The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread

[Zarn]

Obama has wasted too much capital on healthcare ( wayy too much if it fails anyway).
This administration should be setting the agenda not allowing debate within the country to take control of it.  Say what you want to about the evil bush adminstation, you can't deny they knew how to get the message across and stir the country in their direction.  They'd been better off attacking the jobs/unemployment issue.

That is one of the aspects of the Bush Administration that I despise.

[Zarn]

No dark greens?

[Zarn]

Rasmussen 44/55

Gallup 47/47

Both record lows.

Actually, he had 44/56 for Ras before.

[Zarn]

It looks like a small bump is over. Some of the states that were seeming to come back to Obama's column are dropping again.

[Zarn]

Iowa is not in the Rust Belt. You are in the real Rust Belt, and you didn't know Iowa wasn't...

[Zarn]

Iowa is not in the Rust Belt. You are in the real Rust Belt, and you didn't know Iowa wasn't...

Iowa has much heavy industry.

So does China.

[Zarn]

It is 48-47 on RCP (you forgot to wait for Gallup's WTF results ),

and

47.3-48.9 on Pollster.

[Zarn]

What will be the next state to go? New Mexico?

I have a feeling that Obama's bottomed out (for now) more green will crop up.

Not much is getting done and his proposals have been angering independents. Also, unemployment bites.

[Zarn]

Who doesn't know about Michigan's unemployment? The problem with them is that many are unapologetically liberal. I hardly call 53% overwhelming support.

[Zarn]

Source for which?

[Zarn]

It's probably in the late 50's, given the pollster. I'm actually surprised it is not higher.

[Zarn]

It's probably in the late 50's, given the pollster. I'm actually surprised it is not higher.

Oh come on, it's not even a Dailykos sponsored poll and how should it be any higher than that given his national approval numbers?

It's Vermont...

[Zarn]

So Uni polls aren't terrible but Rasmussen cannot be relied upon?

[Zarn]

New Jersey (Rutgers)

57% Approve
37% Disapprove

The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll was conducted from February 19-22, 2010 with a scientifically selected random sample of 886 registered voters. Data are weighted to represent known parameters in the New Jersey population, including gender, age, race, education, and Hispanic ethnicity. All results are reported with these weighted data.

http://eagletonpoll.rutgers.edu/polls/release_03-05-10.pdf

LOL I went to Rutgers... not reliable data.

[Zarn]

That defeats the whole purpose of the balance of power in the electoral college. It's immoral.

Republics only prosper with certain restrictions, so no one can rule over anyone.

[Zarn]

Having people vote accross state lines is ridiculous and wrong, period. People should be voting in their home state. You are crazy for saying that is okay, but of course, you only will think it's okay when Democrats are doing it. Republicans can't.

Republicans didn't because they had no real opportunities for doing so. They had their own must-win races and no easy pick-offs from 2004. Obama won every state that either Gore won in 2000 or Kerry won in 2004 by at least 9%.   

I am talking about people changing their legal residence -- which implies getting a new driver's license, changing auto registration, and finding a legal residence. People do that all the time. A temporarily-transplanted New Yorker might have to abandon his right to vote in New York so that he can vote in North Carolina... but that applies whether one did so so that one becomes a store manager after being an assistant store manager, too.

Way to not address what I was saying.

[Zarn]

Having people vote accross state lines is ridiculous and wrong, period. People should be voting in their home state. You are crazy for saying that is okay, but of course, you only will think it's okay when Democrats are doing it. Republicans can't.

Republicans didn't because they had no real opportunities for doing so. They had their own must-win races and no easy pick-offs from 2004. Obama won every state that either Gore won in 2000 or Kerry won in 2004 by at least 9%.   

I am talking about people changing their legal residence -- which implies getting a new driver's license, changing auto registration, and finding a legal residence. People do that all the time. A temporarily-transplanted New Yorker might have to abandon his right to vote in New York so that he can vote in North Carolina... but that applies whether one did so so that one becomes a store manager after being an assistant store manager, too.

Way to not address what I was saying.

In case you intended to discuss the possibility of people voting multiple times in the same election (voter fraud) -- such is rare. That's just too inefficient. It's far  easier to register likely voters -- which I am proud to have done -- or to drive people to the polls. Other techniques that really can swing an election are done by political hacks and election administrators, one hopes rarely and with insignificant consequences.

Methods of vote fraud include improper handling of registration forms, creation of fictitious voters, intimidation of or interference with voters, tampering with voting devices or paraphernalia, dishonest dealings with absentee ballots, and deliberate misrepresentation of the vote count, and  misrepresentation of the counts of votes. 

Double-voting is possible with getting an absentee ballot in one state, registering in another, and voting in person in the second state. Political operatives who do so themselves can be in deep trouble if they do that. 

 

What I said is not a sombrero. Stop dancing around it.

[Zarn]

Having people vote accross state lines is ridiculous and wrong, period. People should be voting in their home state. You are crazy for saying that is okay, but of course, you only will think it's okay when Democrats are doing it. Republicans can't.

Republicans didn't because they had no real opportunities for doing so. They had their own must-win races and no easy pick-offs from 2004. Obama won every state that either Gore won in 2000 or Kerry won in 2004 by at least 9%.   

I am talking about people changing their legal residence -- which implies getting a new driver's license, changing auto registration, and finding a legal residence. People do that all the time. A temporarily-transplanted New Yorker might have to abandon his right to vote in New York so that he can vote in North Carolina... but that applies whether one did so so that one becomes a store manager after being an assistant store manager, too.

Way to not address what I was saying.

In case you intended to discuss the possibility of people voting multiple times in the same election (voter fraud) -- such is rare. That's just too inefficient. It's far  easier to register likely voters -- which I am proud to have done -- or to drive people to the polls. Other techniques that really can swing an election are done by political hacks and election administrators, one hopes rarely and with insignificant consequences.

Methods of vote fraud include improper handling of registration forms, creation of fictitious voters, intimidation of or interference with voters, tampering with voting devices or paraphernalia, dishonest dealings with absentee ballots, and deliberate misrepresentation of the vote count, and  misrepresentation of the counts of votes. 

Double-voting is possible with getting an absentee ballot in one state, registering in another, and voting in person in the second state. Political operatives who do so themselves can be in deep trouble if they do that. 

 

What I said is not a sombrero. Stop dancing around it.

End of discussion.

Try answering someone, when they question your methods.

[Zarn]

]


Approval ratings for Congress are far lower -- and especially for the Republican Party .

Fixed.

Actually the Republicans have held a lead on the generic congressional ballot since late June of 2009.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot

Any challenge to President Obama from the Republican Party will come from either a current or former State governor or a US Senator.  How popular some right-wing Republican is in his own  right-leaning State will matter little a state near the middle of the spectrum (i.e., Virginia, Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Iowa... not his own)

Republicans are not that popular among Republicans.

[Zarn]

Rasmussen uses a likely voter model, not a terrible one such as adults.

University polls are the worst. Their data is for the most part, useless.

[Zarn]

Historic facts (2004 and 2008) prove that Rasmussen is the best (national) pollster.

Not so much with the states though. And in November 2008, Rass wasn't as crazily different to the other companies, they are now.

I remember numerous complaints about Ras in 2008.

[Zarn]

Gallup for the first time has Obama negative
46 aprrove

47 Disapprove

Obviously, Gallup is a hack pollster run secretly by Rasmussen Reports who are a puppet of Fox, who are a puppet of the Republican Party, who are a puppet of the 'States Rights' Movement, who are a puppet of the Ku Klux Klan, who are a puppet of massive corporations that benefit from picking on the little guy, who want to reinstate slavery.

Don't fall for this pro-slavery propaganda!!!

[Zarn]

Problem is some might actually believe it.

[Zarn]

Obama is 99% approve to 1% disapprove in Chris Mathews' pants.

Yesterday and since the beginning of the presidency, it was 100% approve or higher and 0% disapprove or lower.

[Zarn]

Not many complain about Rasmussen, only hacks do.