This is going to ‘fuel’ all sorts of irresponsible demagoguery regarding gas prices in the upcoming months:
Rising gas prices and ongoing bloodshed in Iraq continue to take their toll on President Bush, whose standing with the public has sunk to an all-time low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll.
The survey found Bush’s job approval rating at 45 percent, down seven points since January and the lowest ever recorded for the president in Post-ABC surveys. Fifty-three percent disapproved of the job Bush is doing.
The war has been a drag on Bush’s presidency for many months, but his Iraq approval ratings in the new poll were little changed from two months ago, despite widespread violence, a rash of U.S. casualties, antiwar protests outside the president’s Texas ranch and a growing debate about reducing U.S. troop levels.
What may have pushed Bush’s overall ratings down in the latest poll is pervasive dissatisfaction over soaring gasoline prices. Two-thirds of those surveyed said gas prices are causing financial hardship to them or their families. Gas prices stand to go even higher after Hurricane Katrina’s rampage through the oil-rich Gulf of Mexico.
More ominously for the president, six in 10 Americans said there are steps the administration could take to reduce gas prices. Slightly more than a third say the recent run-up has been due to factors beyond the administration’s control.
“I supported him last year,” said Gina Coleman, 29, a homemaker living in Camden County, N.J. “I wouldn’t vote for him again. It’s gas prices, the war — just the way he has been handling things. The rise in gas is something that has been happening for a long time, and the prices are getting worse. This makes me feel more negative about him, definitely.”
Coupled with the current disaster in the Gulf and rising demand abroad for petroleum, prices are going to go through the roof. While the Bush administration, the auto companies, and the public have failed miserably with regard to conservation efforts, there is little that can be done in the short-term to fix the problem. I fully expect there to be calls for ‘price freezes,’ which do nothing but delay the pain and let people consume as if there was no problem, and releases of the SPR.
The real pinch will be felt in the falland winter with heating oil costs, as for many people, certain amounts of driving are an elective activity.
Mr.Ortiz
As the entire nation reels from the loss of an entire city to a natural disaster, our President addresses the nation:
“We will defeat the terrorists. We will build a free Iraq that will fight terrorists instead of giving them aid and sanctuary.”
WTF?? I don’t like this president, but this was a moment for him to shine. There’s plenty of time yet for a “standing in the rubble with his arm around a rescue worker’s shoulder” moment, but a simple “I feel your pain” would do wonders right about now.
gratefulcub
I wake up every morning, trying to think of a new reason to hate bush. It is what I do for fun. Joking of course, but I am a liberal, and yada yada. That being said, blaming the president for gas prices is so absurd. And it shows the priorities of the american people. They let many things go with bush, they stopped supporting the war, but kept supporting him in the polls for a while. It took high prices at the pump to get any momentum against him going.
Unfortunately, we seem to say “Keep the gas cheap, keep my cable on, and I won’t care about the rest.”
jobiuspublius
Wow, worse than watergate and Carter. That’s gotta hurt. But, let’s not forget Roberts. Complicated world isn’t it?
capelza
John, I agree with you. “Price freezes” would lull people into avoiding any action. Let’s hope this winter is not like last year. I know Carter was a controversial (she says lightly) President, but that old “68 degrees and a sweater” may have a whole new resonance. It’s too bad we didn’t take the opportunity back then to begin to change our energy paradigm, but that’s all too late now.
Mr. Ortiz, I noted that as well. Granted it was a speech commemerating the Victory in the Pacific, but in some way it was SOP for him. I noticed even Jack Cafferty on CNN had a pithy, bordering on snarky, comment about it and his getting back to Washington in some haste, or the lack there of.
ppGaz
Check out the photos of Bush, yesterday, playing around with a guitar.
Bush At Work Tuesday
There are no words. This foolish, awful little man deserves everything he gets now. He’s an embarassment to our country. Thank Dog, people are waking up to it.
mac Buckets
More than that, it’s just another of the many signals that there is a frightening lack of economics education in America. Most people don’t understand even the very basics of how the economy works (they think the President controls the price of gas? Maybe we should’ve had a “War To Steal Iraq’s Oil,” after all!), and an uneducated electorate is the biggest danger to a democracy.
ppGaz
You mean, like they thought he was right about WMDs?
Right about “Mission Accomplished?”
Right about “Dead or Alive / nee Not Terribly Concerned About Him?”
Right about “Turning a Corner” (five times so far)?
Right about “Bring it on?”
Right about “Insurgency in its last throes?”
So the people watch this ongoing train wreck for a while and start to figure out that maybe this guy doesn’t know what he is doing.
In the fullness of time, people seem to be able to figure things out. 78%, according to a poll I saw over the weekend, say that Iraq either hasn’t helped, or has worsened, the threat of terrorism.
Maybe the people aren’t as stupid as he thought?
Mr Furious
Price freezes are a mistake. Some kind of assistance (for the heating oil) is a better solution. This country (led by the Administration) has been ignoring this problem for too long.
There is no fucking way President Bush EVER asks this country to wear a sweater, turn down a thermostat or carpool. Non-conservation has been practically a point of pride for these people.
There are people in unfortunate situations getting hammered by gas prices, and I feel bad for them, but by and large, when I pull in to the gas station and the previous vehicle has left a $75 tab on the pump, I think “Serves you right for driving around alone in a freaking Expedition.”
That might make me a dick, but I’m NEVER going to feel bad for that person.
Mr.Ortiz
Before someone makes me eat my words, I found another story that does show Bush acknowledging the disaster:
“This morning our hearts and prayers are with our fellow citizens along the Gulf Coast who have suffered so much from Hurricane Katrina,” Bush said during speech in San Diego.
Still, this was as an aside to his war on terror speech, and it wasn’t (to my knowledge) broadcast. I’m looking for him to address the nation, and the people of New Orleans.
Peter T.
Any impact the Gulf catastrophe will have on energy prices has nothing to do with Bush, obviously. However, I don’t think he deserves a pass on what has been going on for the past several months. Recall that during California’s energy crisis the conventional wisdom was that the problems were due to market forces. We now know, after Enron’s collapse, that the market was being gamed.
Profligate consumption is at the heart of our energy problems, but I’d feel more comfortable that all is on the up-and-up with an aggressive Justice department and FTC in Washington. I think it’s fair to say that the current administration takes a rather benign view of industry, particularly the energy industry.
jobiuspublius
Alternative Energy. Dear Leader probably failed to lead on that too. Don’t bother quoting a few extra million here, a pretty speach there. I want bold visionary leadership, not the corporate hatchetman. Let’s see if he learns anything from his new pet guitar.
demimondian
Exactly — and there’s no probably about it.
We fund our own attackers when we buy oil. We compete with the poor countries of the world, and choke them even more. We damage our own national security. There are technologies already around which would allow us to be more efficient in our use of oil, or to use other sources of energy.
And what does the president do? Yup — we’re a-gonna drill some more.
Idiots.
Jeff Maier
Mr Furious,
I don’t disagree with that sentiment but my concern is for the folks driving around in a rusty 20 year old Corolla or who struggle to pay heating bills even before the pricing run up. There is no easy answer and the long term behavior changes required are going to result in a lot of unfortunate folks feeling the pain before the middle class and up start changing their thinking.
james richardson
i don’t know much about economics, but i know the recent pork-laden energy bill that gave, what, 7.9 billion to energy companies for no apparent reason whatsoever, didn’t make bush look too good to people who actually feel the pinch at the gas pump. all of bush’s recent legislative victories have in common that benefit corporations, and you can only spin trickle-down economics for so long.
Mr.Ortiz
I have to wonder about the “getting off oil will reduce terrorism” argument. How many economies in the Middle East will collapse when the oil runs dry or becomes obsolete? Kingdoms will fall as they run out of funds to appease the masses. Terrorism will almost certainly increase. The only “silver lining” for Americans would be if the terrorists started targeting their own governments instead of ours. Of course, if they succeed in taking over, then we’ve got the Taliban all over again and we’re back at war.
That’s my very own doomsday scenario based upon very little actual knowledge of the Middle East, but probably not any less than your typical cable news pundit. Discuss!
Peter T.
When I look in my rear view mirror and see the grill of some huge sport truck or SUV about six inches off my tail, I too like to think ‘give my regards to the gas man, buddy’. On the other hand, big vehicles are the US auto industry’s most profitable sector, and the auto industry still employs lots of blue collar folk in well paying, benefited jobs. And GM and Ford aren’t hanging on by much.
Adam Smith’s ‘invisible hand’ will indeed set things right – eventually, but remember the hand is invisible, not painless.
Mr Furious
Those would be the unfortunate folks I mentioned I feel bad for. But nobody’s filling a 1983 Corolla with 28 gallons of gas (the Expedition’s capacity). The heating oil situation is going to get ugly.
The additional reason I feel no sympathy for the selfish Hummer-driving assholes is this: They might think,”Fine, I can afford the gas.” The problem is they are contributing to the rise in prices FOR EVERYONE, and not everyone CAN afford it.
I say again, FUH2.
ppGaz
The unsure 3%? Bloggers?
croatoan
they think the President controls the price of gas?
So does Bush, or at least he used to:
Maybe we should’ve had a “War To Steal Iraq’s Oil,” after all!
Mission accomplished:
Mr Furious
Don’t worry, Mr. Ortiz, Ford could come out with a car that runs on water tomorrow, and there would be plenty of oil customers for the Middle East (China, anyone?) for the foreseeable future. When the oil runs out, that will be a problem. Of course we might take action to slow that pace…
jobiuspublius
I just heard Hardy Jackson again, the man who had his wife washed out of his arms. I misquoted him in a syntactical significant manner, but, not symantically. I conveyed the tradgedy, I think.
Mr.Ortiz
Myself, about 7 comments ago:
Apparantly the President is way ahead of me:
Might as well start fighting the next Mid-East war while we’re over there. We didn’t even have to wait for the oil to run out. That’s efficiency!
Thanks, croatoan!
p.lukasiak
Of course we should blame Bush for high oil prices. The fact is that there is sufficient oil being pumped out of the ground to meet today’s needs…..high oil prices are not a result of a scarcity of oil, but of fears that the oil supply will be disrupted, and scarcities will result. So oil traders drive up the price of oil futures—which pretty much determines the actual price of oil in that future.
And the biggest reason that people are concerned that the oil supply will be disrupted is the policies of GW Bush. Radical Islamic terrorists could do extraordinary damage to the middle east oil infrastructure, significantly slowing the amount of oil that can get out of the middle east and to the world market—-and Bush has clearly exacerbated the threat of such terrorism —- and the “appeal” of this kind of terrorism as a means of crippling the US (and the world) economy.
Then, of course, there is the Bush regime’s overt hostility to the Chavez administration of Venezuela. Bush’s efforts to undermine the political stability of Venezuela, if successful, could mean an end of oil exports from that nation for some time — either through sabotage of oil facilities by Chavez supporters, or a simple embargo.
Yes, if Bush had been a visionary about energy conservation five years ago, we would be better off than we are today—-but oil prices would still be high because the price of oil is now driven by uncertainty caused by Bush’s foreign policy initiatives, and not by an actual scarcity of crude oil.
Narvy
Maybe. I’m not so sure the people are capable of figuring anything out. With all the past malfeasance, misfeasance, and nonfeasance of the President not having much effect on the polls, the fact that people are upset with him over something he can’t control appeals to my sense of irony.
And (off topic, sorry) while I’m on a people-are-stupid rant, the NY Times is reporting
I rest my case.
ppGaz
A little early.
If a nation of people stupid enough to pimp creationism is turning away from George Bush ….. how feckless is this guy?
He can’t even fool the damned Pentecostals any more?
Who’s left?
jaime
Most people used to think Presidents had little or no control over Gas prices. Unfortunately for Dubya two photos will be associated directly to him…the flight suit, and this nugget:
http://www.pitbullsaloon.com/A_View/images/Bush&Abdullah.jpg
ppGaz
Nothing more satisfying than delicious irony.
Imagine George the Spud getting skewered over a symbolic photograph!
I think Michael Moore is laughing up a lung right now.
Nooooo, the world’s most sycophantic Saudi ass-kissers can’t possibly be held accountable for anything related to oil …. can they? President Cheney wouldn’t stand for it.
mac Buckets
I expect the rabid left, as expressed above, to blame Bush for everything from the price of gasoline (while ignoring booming Chinese demand, and while denouncing ANWR drilling and other measures to boost domestic production, of course) to the existence of hurricanes. You guys wouldn’t be any fun if you weren’t this…imaginative.
However, the average non-partisan should know better, and be taught better.
capelza
Bush may or may not be responsible for the price of petroleum, but maybe, just maybe he and his folks shouldn’t have used “Gored at the Pump” during the 2000 election. In essence he was telling the American people that the President IS responsible. So now he and his defenders have to live with an idea they themselves helped to disseminate…it’s one of those “hoisting yourself on your owm petard” kinda moments..
yet another jeff
I would be interested in seeing how much demand for oil has risen from China in the past two years.
Andrei
Ok… I call your bluff.
In the context of current events and their severity, exactly what has Bush done in the past 5 years that is worthy of anything close to real praise? Why should we not blame him for what we perceive as a serious lack of leadership?
Extra credit: Point us to an interview where Bush can be found talking from the hip (and not repeating sound byte after carefully crafted or scripted sound byte) where he shows a little intelligence about the scope of problems he faces as the leader of the free world.
Watch Jon Stewart at all? There’s a reason his impersonation of Bush is hysterically funny. It’s accurate.
Bruce Moomaw
Well, the barn door is open and the horse is already out — but we COULD, years ago, have removed those idiotic tax advantages that actually artificially encouraged people to buy SUVs.
There was, in fact, a measure presented to the Senate two years ago to do so. It failed — 8 Republican Senators voted for it, while 15 Democrats voted against it. The latter, of course, included Michigan’s Senators, but they also included the likes of Mikulski, whose reasoning I still do not understand. However, it should be kept in mind that most of the Democrats did vote for it, and most of the GOP voted against it — with the encouragement of the White House. Why should we expect the White House to be any more responsible now, where both energy and the environment are concerned?
RSA
ppGaz wrote:
Hey, Bush wasn’t wrong about that! It was Cheney!
B. Ross
$3.30 here, up sixty five cents overnight. Looks like that’s a good price. Glad that we didn’t take the Carter’s Satanist path to energy independence thirty years ago. Where would we be now? Pouring vegetable oil into our vehicles, and thumbing our noses at the Saudis? No way.
Alexandra
It cost me 45 freaking bucks to fill my tank today. Painful!
Bob
If you can’t blame Clinton for the booming economy and the exponential job growth during the 90s how can you blame Bush for the war, the skyrocketing oil prices, 9/11 and his failure to catch Osama, and his gutting of the budget for rebuilding the levees?
Oh, I know: BLOW JOB! But remember, we haven’t heard the last from Jeff Gannon.
goonie bird
So who could ever trust a bunch of polls taken by API or AP or CNN/TIME or any of the other liberal left-wing news agentcies?
Bruce Moomaw
Mr. Bird (can I just call you Goonie?) is living up to his name. That same poll gives Bush, overall, only an 8-point negative rating — whereas Gallup right now gives him a 16-point negative one (as does Harris). American Research Group gives him a 22-point negative one. All four polls were pretty accurate on the 2004 election.