Wonder why Bush polls aren’t worse
President Bush got such negative TV coverage during the month of January — and Democrats got so much favorable attention — one wonders why Bush’s polls aren’t worse than they are.
Bush’s approval ratings are now down to the low 50s and he loses in head-to-head matchups with both the Democratic frontrunner, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and his only rival, Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.
But, considering where he’s at after the pummeling he’s taken, Bush should rebound when he starts fighting back in earnest and when (as seems likely) the economy picks up.
Bush’s depressed polls can be explained by what the public has heard over the past month. A study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs shows that references to Bush in January were more than two-thirds negative on the three broadcast network evening newscasts, while references to Democratic presidential candidates were 71 percent positive.
A negative press isn’t new for Bush, according to the center’s director, Robert Lichter. “Except after Sept. 11 and during the Iraq war, he’s had a terrible press,” Lichter said. “The fact is that all presidents do.”
A large-scale study by the center prior to Bush’s arrival in the presidency showed that Ronald Reagan got only 30 percent positive notices in the network newscasts and in The New York Times and Washington Post during his first year in office.
Bush’s father got 33 percent positive coverage, while Bill Clinton got 38 percent.
During January, Bush’s bad press was a combination of the content of the news — continuing casualties in Iraq, the David Kay report declaring that Iraq probably had no weapons of mass destruction before the war, drooping job-creation numbers, a lackluster State of the Union speech — plus coverage of the Democrats attacking Bush, according to Lichter.
Moreover, the spin put on most news reports about the Democrats has been favorable, center data shows — 79 percent favorable for Kerry over the course of the month, 96 percent favorable for Edwards and 52 percent favorable for Howard Dean.
The new USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll showed Kerry beating Bush by 55 percent to 43 percent and Edwards ahead, 54 percent to 44 percent.
Kerry has become the far-away front-runner based mostly on Democrats’ perceptions that he is the most electable of the candidates. Enthusiasm for him seems to be based on the notion he can beat Bush while others, apparently, cannot.
Of course, only Kerry has received any negative scrutiny from the media, rival Democrats or the Bush campaign. All three have pointed out Kerry, while claiming to be a fighter against “special interests,” has received more money from lobbyists over his career than any other senator.
Doubts also have been raised about his voting record on national security — especially his opposition to various weapons systems and intelligence budgets.
A jobs turnaround and decent progress toward stability in Iraq would put Bush back in command of the presidential race. Of course, it hasn’t happened yet.
(Morton Kondracke is executive editor of Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill.)