The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:22:30 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 ... 332 333 334 335 336 [337] 338 339 340 341 342 ... 410
Author Topic: The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread  (Read 1205209 times)
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8400 on: August 05, 2011, 10:46:35 AM »

I am positive neither pbrower or JJ's analyses are biased by their political beliefs at all.

I don't know.  I think Obama can win in a good economy.  However, I think we're heading into recession.  We'll know the second one first.

Obviously, Obamacare was not politically popular.
Logged
Penelope
Scifiguy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8401 on: August 05, 2011, 11:51:34 AM »

I am positive neither pbrower or JJ's analyses are biased by their political beliefs at all.

I don't know.  I think Obama can win in a good economy.  However, I think we're heading into recession.  We'll know the second one first.

Obviously, Obamacare was not politically popular.

We're can't be entering a new recession, we never left the old one. If we keep getting private sector job growth through 2012, then we'll see a fairly big victory for Barack Obama.

'Obamacare' was not unpopular in the fashion that you appear to be spinning it. A lot of people did not like Obama's healthcare reform because they thought it did not go far enough, and that will not drive them to vote for Mitt Romney, or whoever the GOP candidate will be.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8402 on: August 05, 2011, 03:00:48 PM »

I am positive neither pbrower or JJ's analyses are biased by their political beliefs at all.

I am aware of my bias and try to keep it separate from analysis. Sure, I want President Obama to win re-election, the Democrats to hold onto the Senate and take back the House... but everyone knows that. I don't try to sugar-coat the polls. Some are just more meaningful and reliable than others.

I do not predict trends; I am not a day-trader.  I am not everywhere, so I cannot figure out what is going on everywhere. It is generally possible to translate some data (the President has 47% approval in Virginia) into a prediction of an electoral result based on that poll (that he would win the state 51-48).

Today Rasmussen showed  a 47% approval for the President. Whether that is a bit high or low is a matter of taste. If the President had to start campaigning from that position nationwide, then on the average he would gain 6% if the rules for gain for an incumbent President were the same for an incumbent Governor or Senator. This fits because almost all Presidents are former Governors or Senators and parlay their practice in statewide campaigns to nationwide campaigns. You can see why that gain would be the average for a candidate of 'average' skill as a campaigner facing the 'average' challenger under the sorts of economic conditions typical for such an approval rating.   Governing or legislating and campaigning are tow different things.

Approval ratings will rise with events (whacking Osama bin Laden) and fall (the Debt Ceiling debate). I have not tried to predict how the Debt Ceiling law would affect the President's approval rating. Even so the political process is effectively gridlocked and it will so remain until the end of the current Congress.

Day-to-day and week-to-week changes in the polls are at most statistical noise. So it is with Gallup , PPP, Rasmussen, or even SurveyUSA.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8403 on: August 05, 2011, 03:08:06 PM »

6% rule, lol
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8404 on: August 05, 2011, 06:20:11 PM »

I am positive neither pbrower or JJ's analyses are biased by their political beliefs at all.

I don't know.  I think Obama can win in a good economy.  However, I think we're heading into recession.  We'll know the second one first.

Obviously, Obamacare was not politically popular.

We're can't be entering a new recession, we never left the old one. If we keep getting private sector job growth through 2012, then we'll see a fairly big victory for Barack Obama.

'Obamacare' was not unpopular in the fashion that you appear to be spinning it. A lot of people did not like Obama's healthcare reform because they thought it did not go far enough, and that will not drive them to vote for Mitt Romney, or whoever the GOP candidate will be.

Your definition of a recession is a weird one. Under the standard definition, the recession ended in June 2009. There is no rule that says, "you can't have another recession until you have regained all the lost GDP and jobs". That is not how the cycles of expansion and contraction work.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8405 on: August 05, 2011, 06:21:29 PM »

I am positive neither pbrower or JJ's analyses are biased by their political beliefs at all.

I don't know.  I think Obama can win in a good economy.  However, I think we're heading into recession.  We'll know the second one first.

Obviously, Obamacare was not politically popular.

We're can't be entering a new recession, we never left the old one. If we keep getting private sector job growth through 2012, then we'll see a fairly big victory for Barack Obama.

'Obamacare' was not unpopular in the fashion that you appear to be spinning it. A lot of people did not like Obama's healthcare reform because they thought it did not go far enough, and that will not drive them to vote for Mitt Romney, or whoever the GOP candidate will be.

Obama's big strategy was to pass Obamacare and this, according to him, was going to raise Democrats popularity and secure Congress.  How many seats did it gain the Democrats in the House in 2010?
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8406 on: August 05, 2011, 06:23:43 PM »


Gallup, meh- Obama

Approve:  41%, u

Disapprove:  52%, u

Logged
bloombergforpresident
obama12
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 376


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8407 on: August 05, 2011, 10:25:54 PM »

Do you think Obama's numbers might dip into the 30s since the debt downgrade?
Logged
Penelope
Scifiguy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8408 on: August 05, 2011, 10:28:00 PM »

Do you think Obama's numbers might dip into the 30s since the debt downgrade?

Almost certainly.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8409 on: August 05, 2011, 10:30:21 PM »


Have you ever seen the rationale?

If anything I am less generous than Nate Silver because  an incumbent President can never get more than 62% of the vote. On the other side, I assume that if the President's approval rating is below 40% in a state, then he is unlikely to do much campaigning in that state.  
Logged
bloombergforpresident
obama12
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 376


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8410 on: August 05, 2011, 10:35:01 PM »

Do you think Obama's numbers might dip into the 30s since the debt downgrade?

Almost certainly.

Agreed. He's screwed especially since the stock markets might plunge Monday.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8411 on: August 05, 2011, 10:47:16 PM »

Obam+ runs the very good chance of being seen as:

1.  An ineffectual leader.

2.  The president who brought economic disaster.
Logged
Penelope
Scifiguy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8412 on: August 05, 2011, 10:48:40 PM »

Obam+ runs the very good chance of being seen as:

1.  An ineffectual leader.

2.  The president who brought economic disaster.

lol

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nation right now if you think that only Barack Obama will be seen in a poor light. 
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8413 on: August 05, 2011, 11:29:45 PM »

We will see how Obama performs come 2012, and if he's in the same waters compared to 2011, he's gone.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8414 on: August 05, 2011, 11:59:47 PM »

Obam+ runs the very good chance of being seen as:

1.  An ineffectual leader.

2.  The president who brought economic disaster.

lol

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nation right now if you think that only Barack Obama will be seen in a poor light. 

He's currently the only president in the running. He's suppose to be the guy in charge.  Re-elections are referendums of incumbents.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8415 on: August 06, 2011, 12:37:14 AM »

We will see how Obama performs come 2012, and if he's in the same waters compared to 2011, he's gone.

I think this is the key.  Obama, or Obam+, could survive very low poll numbers, if there is time to recover.  Reagan and Clinton were in the mid-30's, but it was prior to 18 months out.

Ford, Carter, and GHW Bush all "troughed" in the last 18 months of their presidencies, and all recovered a bit by election day, but none of them won that election.

GW Bush was the bit of the exception, but his numbers bounced from a post 911 trough in 2003 (Iraq invasion).

All this is from Gallup.

Obama has not yet troughed, and I'd expect his numbers go lower.  If this was August of 2009 or 2010, I'd say this was totally meaningless.  It's 2011.
Logged
Penelope
Scifiguy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8416 on: August 06, 2011, 09:19:43 AM »

Obam+ runs the very good chance of being seen as:

1.  An ineffectual leader.

2.  The president who brought economic disaster.

lol

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nation right now if you think that only Barack Obama will be seen in a poor light. 

He's currently the only president in the running. He's suppose to be the guy in charge.  Re-elections are referendums of incumbents.

Yes, it is a referendum of the incumbent, but the Republicans are also going to get a hellstorm of anger as well. You are incredibly silly if you somehow think that only Barack Obama is going to get anger over the debt crisis that the GOP manufactured.
Logged
Penelope
Scifiguy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8417 on: August 06, 2011, 09:29:56 AM »

We will see how Obama performs come 2012, and if he's in the same waters compared to 2011, he's gone.

I think this is the key.  Obama, or Obam+, could survive very low poll numbers, if there is time to recover.  Reagan and Clinton were in the mid-30's, but it was prior to 18 months out.

Ford, Carter, and GHW Bush all "troughed" in the last 18 months of their presidencies, and all recovered a bit by election day, but none of them won that election.

GW Bush was the bit of the exception, but his numbers bounced from a post 911 trough in 2003 (Iraq invasion).

All this is from Gallup.

Obama has not yet troughed, and I'd expect his numbers go lower.  If this was August of 2009 or 2010, I'd say this was totally meaningless.  It's 2011.

1. HW had approvals in the 70s before his trough.

2. Neither Carter nor Bush really recovered from their trough, and Ford is a special case that is pretty incomparable. Carter was somewhere in the 30s on election day, and Bush was around 40%. Meanwhile, Truman troughed around the same time Obama looks to be about to, and went on to recover and win re-election.
Logged
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 #8418 on: August 06, 2011, 09:53:56 AM »

Rasmussen is still at 47-52 today.

And:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8419 on: August 06, 2011, 10:07:33 AM »
« Edited: August 06, 2011, 03:49:42 PM by J. J. »


Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 47, u.

Disapprove 52%, u.

"Strongly Approve" is at 25%, +1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 39%, -u.

As with yesterday, either some improvement for Obama, or a bad sample.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8420 on: August 06, 2011, 10:52:40 AM »

We will see how Obama performs come 2012, and if he's in the same waters compared to 2011, he's gone.

I think this is the key.  Obama, or Obam+, could survive very low poll numbers, if there is time to recover.  Reagan and Clinton were in the mid-30's, but it was prior to 18 months out.

Ford, Carter, and GHW Bush all "troughed" in the last 18 months of their presidencies, and all recovered a bit by election day, but none of them won that election.

GW Bush was the bit of the exception, but his numbers bounced from a post 911 trough in 2003 (Iraq invasion).

All this is from Gallup.

Obama has not yet troughed, and I'd expect his numbers go lower.  If this was August of 2009 or 2010, I'd say this was totally meaningless.  It's 2011.

1. HW had approvals in the 70s before his trough.

2. Neither Carter nor Bush really recovered from their trough, and Ford is a special case that is pretty incomparable. Carter was somewhere in the 30s on election day, and Bush was around 40%. Meanwhile, Truman troughed around the same time Obama looks to be about to, and went on to recover and win re-election.

1.  GHW Bush's high poll numbers are irrelevant because we are talking the low. His low was 29% in August of 1992.

2.  I think neither Carter nor Bush (and both had other factors in their poll numbers) basically had any time to recover, and that is the point.  Turman's Gallup first term trough was in September 1946. at 33%.  He was up to 56% by mid March in 1947.  He dropped again in 1948, but never to those lows.

The question will be, will Obama trough over the next six months?  His low as 40% as a single number, but on the comparison chart he's at his lowest now, 42%.  http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx  Arguably, he's troughing on Gallup, but is he going to go lower?  No president has lost re-election with a maximum trough that high, but none have won re-election with the maximum trough in the 18 months prior to the election.



Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,542


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8421 on: August 06, 2011, 12:57:53 PM »

Oh, please, you had the same situation with Reagan, a small majority in the Senate and an increasingly hostile House; his attempts to run against Tip O'Neil failed.  As for the Tea Party, as noted, they didn't get everything they wanted, because of the Senate.

Obama would have to do what Clinton did, and triangulate.  When he tried with Democrats in the Senate, he got shot down.  Then he lapsed into passivity.

I doubt that this shift to the GOP is reversible.  Further, Obama, the incumbent, seems to be much less popular than Obama the candidate.  As for seniors, Obama was the one promoting Medicare cuts, and Obamacare, one he said would solve everything, hasn't.

People are wiser to how Obama will do as president, because they've him do it for four years (in 2012).  "Yes we can" is rapidly becoming "No he hasn't."  He's losing groups across the boards; he's only up with a majority with Democrats, African Americans, and people with advanced degrees.  There is a fair amount of over in that group.

If the economy improves by January, he had good shot; if after that, the economy doesn't clear up, he's done for.

Obama basically has to get the economy improving by the second quarter of next year.  If the economy starts to turn around in the summer of 2012, it will be too late.  People's opinions about the economy harden sometime between March and June of an election year.
Logged
Penelope
Scifiguy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8422 on: August 06, 2011, 01:24:11 PM »

Gallup

Dissaprove: 50% (-2)

Approve: 42% (+1)

Logged
Penelope
Scifiguy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8423 on: August 06, 2011, 01:24:45 PM »

Oh, please, you had the same situation with Reagan, a small majority in the Senate and an increasingly hostile House; his attempts to run against Tip O'Neil failed.  As for the Tea Party, as noted, they didn't get everything they wanted, because of the Senate.

Obama would have to do what Clinton did, and triangulate.  When he tried with Democrats in the Senate, he got shot down.  Then he lapsed into passivity.

I doubt that this shift to the GOP is reversible.  Further, Obama, the incumbent, seems to be much less popular than Obama the candidate.  As for seniors, Obama was the one promoting Medicare cuts, and Obamacare, one he said would solve everything, hasn't.

People are wiser to how Obama will do as president, because they've him do it for four years (in 2012).  "Yes we can" is rapidly becoming "No he hasn't."  He's losing groups across the boards; he's only up with a majority with Democrats, African Americans, and people with advanced degrees.  There is a fair amount of over in that group.

If the economy improves by January, he had good shot; if after that, the economy doesn't clear up, he's done for.

Obama basically has to get the economy improving by the second quarter of next year.  If the economy starts to turn around in the summer of 2012, it will be too late.  People's opinions about the economy harden sometime between March and June of an election year.

Yes dear, we all know. That's why McCain won in '08.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8424 on: August 06, 2011, 03:51:09 PM »

Oh, please, you had the same situation with Reagan, a small majority in the Senate and an increasingly hostile House; his attempts to run against Tip O'Neil failed.  As for the Tea Party, as noted, they didn't get everything they wanted, because of the Senate.

Obama would have to do what Clinton did, and triangulate.  When he tried with Democrats in the Senate, he got shot down.  Then he lapsed into passivity.

I doubt that this shift to the GOP is reversible.  Further, Obama, the incumbent, seems to be much less popular than Obama the candidate.  As for seniors, Obama was the one promoting Medicare cuts, and Obamacare, one he said would solve everything, hasn't.

People are wiser to how Obama will do as president, because they've him do it for four years (in 2012).  "Yes we can" is rapidly becoming "No he hasn't."  He's losing groups across the boards; he's only up with a majority with Democrats, African Americans, and people with advanced degrees.  There is a fair amount of over in that group.

If the economy improves by January, he had good shot; if after that, the economy doesn't clear up, he's done for.

Obama basically has to get the economy improving by the second quarter of next year.  If the economy starts to turn around in the summer of 2012, it will be too late.  People's opinions about the economy harden sometime between March and June of an election year.

Yes dear, we all know. That's why McCain won in '08.

Not to mention GHW Bush. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 332 333 334 335 336 [337] 338 339 340 341 342 ... 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 0.075 seconds with 10 queries.