The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread

[DariusNJ]

Didn't see this posted here, so

PPP
Colorado: 49% approve, 47% disapprove

"His reviews are highly polarized along partisan lines with 88% of Democrats but only 13% of Republicans saying he's doing a good job. Independents split almost evenly with 48% giving him good marks and 46% disapproving.

Both of our Colorado polls since he took office have found Obama's approval lagging the 54% of the vote he received in the state last year and a Gallup study last week had his popularity there ranking 43rd out of 50 states, behind many places where he did much worse at the ballot box last year.

That begs the question: what's Obama's problem in Colorado?

Comparing our final pre-election poll in the state, which correctly showed him winning with 54% of the vote, to his approval numbers a few things stand out:

-Obama's numbers with Democrats and Republicans now are virtually identical to the share of the vote he got, but he's slipped among independents. He won about 60% of the independent vote but now has just a 48% approval rating with them.

-While Obama is pretty much steady with high approval among Hispanic and black voters, only 44% of whites approve of the job he's doing where 50% of them voted for him.

-His approval rating among young voters (good) and old voters (bad) is similar to what he got in November but he's dropped from winning about 56% of the vote from middle aged voters to a 49% approval rating with them.

One issue that's not helping Obama too much in the state is health care, as 51% of respondents say they're opposed to the President's plans with just 38% in support.

The 'birther' movement is relatively strong in Colorado. Just 58% of voters in the state will say for sure that they think Obama was born in the United States while 24% believe that he was not and 18% are unsure. This line of thinking is particularly prevalent among Republicans, 43% of whom think the President was not born in the country compared to just 33% who think he was.

One thing Colorado voters can be proud of though is their awareness that Hawaii is part of the United States. A PPP national poll released earlier today found that only 90% of Americans overall think that it is, but 97% of folks in Colorado do."

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/08/obama-steady-in-colorado.html

[Vepres]

So you said that Obama won the 18-29 vote in MT by a 61-37. Then why is his favorables with them only 51-47? Not much of an "age wave" if you ask me.

When reality set in, Obama isn't as cool and perfect as he was in the campaign. That said, he still has an advantage among them ATM.

[pbrower2a]

So you said that Obama won the 18-29 vote in MT by a 61-37. Then why is his favorables with them only 51-47? Not much of an "age wave" if you ask me.

He's not actively campaigning right now. The efficient and effective election machine that he had in operation in 2008 is in mothballs. Don't worry; it will be up and running, perhaps even before the Republicans start their knock-down, drag-out in New Hampshire. There are no political campaign ads. In a knock-down, drag-out primary struggle the opposing sides usually supply grist for the campaign apparatus of the incumbent.

I predict that Obama will have no meaningful primary challenge. It will be likely light-weight Dennis Kucinich and some heavy-handed acolyte of Lyndon LaRouche. Who runs will determine what sort of advertising and campaign messages will be out, as well as the locations of the ads. The autumn of 2008 will be shown as a bad time for America except for one thing. No, it's not the Philadelphia Phillies winning the World Series, which wasn't so delightful in Florida.

Without a meaningful primary challenge and with sharp competition within the other party's primaries, Obama will have a head start in winning re-election against a challenger. Is that unfair? No. That's just how American politics operates, and it shows how a mediocre-to-good incumbent President is all-but-invincible in a campaign for re-election. You can count on the Obama campaign exploiting any weakness of the opponent, just as in 2008, and pulling back only when going further will seem like overkill. Barack Obama will have control of official travels, and they will tend to go to swing states (possible exception: natural disasters).

[Zarn]

There is no opponent campaigning, either.

[Rowan]

There is no opponent campaigning, either.

Shhh, be quiet, or else you will wake pbrower up from his wet dream.

[Dan the Roman]

The thing about 18-29 year olds, and other groups as well, is that their is no opponent to compare Obama too. When there is a Republican nominee, social issues will drive younger voters to cast ballots for the Democrats as they did for Kerry.

[Tender Branson]

Didn't see this posted here, so

PPP
Colorado: 49% approve, 47% disapprove

Page 132 ...

[nhmagic]

So you said that Obama won the 18-29 vote in MT by a 61-37. Then why is his favorables with them only 51-47? Not much of an "age wave" if you ask me.

He's not actively campaigning right now. The efficient and effective election machine that he had in operation in 2008 is in mothballs. Don't worry; it will be up and running, perhaps even before the Republicans start their knock-down, drag-out in New Hampshire. There are no political campaign ads. In a knock-down, drag-out primary struggle the opposing sides usually supply grist for the campaign apparatus of the incumbent.

I predict that Obama will have no meaningful primary challenge. It will be likely light-weight Dennis Kucinich and some heavy-handed acolyte of Lyndon LaRouche. Who runs will determine what sort of advertising and campaign messages will be out, as well as the locations of the ads. The autumn of 2008 will be shown as a bad time for America except for one thing. No, it's not the Philadelphia Phillies winning the World Series, which wasn't so delightful in Florida.

Without a meaningful primary challenge and with sharp competition within the other party's primaries, Obama will have a head start in winning re-election against a challenger. Is that unfair? No. That's just how American politics operates, and it shows how a mediocre-to-good incumbent President is all-but-invincible in a campaign for re-election. You can count on the Obama campaign exploiting any weakness of the opponent, just as in 2008, and pulling back only when going further will seem like overkill. Barack Obama will have control of official travels, and they will tend to go to swing states (possible exception: natural disasters).

I think Hillary could be a surprise nominee - if she smells blood, also if this healthcare thing doesn't go, dont think she won't be sniffing up the progressive members to see if they will lend her a hand.

[pbrower2a]

So you said that Obama won the 18-29 vote in MT by a 61-37. Then why is his favorables with them only 51-47? Not much of an "age wave" if you ask me.

He's not actively campaigning right now. The efficient and effective election machine that he had in operation in 2008 is in mothballs. Don't worry; it will be up and running, perhaps even before the Republicans start their knock-down, drag-out in New Hampshire. There are no political campaign ads. In a knock-down, drag-out primary struggle the opposing sides usually supply grist for the campaign apparatus of the incumbent.

I predict that Obama will have no meaningful primary challenge. It will be likely light-weight Dennis Kucinich and some heavy-handed acolyte of Lyndon LaRouche. Who runs will determine what sort of advertising and campaign messages will be out, as well as the locations of the ads. The autumn of 2008 will be shown as a bad time for America except for one thing. No, it's not the Philadelphia Phillies winning the World Series, which wasn't so delightful in Florida.

Without a meaningful primary challenge and with sharp competition within the other party's primaries, Obama will have a head start in winning re-election against a challenger. Is that unfair? No. That's just how American politics operates, and it shows how a mediocre-to-good incumbent President is all-but-invincible in a campaign for re-election. You can count on the Obama campaign exploiting any weakness of the opponent, just as in 2008, and pulling back only when going further will seem like overkill. Barack Obama will have control of official travels, and they will tend to go to swing states (possible exception: natural disasters).

I think Hillary could be a surprise nominee - if she smells blood, also if this healthcare thing doesn't go, dont think she won't be sniffing up the progressive members to see if they will lend her a hand.

Primary challenges to an incumbent President happen with a weakened incumbent. So it was with Ted Kennedy against Jimmy Carter in 1980 and Ronald Reagan against  Gerald Ford in 1976. Such challenges bode ill for the incumbent's party in the general election because they offer grist for an organized and unified opponent. Ford was defeated in 1976; Carter was defeated in 1980.

Then there was 1968, when the incumbent with a strong record on everything except for a war gone awry faced challenges from a peace faction and the racist campaign of George Wallace. The incumbent President chose not to run for re-election, and Richard Nixon crushed the VP.

Do I think intra-party challenges wrong? Hardly. It's too bad that there wasn't one in 2004 against what some consider the worst President in American history. McCain? Lugar? Voinovich?  Specter? Collins? Even someone from the Hard Right -- Coburn, Santorum,  or DeMint -- could have chosen to challenge the "good" with the "perfect" (abortion ban, crackdown on homosexuality, acceleration of the drug war, attempt to "Christianize" American politics, and a dismantling of the welfare state in favor of a fascist economy).

Obama knows well enough to put potential rivals in responsible positions in which they can achieve everything other than establishing a political base. That's the "Team of Rivals" approach. After eight years, the maximum time for his Presidency, what happens is no longer his concern; his personal role in governing America will be over.

 

[Vepres]

The thing about 18-29 year olds, and other groups as well, is that their is no opponent to compare Obama too. When there is a Republican nominee, social issues will drive younger voters to cast ballots for the Democrats as they did for Kerry.

I think they would support Gingrich or Gary Johnson.

[pbrower2a]

The thing about 18-29 year olds, and other groups as well, is that their is no opponent to compare Obama too. When there is a Republican nominee, social issues will drive younger voters to cast ballots for the Democrats as they did for Kerry.

I think they would support Gingrich or Gary Johnson.

Gingrich really is a Hard Right social "conservative" who would turn off American young adults -- just like Palin in that respect.

[Phony Moderate]

Gallup:

Approve - 52%
Disapprove - 40%

[Tender Branson]

Massachusetts (Rasmussen)

59% Approve
41% Disapprove

This state telephone survey of 500 Likely Voters in the state of Massachusettes was conducted by Rasmussen Reports on August 20, 2009. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_state_toplines/massachusetts/toplines_election_2010_massachusettes_governor_august_10_2009

Michigan (Rasmussen)

52% Approve
48% Disapprove

This state telephone survey of 500 Likely Voters in Michigan was conducted by Rasmussen Reports August 19, 2009. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_state_surveys/michigan/toplines/toplines_michigan_august_19_2009

[pbrower2a]

"Likely voters, again, MA and MI"

[Tender Branson]

New York (Siena Research Institute)

70% Favorable
23% Unfavorable

This SRI survey was conducted August 17-20, 2009 by telephone calls to 621 New York State registered voters. It has a margin of error of 3.9 percentage points. Data was statistically adjusted by age, party and geography to ensure representativeness. Sampling was conducted via random digit dialing weighted to reflect known population patterns.

http://sienaresearchinstitute.pbworks.com/f/09+August+SNY+Poll+Release+--+FINAL.pdf

[War on Want]

The thing about 18-29 year olds, and other groups as well, is that their is no opponent to compare Obama too. When there is a Republican nominee, social issues will drive younger voters to cast ballots for the Democrats as they did for Kerry.

I think they would support Gingrich or Gary Johnson.

No. Gingrich wasn't popular among the youth even when he was relativley young himself.

[Rowan]

Just for the record, favorables among 18-29 year olds from PPP's latest poll:

Huckabee 45/19
Romney 32/34
Gingrich 30/32
Palin 30/53

[War on Want]

Just for the record, favorables among 18-29 year olds from PPP's latest poll:

Huckabee 45/19
Romney 32/34
Gingrich 30/32
Palin 30/53

I'm not surprised Huckabee is doing so well among the youth.

[Democratic Hawk]

Just for the record, favorables among 18-29 year olds from PPP's latest poll:

Huckabee 45/19
Romney 32/34
Gingrich 30/32
Palin 30/53

I'm not surprised Huckabee is doing so well among the youth.

And, according to PPP, Obama would carry them against Huckabee (51-40); Gingrich (53-40); Romney (58-28); and Palin (60-28)

[Rowan]

Yeah, but for a Republican to get 40% of the youth vote is pretty impressive compared to McCain, and LOL at Palin's 28%.

[ajc0918]

Just for the record, favorables among 18-29 year olds from PPP's latest poll:

Huckabee 45/19
Romney 32/34
Gingrich 30/32
Palin 30/53

I'm not surprised Huckabee is doing so well among the youth.

And, according to PPP, Obama would carry them against Huckabee (51-40); Gingrich (53-40); Romney (58-28); and Palin (60-28)

Why is Romney so low?

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Just for the record, favorables among 18-29 year olds from PPP's latest poll:

Huckabee 45/19
Romney 32/34
Gingrich 30/32
Palin 30/53

Huckabee's numbers are surprising.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Why is Romney so low?

Because the youth of today don't want to vote for Pure Evil.

[Mechaman]

Just for the record, favorables among 18-29 year olds from PPP's latest poll:

Huckabee 45/19
Romney 32/34
Gingrich 30/32
Palin 30/53

Huckabee's numbers are surprising.

I worry for the future of today's youth if Huckabee is that popular.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Why is Romney so low?

Because the youth of today don't want to vote for Pure Evil.

^^^^