One huge difference between the Clinton and Bush administrations is the way their poll numbers are covered in the press. When Clinton dipped in the polls, the media would inevitably write a slew of process stories about an administration in disarray, the need to change tactics, etc. But when Bush’s approval ratings
drop to the low 40s (via Atrios) after the narrowest re-election since Woodrow Wilson, well, nothing happens.

Why? Well, the first difference is that Bush’s people don’t leak, so the reporters have no information to hang the process stories on. In addition, 9/11 made Bush seem invincible, and the White House is unwilling to concede the importance or even the legitimacy of the poll numbers. But here in the reality-based community, the truth is clear: Bush is not very popular. And it’s already starting to bite him in the a– (see: stem cells, Social Security, Iraq, etc.).

If a president drops in the polls and no one notices, does he make a sound when he hits bottom?