The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread

[Bull Moose Base]

I'd like to see this thing without Rasmussen.  Their polls are always more in favor of Republicans than anyone else's and no one objective thinks it's accidental.

[Bull Moose Base]

I'd like to see this thing without Rasmussen.  Their polls are always more in favor of Republicans than anyone else's and no one objective thinks it's accidental.

But every other company is a Liberal hack company, didn't you know?

Including that company called "the voters" that favored the Democrat in 4 of the last 5 elections.

[Bull Moose Base]

The one consistency in presidential approval ratings over the years is inconsistency.  The one predictable thing is unpredictability.  He's still not one third of the way between Inauguration and Election Day 2012.  Obama's approvals have fallen in the 14 months since he started, and they're very likely to both rise and fall at different points over the course of the 31 months between now and his next election.  Where they end up in November 2012 will be hard to predict even in March of 2012, let alone now.  The end.

[Bull Moose Base]

Midterm results are in!!

Rasmussen in month before election consistently showed Republicans 3-4 points stronger than they ended up.

...as per 538.

[Bull Moose Base]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/15/cnn-poll-election-not-a-mandate-for-gop/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And Democrats more favorably viewed than Republicans (though both parties negatively)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Bull Moose Base]

I bet we'll see a drop this week from deflated support on the left.

EDIT: Even before the tax cuts deal, arguably the most unpopular with thing he has done as far as the base is concerned, I think about 20% of those disapproving said they felt so because he wasn't liberal enough.  That number will shoot up this week.  He may fall below 40% approval in the wake of this.

[Bull Moose Base]

For what it is worth, Senator Amy Klobuchar looks very safe in Minnesota:

Minnesota Survey Results
Q1 Do you approve or disapprove of Senator Al
Franken’s job performance?
Approve .......................................................... 45%
Disapprove...................................................... 42%
Not sure .......................................................... 13%

Q2 Do you approve or disapprove of Senator Amy
Klobuchar’s job performance?
Approve .......................................................... 59%
Disapprove...................................................... 29%
Not sure .......................................................... 12%

Michelle Bachmann is poison in any statewide race:


Q3 Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion
of Michele Bachmann?
Favorable........................................................ 37%
Unfavorable .................................................... 51%
Not sure .......................................................... 11%

Michelle Bachmann will energize the Hard Right nationwide, but any Republican who attaches himself or herself to her rides a dead horse into quicksand. I'm going to guess that Sarah Palin is crass enough and Newt Gingrich is amoral enough to do so, but nothing is said about approval of President Obama in Minnesota in the Minnesota polls by PPP except that "President Obama could use Senator Klobuchar's coattails".

If I were to hazard a guess, then I would figure that as in Michigan, no Southern reactionary is going to win Minnesota for a very long time. Heck, Ronald Reagan lost this state twice -- and it was the only state that he lost in 1984, and Reagan had no regional weaknesses as a candidate. Mitt Romney might fare better than anyone else as a GOP nominee, but likely still lose Minnesota in a close election nationwide. Minnesota is much like Michigan in its politics except that Michigan has more blacks and more exposure to the auto industry. I don't have a poll for Minnesota and President Obama, so Minnesota remains gray on my maps for now.


You see it here first: Amy Klobuchar could well be the next President of the United States.

That is 2016, which is a long way off. But who else would you bet on? She could be the third person not a WASP male to be President (JFK and Obama are the first two).   
 

Agree on Klobuchar.  Gillibrand is also a good bet to run and do well.  And I don't necessarily think splitting the female vote would be all that big an effect since they are a majority of the electorate and we're just about at the point where almost all men would be willing to vote for a woman for president.  So I could even see a scenario where those two are the two last women standing.  And as I wrote once in the long-term trends thread, I think people are underestimating the chance of the Democratic ticket in 2016 being both women.  Intuitively that feels like a big step, but I bet voters would accept it much easier than people think.

I also think Franken is woefully under-apprectiated up there.

[Bull Moose Base]

Ya, I think Gillibrand benefits from being in Hillary's seat, the biggest media market and a fundraising talent.  I'm guessing based on frustrations with Obama that someone particularly scrappy might fare well in a primary.  And I do think there will be Democrats first elected in 2012 who garner considerable 2016 buzz as Obama did it in 4 years and the Christie buzz.  Maybe just a product of the internet world.

[Bull Moose Base]

I bet we'll see a drop this week from deflated support on the left.

EDIT: Even before the tax cuts deal, arguably the most unpopular with thing he has done as far as the base is concerned, I think about 20% of those disapproving said they felt so because he wasn't liberal enough.  That number will shoot up this week.  He may fall below 40% approval in the wake of this.

I don't think so.  This plan is, so far anyway, relatively popular, and Obama getting some visible distance between him and Liberal Democrats will probably help his image.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145109/Americans-Support-Major-Elements-Tax-Compromise.aspx

Andrew Sullivan agrees with you.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/12/winning-back-the-independents-.html

[Bull Moose Base]

I bet we'll see a drop this week from deflated support on the left.

EDIT: Even before the tax cuts deal, arguably the most unpopular with thing he has done as far as the base is concerned, I think about 20% of those disapproving said they felt so because he wasn't liberal enough.  That number will shoot up this week.  He may fall below 40% approval in the wake of this.

Not quite below 40.  Though they're still a decent bet to come home  once the election kicks in.

[Bull Moose Base]

Not surprised Rasmussen is higher than other polls since their more Republican sample won't reflect Obama's recent alienation of liberals to the extent other polls do.

[Bull Moose Base]

I honestly find Gillibrand pretty underwhelming.  Klobuchar, sure.  I could see her run for president at some point.  But Gillibrand?  Is there anything more there than the fact that she's a young female Senator from New York?

I think frustrations stemming from Hillary near miss and Obama's compromises will help a female with a strong progressive record and being from NY will allow her to vote very liberal.  She's not Elizabeth Warren but I highly doubt Warren will run.  KG seems quite likely to.

[Bull Moose Base]

But you haven't strongly suspected a skewed anti-Obama sample the last 2 years?

[Bull Moose Base]

I'm curious if Obama starts polling above 50 in the next few months if any of the presumed candidates will get cold feet and bail on a run.  I don't think you'll see any majors get in before mid-March.

I'm continuing to assume Palin and Huckabee won't say anything in the 1st half of 2011.  It'll also be curious to see how they continue to poll without announcing or campaigning.  Obama being over 50% for 6 months would probably keep Huck out and maybe Palin as her head-to-head gap would grow.

[Bull Moose Base]

Obama Approval rating December 2010 (Gallup)

46% Approve

46% Disapprove

Trends for comparison

Carter 51/34 (December 1978)

Reagan 41/50 (December 1982)

Bush I 61/32 (December 1990)

Clinton 41/52 (December 1994)

Bush II 63/32 (December 2002)

Two years before...
The 2 least approved ended up easily re-elected. 
The 3 most approved either lost big or won narrowly with <50% approval.

[Bull Moose Base]

I'm curious if Obama starts polling above 50 in the next few months if any of the presumed candidates will get cold feet and bail on a run.  I don't think you'll see any majors get in before mid-March.

I'm continuing to assume Palin and Huckabee won't say anything in the 1st half of 2011.  It'll also be curious to see how they continue to poll without announcing or campaigning.  Obama being over 50% for 6 months would probably keep Huck out and maybe Palin as her head-to-head gap would grow.

Any guesses?  I'd say the bigger the opportunity cost, the more likely to pass, like Pence or Huckabee.  And maybe someone like Thune or Daniels if they had mixed feelings to begin with.

[Bull Moose Base]

Could be the snowstorms.

[Bull Moose Base]

Gallup
49 approve
43 disapprove

[Bull Moose Base]

Gallup 53.  Highest in a year.

[Bull Moose Base]

Really bad jobs numbers today. A deficit-deal that by Obama's own analysis people won't like (and people don't necessarily care much about the deficit anyway) or potential market panic if deal crumbles.  The next couple weeks look to be ugly in this department.  He should probably kill Gaddafi.

[Bull Moose Base]

Has there ever been a nominee as strongly favored and well-positioned as Hillary who didn't win the nomination?  If you want to pretend Obama's political skill is comparable to that of Ford (who never won a race bigger than a congressional district) knock yourself out.

[Bull Moose Base]

Has there ever been a nominee as strongly favored and well-positioned as Hillary who didn't win the nomination?  If you want to pretend Obama's political skill is comparable to that of Ford (who never won a race bigger than a congressional district) knock yourself out.

Excluding incumbents who dropped out (Truman, LBJ) or candidates who self-destructed (Hart), Muskie comes to mind. And nobody he ran against (certainly not McGovern) had anywhere near the charisma of Obama or even Edwards. Kennedy also started as a near-shoo-in against Carter, though primarying an incumbent is always tricky.

Unless they're under siege in some dramatic way, I think most presidents start off with the presumption that they are political savants; it's like the early SNL joke about Ford, "If He's So Dumb, How Come He's President?" The Bush I team were considered Machivellian geniuses as late as the Clarence Thomas hearings in Oct. '91. This William Safire column from June '80 notes the "conventional wisdom" that Carter is "an inept president but a great political campaigner."

There are three incumbents on that list who lost re-election.  Safire's hyperbole notwithstanding, none were remotely close to Obama in political talent.  Two of the presidents lost to opponents who were way more talented campaigners, the other had never won a race bigger than a CD.  And none were dealing with a conspicuously obstructionist congress.  This doesn't mean he can't lose or his approval rating isn't a factor.  But it does mean we should hesitate to extrapolate x is the approval rating cut-off from that very limited data from dissimilar circumstances.

[Bull Moose Base]

There are three incumbents on that list who lost re-election.  Safire's hyperbole notwithstanding, none were remotely close to Obama in political talent.  Two of the presidents lost to opponents who were way more talented campaigners, the other had never won a race bigger than a CD.  And none were dealing with a conspicuously obstructionist congress.  This doesn't mean he can't lose or his approval rating isn't a factor.  But it does mean we should hesitate to extrapolate x is the approval rating cut-off from that very limited data from dissimilar circumstances.

Is Obama more of a political talent than Ford, Carter or Bush 1? Yeah, almost certainly (not that this is a high bar to clear). But again, at the start of the '92 election, Bush was not thought of as a political no-talent but as a guy who decimated Dukakis after trailing by 17 points. Carter was perceived as an ex-peanut farmer who became president kinda miraculously after serving a single gubernatorial term. "Safire's hyperbole" was not his own view, but a recitation of the CW about Carter - this Guardian postmortem on the campaign describes "electioneering" as the "one skill" Carter "was reputed to have." Basically, anyone talented enough to get elected president is going to be thought of as a highly talented campaigner. Obama's really not unique in that regard.

In point of fact, Ford and Bush did have hostile opposition congresses, which they tried to run against, Truman-style, before moving on to other strategies (check their convention acceptance speeches).

Bush Sr had beaten an inept national candidate Mike Dukakis, then faced Bill Clinton for re-election. Jimmy Carter had beaten a fairly weak candidate who'd never won more than a CD and pardoned Nixon without explaining himself, then faced Reagan for re-election.  Carter's primary win wasn't unimpressive but nowhere close to what Obama pulled off beating Hillary Clinton for the nomination.  And whichever Republican he faces won't be nearly as tough as Reagan or Clinton.

I don't believe the Democratic congress in 76 and 92 was perceived as anywhere close to as obstructionist or radical as this GOP one is so the fact that Ford or Bush Sr tried to swipe at them tells me little.  Simply put, Ford losing with 45% approval doesn't convince me Obama can't win with lower approval.

[Bull Moose Base]

Obama average approval now at -3.1  (RealClear), he has been in negative territory for about 2 weeks, I expect he get some sort a bump when the debt ceiling is raised and he takes credit for whatever "compromise" occurs.

Bet no bump and bet Obama doesn't expect one.

[Bull Moose Base]

Downgrade may bring Obama's approval down but GOP would be hurt far worse I think.  A big debt reducer would probably be more unpopular than popular and hurt both sides a little but equally.  Grand bargain is then smarter for GOP but they appear to either be betting Obama takes bigger hit than they do which seems dumb or they don't care if they lose the House as long as they win back the White House, which I'm sort of skeptical of since they'd lose their own jobs.  So I guess I'll go with dumb.  But I'm open to persuasion otherwise.