The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 09:23:18 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 185 186 187 188 189 [190] 191 192 193 194 195 ... 410
Author Topic: The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread  (Read 1207639 times)
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4725 on: May 06, 2010, 01:36:37 PM »

Kentucky (PPP)Sad

37% Approve
59% Disapprove

PPP surveyed 946 Kentucky voters on May 1st and 2nd. The margin of error for the survey was +/-3.2%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_KY_505.pdf

New Hampshire (UNH)Sad

50% Approve
46% Disapprove

50% Favorable
44% Unfavorable

These findings are based on the latest WMUR Granite State Poll, conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center. 512 randomly selected New Hampshire adults were interviewed by telephone between April 18 and April 28, 2010. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4.4 percent.

http://www.unh.edu/survey-center/news/pdf/gsp2010_spring_presapp50410.pdf
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4726 on: May 06, 2010, 03:18:09 PM »

KY, NC, NH updates




Mixed approval and favorability (Ohio only):



The same key applies to both maps. Take your pick.

Key:


<40% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Orange (50% if 60% or higher disapproval)
40-44% with Disapproval Higher: 50% Yellow  
45-49% with Disapproval Higher: 30% Yellow
<50% with Approval Equal: 10% Yellow (really white)

<50%  Approval greater: 30% Green
50-55%: 40% Green
56-59%: 60% Green
60%+: 80% Green


Months (All polls are from 2010):

A -  January     G -  July
B -  February   H -  August
C -  March        I -  September
D -  April          J  -  October
E -  May           K -  November
F -   June         L -   December

C* -- March 2010, after the passage of Health Care Reform legislation in the House.

S - suspect poll (examples for such a qualification: strange crosstabs, likely inversion of the report (for inversions, only for polls above 55% or below 45%...  let's say Vermont 35% approval or Oklahoma 65% approval), or more than 10% undecided. Anyone who suggests that a poll is suspect must explain why it is suspect.

Partisan polls and polls for special interests (trade associations, labor unions, ethnic associations) are excluded.

Z- no recent poll

37 states have checked in since HCR legislation was passed in the House.





deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater  157
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin  20
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 115
white                        too close to call  18
pale blue                  Republican  under 5%  48
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin   34
deep blue                 Republican over 10%
 55  

44% approval is roughly the break-even  point (50/50) for an incumbent's win.  I add 6% for approval between 40% and 46%, 5% at 46%, 4% between 47% and 50%, 3% for 51%, 2% for 53%, 1% for 54% and nothing above 55% or below 40% for an estimate of the vote.

Favorability is probably 1% below the vote.  This model applies only to incumbents, who have plenty of advantages unless they are shown to be failures.













Logged
JerryBrown2010
KyleGordon2016
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 712
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.68, S: -9.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4727 on: May 06, 2010, 06:12:46 PM »

Fox News (National)

 Approve 48%
 Disapprove 43%
Logged
Poundingtherock
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 917
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4728 on: May 06, 2010, 11:38:51 PM »

48/46 All State/National Journal
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,611
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4729 on: May 06, 2010, 11:44:37 PM »

If trends due continue, Texas will be gone for the GOP by 2025. I don't think it will though, the Hispanic community hasn't been dumbed down enough to fall into that partisan trap.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,611
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4730 on: May 06, 2010, 11:45:00 PM »
« Edited: May 07, 2010, 04:49:19 PM by ShadowOfTheWave »

If trends do continue, Texas will be gone for the GOP by 2025. I don't think it will though, the Hispanic community hasn't been dumbed down enough to fall into that partisan trap.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4731 on: May 07, 2010, 08:31:53 AM »
« Edited: May 08, 2010, 11:50:03 AM by pbrower2a »

Indiana State Survey of 500 Likely Voters
Conducted May 5-6, 2010
By Rasmussen Reports

1* How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as President… do you strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove, or strongly disapprove of the job he’s been doing?

23% Strongly approve
20% Somewhat approve
12% Somewhat disapprove
44% Strongly disapprove
1% Not sure

Approval only, as the effects of favorability and approval are easily normed:






Key:


<40% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Orange (50% if 60% or higher disapproval)
40-44% with Disapproval Higher: 50% Yellow  
45-49% with Disapproval Higher: 30% Yellow
<50% with Approval Equal: 10% Yellow (really white)

<50%  Approval greater: 30% Green
50-55%: 40% Green
56-59%: 60% Green
60%+: 80% Green


Months (All polls are from 2010):

A -  January     G -  July
B -  February   H -  August
C -  March        I -  September
D -  April          J  -  October
E -  May           K -  November
F -   June         L -   December

C* -- March 2010, after the passage of Health Care Reform legislation in the House.

S - suspect poll (examples for such a qualification: strange crosstabs, likely inversion of the report (for inversions, only for polls above 55% or below 45%...  let's say Vermont 35% approval or Oklahoma 65% approval), or more than 10% undecided. Anyone who suggests that a poll is suspect must explain why it is suspect.

Partisan polls and polls for special interests (trade associations, labor unions, ethnic associations) are excluded.

Z- no recent poll

37 states have checked in since HCR legislation was passed in the House. I have now recounted the likely electoral votes.





deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater  164
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin  20
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 100
white                        too close to call  18
pale blue                  Republican  under 5%  59
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin   51
deep blue                 Republican over 10% 35
 

44% approval is roughly the break-even  point (50/50) for an incumbent's win.  I add 6% for approval between 40% and 46%, 5% at 46%, 4% between 47% and 50%, 3% for 51%, 2% for 53%, 1% for 54% and nothing above 55% or below 40% for an estimate of the vote.

 This model applies only to incumbents, who have plenty of advantages unless they are shown to be failures.













Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4732 on: May 07, 2010, 09:49:20 AM »

Us conservatives need to find a way to knock that guy's numbers down in Ohio. That's very scary.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4733 on: May 07, 2010, 11:01:51 AM »

Rasmussen has Obama at 48 in Ohio but 45 nationally.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4734 on: May 07, 2010, 12:19:57 PM »
« Edited: May 07, 2010, 07:18:14 PM by pbrower2a »

Us conservatives need to find a way to knock that guy's numbers down in Ohio. That's very scary.

His numbers in Ohio roughly parallel the national numbers.  pbrower2a is adding six to Obama's numbers in the second map for ... who knows what reason.

It's probably four in that case (Ohio), as it is more than two years away from the election, and I figure that the effect peaks for an incumbent President around 44% approval early on. He won't run unopposed.

In any event I use the model for an incumbent facing a "known" challenger. That may be unduly cautious in this case unless the GOP finds "the New Reagan" who has the ability to win over a big part of the Blue Firewall.

An incumbent Senator or Governor has huge advantages in any effort to win re-election, and those are much the same for a President:

1. Free attention from the media, the attention allowing his campaign to complement the attention with targeted campaign efforts. A challenger must campaign more and buy more advertising access to get a message out, and the message often ends up a muddle.

2. Control of the agenda. An incumbent President really has that and if he is at all competent, he can exploit it without any cynical ploys.

3. The accoutrements of office that impress people who vote for the incumbent under almost any circumstance because the incumbent President is the ultimate expression of power.

4. Being better-known than the challenger.

5. (Except for Gerald Ford), the proven ability to manage a successful campaign for President.

Of course that all fails if the President is generally recognized as incompetent, insensitive, or offensive -- in which case the incumbent President needs much more than a 6% gain in the vote from his approval rating, and probably lacks the time or ability to get it.  

We have yet to see the 2012  election; I predict that the smooth campaign machine of 2008 and the slick campaigner will both be available in the autumn of 2012 as they were in 2008 and aren't now. The President seems to have taken his lumps (on health-care reform) early enough that they won't be an issue of first rank in 2012.

George W. Bush had nationwide approval ratings below 50% throughout most of the 2004 campaign -- and he still won. Figure that Barack Obama could do much the same because he is a slicker campaigner.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4735 on: May 07, 2010, 12:21:17 PM »

Us conservatives need to find a way to knock that guy's numbers down in Ohio. That's very scary.

His numbers in Ohio roughly parallel the national numbers.  pbrower2a is adding six to Obama's numbers in the second map for ... who knows what reason.

It's probably four in that case (Ohio), as it is more than two years away from the election, and I figure that the effect peaks for an incumbent President around 44% approval early on. He won't run unopposed.

In any event I use the model for an incumbent facing a "known" challenger. That may be unduly cautious in this case unless the GOP finds "the New Reagan" who has the ability to win over a big part of the Blue Firewall.

An incumbent Senator or Governor has huge advantages in any effort to win re-election, and those are much the same for a President:

1. Free attention from the media, the attention allowing his campaign to complement the attention with targeted campaign efforts. A challenger must campaign more and buy more advertising access to get a message out, and the message often ends up a muddle.

2. Control of the agenda. An incumbent President really has that and if he is at all competent, he can exploit it without any cynical ploys.

3. The accoutrements of office that impress people who vote for the incumbent under almost any circumstance because the incumbent President is the ultimate expression of power.

4. Being better-known than the challenger.

5. (Except for Gerald Ford), the proven ability to manage a successful campaign for President.

Of course that all fails if the President is generally recognized as incompetent, insensitive, or offensive -- in which case the incumbent President needs much more than a 6% gain in the vote from his approval rating, and probably lacks the time or ability to get it.  

We have yet to see the 2012  election; I predict that the smooth campaign machine of 2008 and the slick campaigner will both be available in the autumn of 2012 as they were in 2008 and aren't now. The President seems to have taken his lumps (on health-care reform) early enough that they won't be an issue of first rank in 2012.

George W. Bush had nationwide approval ratings below 50% throughout most of the 2008 campaign -- and he still won. Figure that Barack Obama could do much the same because he is a slicker campaigner.

George W. Bush didn't win in 2008. (Unless you count his black clone, Barack Obama)
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4736 on: May 08, 2010, 07:42:19 AM »

Beginning in 1900, 13 of 18 Presidents seeking re-election or at the least continuation of their terms have been re-elected.  That can't be mere coincidence. An incumbent President has advantages that a challenger doesn't have.

Sorry about the typo involving George W. Bush and the 2008 election. 
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4737 on: May 08, 2010, 08:14:16 AM »

Beginning in 1900, 13 of 18 Presidents seeking re-election or at the least continuation of their terms have been re-elected.  That can't be mere coincidence. An incumbent President has advantages that a challenger doesn't have.

Sorry about the typo involving George W. Bush and the 2008 election. 

An incumbent president has advantages, but not overwhelming ones.

Post World War II, we've had two incumbents that looked at the situation and said, "I can't win," and then dropped out (HST, LBJ).  We've had three losses (GRF, JEC, GHWB).  The number that were re-elected was six (HST, DDE, LBJ, RMN, RWR, WJC, GWB).  It is almost even.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,809
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4738 on: May 08, 2010, 08:17:02 AM »
« Edited: May 08, 2010, 08:20:00 AM by WEB Dubois »

I think Obama rather had problems more problems with his base than with independent minded voters. The fact is that when Bush lost Congress in 2006. his approvals was much lower than Obamas. And the Dems should hold both majorities.

If conservatives were loyal enough to give Bush a second term, Dems who weren't energized should do the same and we weren't giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4739 on: May 08, 2010, 08:37:41 AM »

May 7, 2010


Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 45% -2

Disapprove 54% +2


"Strongly Approve" is at 27%, -1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 40%, +2.

Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4740 on: May 08, 2010, 08:40:58 AM »



Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 46% +1

Disapprove 53% -1


"Strongly Approve" is at 27%, u.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 41%, +1.

The slip below 30% in strongly approve might be some real movement.

Logged
Inmate Trump
GWBFan
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,022


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -7.30

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4741 on: May 08, 2010, 09:05:02 AM »
« Edited: May 08, 2010, 09:09:19 AM by Clay »

I think the only thing that's going to get Obama re-elected and allow him to stay in office will be the less than stellar Republican candidate, be it Romney, Palin or Huckabee--all of which are the top 3 contenders at the moment.

Obama can lose; Republicans can take him out.  They just have to put forth the right person and the 3 above are not it.  Someone made the comparison between George W. Bush's approval ratings going into re-election and Obama's.  GWB would've lost if Kerry hadn't been the Democrat's nominee; they put up a horrible candidate and it cost them the election....much the same will likely happen to the Republicans in 2012 if they keep going in the direction they're going (ie, nominating Romney, Palin or Huckabee, three of the worst possible candidates to run a general election).

Palin's good at getting the base riled up but she has WAY too many negatives, more than any general election candidate since........?

Huckabee's got the "good guy" persona down perfectly but he comes across as simple-minded and weak and would not be able to win nationally in places Republicans are going to need to win in (PA, OH, FL).

Romney has no positives, simply put.  He comes across as a liar; someone I wouldn't trust....much the same way John Kerry came across in 2004 with a used car salesman personality added in.  I think he might even be worse than Palin.  At least with her you know what you're getting and you know where she stands on most issues.  With Romney you don't know either.
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,625
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4742 on: May 08, 2010, 10:24:45 AM »


Romney has no positives, simply put.  He comes across as a liar; someone I wouldn't trust....much the same way John Kerry came across in 2004 with a used car salesman personality added in.  I think he might even be worse than Palin.  At least with her you know what you're getting and you know where she stands on most issues.  With Romney you don't know either.

Romney's positives:
  • It's the economy, stupid. The recession will either be ongoing or just have ended, and Romney has amazing expertise in economic affairs.
  • Presidentiability. Romney looks presidential. This is a fairly important factor - Obama would've likely won the general election anyway, but this is why he beat Hillary Clinton in the primary.
  • Proven electability. Massachusetts was just as Democratic in 2002 as it is now, and Romney won. 2006 presidential polling showed Romney in single digits - he came in second overall. Romney is electable.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4743 on: May 08, 2010, 11:01:20 AM »
« Edited: May 08, 2010, 03:40:16 PM by Sam Spade »

Obama Job Approval chart - ALL POLLS
Updated May 8, 2010

Methodology (at this point - will probably start narrowing closer to 2010 elections)

- All polls per state done in last six weeks (must be started after March 29 for this week), maximum one poll per firm.
- Other polls done in last six months can be included, but no more than three polls per state can be outside the six week envelope and if more than three polls done in last six weeks, no polls before that.  (also if one poll done in last six weeks, then only two can be included in six month period, two polls, then one, etc).
- No favorable polls; no excellent/good/fair/poor polls; no Rutgers-Eagleton/Strategic Vision/any other questionable company; no partisan/internals, my judgment as to what is prevails
- National number is an amalgamation of 2008/2004 turnout with certain additional variables.
- Virginia Gov/Massachusetts Special polls ignored.  New Jersey Gov polls wouldn't be included under the methodology anyways.

State# of PollsObama ApprovalObama Disapproval2008 Obama2004 Kerry2000 Gore
Alabama340%58%39%37%42%
Alaska137%56%38%36%28%
Arizona342%54%45%44%45%
Arkansas337%61%39%45%46%
California358%38%61%54%53%
Colorado246%53%54%47%42%
Connecticut354%41%61%54%56%
D. C.0NoneNone92%89%85%
Delaware254%44%62%53%55%
Florida348%49%51%47%49%
Georgia342%55%47%41%43%
Hawaii177%23%72%54%56%
Idaho233%62%36%30%28%
Illinois256%41%62%55%55%
Indiana239%57%50%39%41%
Iowa348%49%54%49%49%
Kansas238%60%42%37%37%
Kentucky339%59%41%40%41%
Louisiana140%59%40%42%45%
Maine0NoneNone58%54%49%
Maryland258%35%62%56%57%
Massachusetts156%44%62%62%60%
Michigan150%49%57%51%51%
Minnesota149%49%54%51%48%
Mississippi0NoneNone43%40%41%
Missouri343%53%49%46%47%
Montana0NoneNone47%39%33%
Nebraska138%61%42%33%33%
Nevada246%52%55%48%46%
New Hampshire348%48%54%50%47%
New Jersey354%39%57%53%56%
New Mexico250%47%57%49%48%
New York357%40%63%58%60%
North Carolina347%48%50%44%43%
North Dakota144%54%45%36%33%
Ohio344%51%51%49%46%
Oklahoma237%60%34%34%38%
Oregon253%44%57%51%47%
Pennsylvania446%50%54%51%51%
Rhode Island157%41%63%59%61%
South Carolina346%48%45%41%41%
South Dakota243%53%45%38%38%
Tennessee239%57%42%43%47%
Texas338%56%44%38%38%
Utah234%65%34%26%26%
Vermont262%36%67%59%51%
Virginia246%53%53%45%44%
Washington253%45%57%53%50%
West Virginia0NoneNone43%43%46%
Wisconsin346%50%56%50%48%
Wyoming131%68%33%29%28%
NATIONAL48% (47%)48% (49%)53%48%48%
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4744 on: May 08, 2010, 11:33:40 AM »
« Edited: May 08, 2010, 03:38:27 PM by Sam Spade »

Obama Job Approval chart - RASMUSSEN LAST 3 POLLS
Updated May 8, 2010

Methodology (at this point - will probably start narrowing closer to 2010 elections)

- This chart covers an average of the last two/three Rasmussen polls within the last six months, or simply the last poll if no poll exists in that time frame.
- National number is an amalgamation of 2008/2004 turnout with certain additional variables.
- Massachusetts Special polls ignored.

State# of PollsObama ApprovalObama Disapproval2008 Obama2004 Kerry2000 Gore
Alabama142%58%39%37%42%
Alaska0NoneNone38%36%28%
Arizona339%59%45%44%45%
Arkansas337%61%39%45%46%
California358%41%61%54%53%
Colorado344%56%54%47%42%
Connecticut354%45%61%54%56%
D. C.0NoneNone92%89%85%
Delaware352%48%62%53%55%
Florida347%52%51%47%49%
Georgia342%56%47%41%43%
Hawaii177%23%72%54%56%
Idaho130%70%36%30%28%
Illinois358%41%62%55%55%
Indiana340%59%50%39%41%
Iowa348%51%54%49%49%
Kansas142%58%42%37%37%
Kentucky339%60%41%40%41%
Louisiana338%61%40%42%45%
Maine0NoneNone58%54%49%
Maryland259%40%62%56%57%
Massachusetts255%45%62%62%60%
Michigan249%50%57%51%51%
Minnesota351%48%54%51%48%
Mississippi0NoneNone43%40%41%
Missouri341%57%49%46%47%
Montana0NoneNone47%39%33%
Nebraska138%61%42%33%33%
Nevada345%55%55%48%46%
New Hampshire349%51%54%50%47%
New Jersey153%47%57%53%56%
New Mexico154%46%57%49%48%
New York356%44%63%58%60%
North Carolina342%57%50%44%43%
North Dakota342%56%45%36%33%
Ohio347%52%51%49%46%
Oklahoma138%62%34%34%38%
Oregon255%45%57%51%47%
Pennsylvania347%52%54%51%51%
Rhode Island360%39%63%59%61%
South Carolina145%54%45%41%41%
South Dakota343%56%45%38%38%
Tennessee136%62%42%43%47%
Texas340%59%44%38%38%
Utah0NoneNone34%26%26%
Vermont160%39%67%59%51%
Virginia249%51%53%45%44%
Washington353%46%57%53%50%
West Virginia0NoneNone43%43%46%
Wisconsin349%51%56%50%48%
Wyoming131%68%33%29%28%
NATIONAL48% (48%)51% (51%)53%48%48%
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4745 on: May 08, 2010, 11:41:49 AM »
« Edited: May 08, 2010, 03:38:52 PM by Sam Spade »

Obama Job Approval chart - RASMUSSEN LAST POLL
Updated May 8, 2010

Methodology (at this point - will probably start narrowing closer to 2010 elections)

- This chart covers the last Rasmussen Poll in each state so long as under six months old.
- National number is an amalgamation of 2008/2004 turnout with certain additional variables.
- Massachusetts Special polls ignored.

State# of PollsObama ApprovalObama Disapproval2008 Obama2004 Kerry2000 Gore
Alabama142%58%39%37%42%
Alaska0NoneNone38%36%28%
Arizona134%64%45%44%45%
Arkansas135%63%39%45%46%
California160%39%61%54%53%
Colorado145%55%54%47%42%
Connecticut154%43%61%54%56%
D. C.0NoneNone92%89%85%
Delaware154%46%62%53%55%
Florida147%53%51%47%49%
Georgia141%57%47%41%43%
Hawaii177%23%72%54%56%
Idaho130%70%36%30%28%
Illinois161%39%62%55%55%
Indiana143%56%50%39%41%
Iowa148%51%54%49%49%
Kansas142%58%42%37%37%
Kentucky141%59%41%40%41%
Louisiana140%59%40%42%45%
Maine0NoneNone58%54%49%
Maryland159%39%62%56%57%
Massachusetts156%44%62%62%60%
Michigan150%49%57%51%51%
Minnesota149%49%54%51%48%
Mississippi0NoneNone43%40%41%
Missouri142%56%49%46%47%
Montana0NoneNone47%39%33%
Nebraska138%61%42%33%33%
Nevada148%51%55%48%46%
New Hampshire149%50%54%50%47%
New Jersey153%47%57%53%56%
New Mexico154%46%57%49%48%
New York154%46%63%58%60%
North Carolina144%56%50%44%43%
North Dakota144%54%45%36%33%
Ohio148%51%51%49%46%
Oklahoma138%62%34%34%38%
Oregon159%40%57%51%47%
Pennsylvania148%51%54%51%51%
Rhode Island157%41%63%59%61%
South Carolina145%54%45%41%41%
South Dakota145%54%45%38%38%
Tennessee136%62%42%43%47%
Texas142%58%44%38%38%
Utah129%69%34%26%26%
Vermont160%39%67%59%51%
Virginia148%51%53%45%44%
Washington155%45%57%53%50%
West Virginia0NoneNone43%43%46%
Wisconsin148%52%56%50%48%
Wyoming131%68%33%29%28%
NATIONAL49% (48%)50% (51%)53%48%48%
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4746 on: May 08, 2010, 11:49:42 AM »
« Edited: May 08, 2010, 03:39:49 PM by Sam Spade »

Obama Job Approval chart - ALL NON-RASMUSSEN POLLS
Updated May 8, 2010

Methodology (at this point - will probably start narrowing closer to 2010 elections)

- All polls per state done in last six weeks (must be started after March 29 for this week), maximum one poll per firm.
- Other polls done in last six months can be included, but no more than three polls per state can be outside the six week envelope and if more than three polls done in last six weeks, no polls before that.  (also if one poll done in last six weeks, then only two can be included in six month period, two polls, then one, etc).
- No favorable polls; no excellent/good/fair/poor polls; no Rutgers-Eagleton/Strategic Vision/any other questionable company; no partisan/internals, my judgment as to what is prevails
- National number is an amalgamation of 2008/2004 turnout with certain additional variables.
- Massachusetts Special polls ignored.
- No Rasmussen polls in this one.

State# of PollsObama ApprovalObama Disapproval2008 Obama2004 Kerry2000 Gore
Alabama239%58%39%37%42%
Alaska137%56%38%36%28%
Arizona247%50%45%44%45%
Arkansas238%60%39%45%46%
California357%36%61%54%53%
Colorado147%50%54%47%42%
Connecticut254%40%61%54%56%
D. C.0NoneNone92%89%85%
Delaware153%41%62%53%55%
Florida248%48%51%47%49%
Georgia242%55%47%41%43%
Hawaii0NoneNone72%54%56%
Idaho135%54%36%30%28%
Illinois150%42%62%55%55%
Indiana134%57%50%39%41%
Iowa248%48%54%49%49%
Kansas134%62%42%37%37%
Kentucky238%59%41%40%41%
Louisiana0NoneNone40%42%45%
Maine0NoneNone58%54%49%
Maryland256%30%62%56%57%
Massachusetts0NoneNone62%62%60%
Michigan0NoneNone57%51%51%
Minnesota0NoneNone54%51%48%
Mississippi0NoneNone43%40%41%
Missouri244%52%49%46%47%
Montana137%53%47%39%33%
Nebraska0NoneNone42%33%33%
Nevada144%52%55%48%46%
New Hampshire248%48%54%50%47%
New Jersey354%39%57%53%56%
New Mexico145%48%57%49%48%
New York259%37%63%58%60%
North Carolina347%47%50%44%43%
North Dakota0NoneNone45%36%33%
Ohio342%52%51%49%46%
Oklahoma136%58%34%34%38%
Oregon147%48%57%51%47%
Pennsylvania345%50%54%51%51%
Rhode Island0NoneNone63%59%61%
South Carolina247%45%45%41%41%
South Dakota141%52%45%38%38%
Tennessee142%51%42%43%47%
Texas237%55%44%38%38%
Utah138%60%34%26%26%
Vermont163%33%67%59%51%
Virginia144%54%53%45%44%
Washington151%45%57%53%50%
West Virginia0NoneNone43%43%46%
Wisconsin346%49%56%50%48%
Wyoming0NoneNone33%29%28%
NATIONAL48% (47%)46% (47%)53%48%48%
Logged
Devilman88
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,498


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4747 on: May 08, 2010, 12:43:09 PM »

Wow, I didn't know that NC was so close to the National avg.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4748 on: May 08, 2010, 03:18:12 PM »

is that for his entire presidency? I doubt he has a 47% in AZ and SC but only 45% in PA. How old are those numbers? Rasmussen is the most accurate too. Look at their data for 2004 and 2008. They didn't miss a single state in 2004.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4749 on: May 08, 2010, 03:37:20 PM »

is that for his entire presidency? I doubt he has a 47% in AZ and SC but only 45% in PA. How old are those numbers? Rasmussen is the most accurate too. Look at their data for 2004 and 2008. They didn't miss a single state in 2004.

Read the methodology.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 185 186 187 188 189 [190] 191 192 193 194 195 ... 410  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.326 seconds with 10 queries.