You have to look into the minds of the people you're talking to to understand the Pro-Bush sentiment here. HLP is a decent microcosm I guess, though I can;t really be sure of that since I haven't got much of a comparison model.
Look at things from their point of view. They see their day to day lives, and they compare them with the Clinton era four years ago, and frankly, not all that much has likely changed. It's unlikely they 've needed major health care recently, or tried to buy a house or get a job. Most likely, they're not major taxpayers, either living at home, or in a low taxable income state (eg. studying), so any increases or decreases there aren't affecting them so much. They probably complain about petrol prices (if they drive at all) but ultimately, it's a few extra bucks every time you fill up your car. They're also exposed to the spin a lot more than we are - they hear the presidents weekly radio addresses, the televised speeches, and presumably get similar government funded ads that we do whenever a major new policy is implimented. Chances are, they're not trained in environmental biology, so they're not aware of the devastating potential effects of Bush's environmental plans. The economical repercussions of many of Bushs policies also probably aren't affecting them yet - they might be consciously aware that the US has gone from a healthy surplus to a record deficit, but the government still has readily available money, even though it's technically not real money, so for them it's not an issue.
Keep in mind also that they've seen Bush latch on to 9/11 and never let go. Historically there's always been support for leaders during a conflict of any kind - you only have to look at the discrepancy between the quality of Reagans policies and the degree of reverence the people seem to have for him to demonstrate the strength of that argument, even these days. They've seen their president go in and blow stuff up and sat watching their TVs with a vague smile on their face secure in the knowledge that that's the just reward they deserve for messing with the almighty US of A. They see Bush as a protector, a fighter, someone who's not afraid to do what he sees as right, despite massive international opposition. In short, it appeals to the militant patriotism that is so deeply ingrained into them by American culture.
Then compare it with ourselves, the "foreigners", those of us outside the system. Our news reports are of dry numbers - we see things far clearer than they do because they don;t directly affect us. We know that Bush's tax cuts have been aimed almost exclusively at the rich, and since that doesn't really affect us either way, we can oppose it on principle. Moreover, none of his moronic policies are tempered by anything that we can see in the same light as the Americans can see his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (ie. fighting against personal aggressors). On the flipside of that though, we doo see Bush's foreign policy in a far more personal light than the Americans do. They know he'll never **** them over in the same way he did, say, France, but we don't. We never know when the axe might fall our way. And those of us in less politically stable nations might even be worried about more direct American interference in their own governments (coup support etc.). Since that's not something he'll ever support in America, they don't see it as a problem.
Basically, you have to get inside their heads and realize that, effectively, it all comes down to the fact that they're never going to be able to see him as impassionately and clearly as we can, and thus, there's always going to be some degree of support for him.
