHEWS: It's [the CBS poll] terrible news for the president. Thirty-four percent job approval, 30 percent, even lower than that, on Iraq, so that number is pulling him down. And then, the number that really surprised me: 29 percent on personal approval. People don't like the president as much as they don't -- even more than they don't like his policies, which is a staggering blow because we all know that he's had two things going for him since he's been president: the war on terror, where he's gotten good numbers and now they are negative, and likeability. They're both gone now.
Despite the fact that Bush's favorability numbers have gradually declined over many months, Matthews responded incredulously when he first learned, from Newsweek senior White House correspondent Richard Wolffe during the February 28 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, that the CBS poll had found Bush's favorability rating to be so low:
WOLFFE: Well, the numbers were never very good anyway, but he managed to get through the election with bad numbers because he had a bad candidate against him. But you look at the curve of these numbers -- he tanked after Katrina, he hit another low after [Bush's failed Supreme Court nomination of] Harriet Miers. What we're seeing now is just that reminder of the lack of confidence. Twenty-nine percent of Americans have -- give him a positive, favorable rating. That's actually lower than his job approval, way lower than Bill Clinton. People don't think he is a nice guy anymore.
MATTHEWS: Wait a minute, you just jumped there. Are you sure of that last part?
WOLFFE: Absolutely.
MATTHEWS: They don't like him anymore.
WOLFFE: They don't like him anymore. His job --
MATTHEWS: Where do you find that in the numbers?
WOLFFE: It's right there in the poll. His job approval is higher than his personal numbers. Now, you might think that he'd be in a situation his father was, where people thought he was a nice guy but they didn't like the job. In fact, it's closer to where Bill Clinton was where they thought, "Well, there is a problem with this guy, but his job is slightly better."
MATTHEWS: What do they think he is? Just what we used to call a smacked ass, a rich kid who got a job he shouldn't have had?
WOLFFE: I just think --
MATTHEWS: Is that what they think of him?
WOLFFE: You know --
MATTHEWS: Is it that bad?
WOLFFE: The thing that we have reported on him, from '99, when I first started covering him, was that he was basically a likable guy.
MATTHEWS: I thought that.
WOLFFE: As the country has got worse and worse in terms of Iraq, the likability factor is less and less relevant.
MATTHEWS: [Time magazine columnist] Margaret [Carlson], do you see that? I mean, I think everybody now knows what we're talking about. It's not just job approval. A lot of people we know can't do the job but we like them; a lot of people can do the job, we don't like them. But Richard is saying that his personal repute, what people think of him as a guy, if you will, is down, lower than what we think of his job.
Also on Today, while arguing that Bush's support for a proposed deal to allow a company owned by the government of Dubai to operate port terminals in six major U.S. cities "doesn't make sense" to the average American, Matthews claimed that those who are in the military are "very loyal" to Bush:
MATTHEWS: I keep trying to imagine the president at one of those rallies he holds, even in front of military men, who are very loyal to him, and saying, "And to make our ports secure, and to make you secure, we're gonna turn it over to an Arab government." It doesn't work. The common-sense guy working in south Philly near the ports or in Baltimore looks over at the port and he says, "It's being run by the Arabs? It doesn't make sense."
Matthews neglected to explain how the military's "loyal[ty]" to Bush squares with its apparent disapproval of Bush's Iraq policies. According to a Zogby poll conducted January 18-February 14, 72 percent of U.S. troops serving in Iraq believe that the U.S. should withdraw from Iraq within a year and, according to Zogby president and CEO John Zogby, 93 percent believe "removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there."
Does Matthews really think that Bush appears if front of a random sample of military personnel? If he thinks that, he's a bigger idiot than I give him credit for. Bush's support among the military is evaporating. These people are being held in the service with a back door draft (the stop loss policy) and their jobs get more dangerous by the day. Meanwhile, Bush will tell anyone who'll still listen to him, that we're staying the course, as long as it takes and all of that crap. Matthews and Bush don't have a clue what the people whose asses are on the line really think. If you want to know the truth, talk to the grunts, not the window dressing.
Worrywart posted:
"These people are being held in the service with a back door draft (the stop loss policy) and their jobs get more dangerous by the day"
_____________________________________________
WK, do you have any clue what you just posted above? Is this the talking point over at the daily kos or move on?
Stop loss has been in place at least over twenty years and I'm sure longer. I was almost Stop Lossed under H.W.B. and was Stop Lossed under W.J.C. You see it is a tool for commands to control key personnel. It is NOT a "back door draft" as you so ignorantly pointed out.
One suggestion, do a little research before posting the loony talking points.
And yes, I did misspeak. A person joining the military has an 8 year term of enlistment. And as you say, this is not the first president to invoke the stop loss policy. I didn't mean to imply that he was. But don't you think that the people over there are being stretched pretty thin? Some have already served a tour and are back again. Morale is waning.
Your being a military person, am I wrong to say that no one in the press knows what these people are feeling over there? From my experience, they can't. People close ranks, they talk to each other about their feelings, but seldom to the Officers and never to the press. Maybe it's different now, I don't know.
MATTHEWS: What do they think he is? Just what we used to call a smacked ass, a rich kid who got a job he shouldn't have had?
Chris, that is exactly what I think he is.
"because we all know that he's had two things going for him since he's been president: the war on terror, where he's gotten good numbers and now they are negative, and likeability. They're both gone now."
Remember the summer before 9/11 and how bad his numbers were? Remember his endless vacation in his ranch? Chris sure hopes you don't.
"military men, who are very loyal to him"
How do we know that Chris? If we go by the poll of troops in Iraq I would say they aren't too pleased with this guy for getting them in this mess and they want out of there....badly.
Here is part of the poll on troops in Iraq that the media isn't talking about:
"Asked to assess the relative importance of the different justifications for the war articulated by Bush over the last several years, three in four soldiers said ‘'establish(ing) a democracy that could be a model for the Arab world'' -- the justification most recently cited by Bush -- was neither the ‘'main'' nor even a ‘'major reason'' for the U.S. intervention.
More than 90 percent also did not accept the justification most cited by the administration before the war -- to enforce U.N. resolutions requiring the destruction or removal of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) from Iraq. Less than five percent of respondents cited that as the ‘'main'' or a ‘'major reason.''
Remarkably, the two justifications most frequently mentioned by the troops were those that were discredited after the invasion. Forty-one percent said stopping ‘'Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq'' was the ‘'main reason,'' while another 36 percent said it was a ‘'major reason.'' At the same time, 35 percent said ‘'retaliat(ing) for Saddam's role in the 9/11 attacks'' was the ‘'main reason'', and 50 percent called it a ‘'major reason.''
Contrary to the administration's view, most troops also believe that controlling the insurgency -- which they see as overwhelmingly indigenous -- would require doubling the number of ground troops and bombing missions."
[link to www.ipsnews.net]
All the proof needed to know that the heavy and relentless propaganda started in September 2002 worked and worked quite well on a large part of the population.
So how does one get to be a "news analyst"? Can I be one?
No. You're too perceptive and intelligent. Whack yourself on the head with a mallet several hundred times and you might get there.
---That you can fool (even the stupidest of voters ) for only so long. His poles are tanking, --AND YES HE DOE'S CARE. It still amazes me that nearly half of the voters chose someone who has failed at every challenge he has ever attempted. That record has followed him through the White House as well. I must concede, there are people out there who still believe that MISSION ACCOMPLISHED thing.
...it's the ratings for his cheerleaders.
People are looking at this entreched puditocracy and wondering why they never hold Bush to account for his incompetence or cronyism. They look at Fox News or Matthews and his ridiculous guests and say, "These people's version of reality has nothing to do with my life." And then, they switch them off.
It's sad things have to get so bad, but maybe people are finally waking up to the fact that they can't trust this media, just like they can't trust Bush.
No Chris we don't like him. Obviously YOU do...in fact I think YOU love him. ;-) AND this school-girl "crush" you have on the guy is getting downright embarrassing!!!
Ok, I'm one of those MORONS who voted for Bush...not once BUT twice. In my own defense--I did so BOTH times without much conviction or enthusiasm. I was a McCain man in 2000--BUT Bush won the primaries--(and well hey I am a Republican)....and I was an *ANYBODY BUT KERRY* man in 2004 (hey I'm from Massachusetts--I probably KNEW more about him than MOST of you). I almost didn't vote in 2004. I WISH now I hadn't. My apologies to you all...believe me--I'm kicking myself
Rumors are out there that Cheney might resign at years end. IF he does, then I HOPE the IMPEACHMENT of George W. will be next on the agenda.
Can you imagine poor Chris IF that happens? Straight Jacket time ;-)
How in the world does a guy from MA give himself the handle "Jeter2"?
You must never want to go back! ;-)
Well I'm originally from Long Island...met & fell in love with a Massachusetts girl in college...got married and ended up living here in the Bay State. BUT always was and ALWAYS will be a YANKEE FAN....and it ain't easy being a Yanks fan here in "Red Sox Nation" (God that sounds SO stupid!!) LOL!!!
...but I just can't get behind the Yankees, even though I loved Reggie as a kid. Steinbrenner ruined the House that Babe Built for me long ago.
Being from Philly, I'll always be a NL guy at heart (DH? Are you kidding me? If you brush back a hitter, you BETTER get up to that plate!).
Still, one of my best baseball memories was opening day, Yankee Stadium, 1990; Billy Martin died that winter. I sat with the Bleacher Bums in right field, and they showed a clip reel - not a dry eye in the house.
UNTIL they showed a clip of Billy kicking dirt on an umpire. I've never heard cheering that loud.
On his show tonight (3/1) Chris (whatever-is-in-his-brain-is-out-his-month) Matthews offered a solution to Bush's dismal performance ("Why he's not on top of things.") "Maybe what the administration needs is to hire is some people -- some young people -- to call up the President and tell him when he needs to pay attention -- tell him what he may not what to hear..." That's the ticket Chris -- hire some young people yeah...young people to tell Mr. Daddy-Oh,‘Prez -- listen up dude!' Matthews is such a moron he makes Bush seem average and not the idiot he is. God help us all.
I don't know. I think Matthews may be on to something. The only way this president is going to improve his poll numbers (short of bagging Osama bin Laden himself, and even that might help much) and improve the performance of his administration is A) if he makes some personnel changes (tells Andy Card to spend more time with his family, for example, or puts Rove out to pasture someplace in Texas) and maybe B) if he finds a Democrat somewhere (any Democrat) that he is comfortable placing in a high-level position of responsibility in his administration.
Of course Bush knows that other presidents have gone this route, and he wants to show he is different. He also doesn't want to show weakness because of the situation in Iraq and because we are at war. But sometimes making needed changes can be seen as a sign of strength; and sometimes not making them can be seen as foolish stubbornness, not strength.
J2, thanks for writing what you did. I have wondered if Republicans are shaking their heads after electing GW.
As far as likeability, what's the point? So what if people wanna drink some likker with GW and barbecue some ribs? People should have voted for a president, a person with prudence, wisdom, and foresight: not a barbecue buddy.
Hang in there--MOST of the Republicans I know are disgusted with Bush. No, we're NOT about to jump to ship and become Democrats, BUT we acknowledge that THIS President has presided over one of the most arrogant, secretive, and disastrous administrations in history. God help us, I only hope this nation will make it in one piece to the next Presidential election . I personally can't wait till 2008...I want Bush out NOW!!!
How Matthews can go on gushing about Bush and defending this guy is beyond me. There may have been a time that Bush came off as "likable"...BUT I think MOST now see him for what he really is. And likable ain't the word...
Yeah, Bush hasn't been the protector of the Constitution, of states' rights, of fiscal prudence, of the dollar, etc.
When he was elected the second time, I went to my Republican neighbor and wept. My neighbor's a good man. He sat there and listened to my fears.
I think it takes guts to admit that you've made a mistake. You do and I respect that. Matthews can't, so he resorts to the remnants of what one can like about Bush, which is that he's likeable.
I do think MMFA is confusing matters a bit here. Back in November, Matthews was absolutely correct when he pointed out that the president's personal approval rating was higher than his job approval rating. MMFA has failed to make this valid distinction.
and matthews ripped bush a little. but at the end of the interview he talked about how poppy bush and his guys like scowcroft warned against invading. matthews claimed "the republican experts were warning against this". well maybe a few were but by and large the republican establishment was on the band wagon, including all the project for a new american century robots [who needed their "new pearl harbor"] who are at the very top of the bush 2 administration. matt lauer also made a comment to matthews to the effect of "i've talked to the experts on this", as if to say what's the problem here. matt apparently hasn't talked to either the coast guard or the head of the 9-11 commission, who did not approve of the deal. matt and katie continue their bush apologist ways.
Yes, people have finally realized that Cheney-BUSH are below water level.Just how low willtheir poll numbers go?Ihope lower.Read Joe KLEIN 'S "THE NATURAL" about a man who was for all Americans and generally did right.From Kennedy to Lieberman we democrats are way above water.