Daily Presidential Tracking Poll (-5)

rasmussenreports.com ^ | 7/8/2009

[SonOfDarkSkies]

Wednesday, July 08, 2009 Email a Friend Email to a Friend ShareThis Advertisement

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 32% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-seven percent (37%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of –5.

[Frantzie]

Thanks. If people think things are going to get better they are dreaming. The Dems wanted to give credit to people who could not repay it and they are still doing it. Banks were sued if they did not loan money to people incapable or repayment. The whole system of credit scores was destyroyed by community activist lawsuits (Obama).

Nothing has changed. Investment capital will not come to the USA if creditors and investors are treated the same way they were treated in Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Argentina, etc.

[Larightgirl]

LOL @ obama-tuplets!

[rdl6989]

Bttt!

[SeattleBruce]

“The media just eat it up,”
+++++++++++=

We need to both kill and circumvent the enemedia...

[GOP Poet]

Oh YEAH!! I like!

[LS]

You're making a big assumption (erroneous, I think) that stimulus money a) will work; b) will actually be "released" when it is supposed to be (this is government, remember?) and c) that it won't cause the opposite effect.

No, I'm not worried about that. You cannot spend your way to prosperity. Even FDR only managed about two years of uptick, but proportionally spent gazillions more than Obama has.

Second, it's not just the economy. I think people are sick of the apologies, sick of the coddling of dictators, sick of even the drive-bys noting that none of the world leaders (except the Muslims) like this guy.

[Munz]

>You’re making a big assumption (erroneous, I think) that stimulus money a) will work; b) will actually be “released” when it is supposed to be (this is government, remember?) and c) that it won’t cause the opposite effect.<

you misunderstood my train of thought I think. I don;t believe for a millisecond that the stimulus money will actually help anything. Just that it will give the appearance that it has started to work and that it needs time. That is what the democraps will say and I think that the MSM will buy into it. (or at least report it) You know people like Matthews will say something like : It took Bush 8 years to do this to us, Obama needs more than a year and a half or something like that.

>No, I’m not worried about that. You cannot spend your way to prosperity. Even FDR only managed about two years of uptick, but proportionally spent gazillions more than Obama has.<

I think that the 12 trillion that has been committed is about the very worst thing that could have been done. I think it was systematically done by Obama to weaken every citizen so that they become reliant on the government. So that he can take over business sectors by finance or legislation / regulation. You definitely can NOT spend your way into prosperity. When your going bankrupt, you don’t spend money, you cut corners, you make sales easier and more affordable. Obama has done the opposite.

>Second, it’s not just the economy. I think people are sick of the apologies, sick of the coddling of dictators, sick of even the drive-bys noting that none of the world leaders (except the Muslims) like this guy.<

I just don’t know. It depends on where they are getting their news. I would think that his popularity would be in the tank now. If he were doing this in the 60’s or 70’s they would be trying to lynch him now. But the media was more conservative and honest then.
Now his popularity, although slipping, is still remarkably high considering what he has done.
Although on a positive note which encourages your position, people don’t like his policies, even though they still seem to like him.... they can’t seem to make the connections that his policies are his true character showing in action.

It’s like the American people are voting on dancing with the stars or something. They like him, so they vote for him, even though he sucks at dancing .. if you understand my analogy.

[Munz]

>We need to both kill and circumvent the enemedia...<

Somehow I think we would be better off using them as a tool for our own agenda. that takes a smart politician.
If we only had one, maybe Sarah can do it, don’t know yet.

[LS]

"Now his popularity, although slipping, is still remarkably high considering what he has done."

Could be wrong, but I think he is lower than Reagan, Clinton, Bush, or even Jimmy Carter at this point in the presidency.

[SeattleBruce]

>We need to both kill and circumvent the enemedia...<

Somehow I think we would be better off using them as a tool for our own agenda. that takes a smart politician.
If we only had one, maybe Sarah can do it, don’t know yet.
+++++++++++++

Good point...but just recall the reading and comprehension levels and attention span of 50% of American adults.

[Munz]

>Good point...but just recall the reading and comprehension levels and attention span of 50% of American adults.<

Which is why so many still love zero.
they can handle about a 30 second blurb and that’s it.
headlines from the media, true or false are what leave the impression.

You can make or break the issue at hand in that time. The first 30 seconds is *crucial* to how the story or event is perceived.

We need to make sure that the first 30 seconds of any story are put out in a favorable light for us and against them.

If I lost you, pm me, I’ll explain.

[Munz]

SeattleBruce sent me some excellent links today regarding this.
I’ll repost them here so you can see as well. I haven;’t looked over them yet - they are tabbed and i’m saving them for a look later

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/popularity.php

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-presapp0605-31.html

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116677/presidential-approval-ratings-gallup-historical-statistics-trends.aspx#2

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2287204/posts?page=163#163

[SeattleBruce]

Bruce: Good point...but just recall the reading and comprehension levels and attention span of 50% of American adults.

Munz: Which is why so many still love zero.
they can handle about a 30 second blurb and that’s it.
headlines from the media, true or false are what leave the impression.

You can make or break the issue at hand in that time. The first 30 seconds is *crucial* to how the story or event is perceived.

We need to make sure that the first 30 seconds of any story are put out in a favorable light for us and against them.
+++++++++++

Another great point. The battle with the media won't be won, until we take back the first 30 seconds of the news cycle...they are dying, but they still basically control that (except for conservatives and thoughtful independents, who get their news from reliable, non-bigoted sources.)

Understand me when I say, I know that all news sources have a basic bias. It used to be that there was a professionalism to journalism, as with accounting and medicine, etc., that meant that journalists, ATTEMPTED to check their bias at the door. Now that effort to be professional, is out the door. Now their just gigolos and whores for their perceived ‘cause.’ They are bigots. They are the enemy. They are the enemedia.

[Munz]

>Understand me when I say, I know that all news sources have a basic bias. It used to be that there was a professionalism to journalism, as with accounting and medicine, etc., that meant that journalists, ATTEMPTED to check their bias at the door. Now that effort to be professional, is out the door. Now their just gigolos and whores for their perceived ‘cause.’ They are bigots. They are the enemy. They are the enemedia.<

Your 100% right, when those advertising dollars came in, the integrity went out. Plus the fact that so many have actually changed their titles to “commentators” but the public accept them as “journalists”

because of that short attention span you mentioned, they have to sensationalize and captivate with antics.
I only ever posted one video it is here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHDteLh56tY

I took the voice out to show what a pos this woman (Rachel maddows) is and how blatant her attempt is at selling her point of view.

Why she didn’t just dress up as a circus performer is beyond me. But without the voice it is clear to me anyway what her tactic is. This is why I do not watch any MSM now, all my news is from print, so i am not subconsciously moved one way or another. I can analytically decide for myself.

Thank god for the FR!!!!