Reply #20: I think the approval numbers are pretty clear

[markses]

If all of those who thought Bush was lying or hiding something disapproved of it, then Bush's approval numbers would be much lower.

National security was only one possible reason for the HIDING (positive or neutral) position.

A few examples:

1)Republicans might believe in large numbers that Bush is hiding the details of Clinton's stance toward terrorism in order to "protect the office of the President" In fact, I know a number of Republicans who believe this, and it is a common trope on the Internet.

2) People might believe Bush is hiding details of the attack because the DHS is not yet equipped to handle them. This would be a kind of neutral position, since Bush could be blamed for not getting the DHS up to speed, or the blame could be laid at the feet of bureaucratic inertia. In any case, hiding the information would be viewed as a national security concern that still exists.

One could, of course, go on and on in this vein. There's no accounting for all the possible reasons why people would approve of Bush hiding something about 9/11. But the simple fact is that the poll does not discriminate on these bases, and therefore tells us very little. It is a bit like the poll that asked "Has your opinion of the President changed as a result of the State of the Union." The poll tells us little, since it doesn't specify a previous opinion. Here, the slippage is one of valuing the act of hiding information. The poll doesn't tell us how people value this act, so it tells us little about how the numbers translate into positive or negative feelings about hiding. You have not made a positive argument for how these numbers can be translated into approval or disapproval - I think because there is no positive argument that can be made. We simply lack the information as a result of the form of the question.