"From tiny ACORNs grow mighty oaks."
Posted on 07/30/2009 3:26:56 PM PDT by dangus
In 1993, Bill Clinton’s approval ratings sank to 37%, according to a Gallup poll at the time. Yet he was re-elected. Does this mean that Obama can survive his own sinking approval ratings? Maybe not.
The low approval ratings of President Clinton were partly due to an American public withholding judgment on his presidency. Unlike President Obama, Clinton had been elected with a mere plurality (43%) of the vote. Clinton’s disapproval ratings peaked at 49%. In 1996, he was again elected with a mere plurality (49%) of the vote.
In 1994, the Republican party swept into power, gaining 52 house seats and ten senate seats. Certainly, anger at President Clinton’s liberalism helped motivate many Republican voters. Yet Clinton had already recovered his approval rating to 49%. Most generic Congressional preference polls failed to detect a Republican-voting majority. The opposition to Obama is much sharper. Fully 40% of Americans strongly disapprove of Obama’s performance in office, according to the latest Rasmussen poll; although the Rasmussen poll did not exist in 1993, this is likely considerably higher than President Clinton ever would have achieved.
This polling data points to a possible Republican tsunami. That may not be good for conservatives. The Republicans hold most of the Senate seats up for grabs, and need to gain 11 more, for an historic 27 wins. For the Republicans to recapture the Senate, they’d have to win in states as profoundly liberal as New York, California, New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii and Delaware. The winners would likely include many “moderates” who would vote with the Democrats on most contentious issues. Conservatives might be better to have 43 conservative Republicans, 5 Democrat-voting Republicans and 52 Democrats in the Senate than to have 43 conservative Republicans, 10 Democrat-voting Republicans and 47 Democrats in the Senate. If the country is to be controlled by liberals, isn’t it better that Democrats take the blame?
Barring a surprise such as a sudden, sharp reversal in the rising unemployment rate, the Republicans will gain plenty of seats to block a Democratic agenda; they only need 40 in the Senate. Conservatives would be wise focusing on winning primary elections and contributing to true conservatives than supporting candidates who are merely “the lesser of two evils.”
He fortunately got a Republican congress who kept him from being himself and doing every sort of liberal Utopian scheme obama is doing.
And then much like this last election, Republicans ran one of the worst possible candidates: Bob Dole. God bless the man for his service to our country, but he was a horrible candidate.
obama's re-election is a very long way off and obama isn't getting off to a very good start, while doing a lot of damage. Voters will be feeling the results from obama, Reid and Pelosi's bohica treatment of America by 2010. That election could save obama just like the midterm saved Clinton.
>>What the article forgot to mention was that Clinton also won with a plurality in 1996. <<
Actually, the 2nd paragraph states exactly that: “In 1996, he was again elected with a mere plurality (49%) of the vote.”
I agree: Read the article.
Rasmussen puts the Republicans up +4% in the generic congressional preference survey; NPR has them +1; GWU/Battleground still shows a Dem lead of +3; Given the Democrats’ concentration in urban districts which vote 90%+ Democratic, a tie goes to the Republicans.
Limbo, Limbo. How low can he go?
For him to win again the GOP has to run a Bob Dole or John McCain. We are doomed!
The rebound in impeached ex-President Clinton's ratings were mostly due to the fiscal responsibility enforced on him from the Republic House and Senate. He won reelection because they put up a tired old man (I attended a Bob Dole campaign speech - my heart began to sink there when I heard him speak) and because so many promises from the Contract With America were broken.
One should keep in mind that those ACORN goons control not only the census but also elections now.They have 4-8 billion $$$ to build vote count and the DoJ to suppress registrars and state actions against vote fraud.
If the election “saves” Hussein by taking away his Congress and Hussein has not by then already passed any of his Socialist America initiatives then he will be survivable.At the point that any of his initiatives passes, it ceases to matter who wins what in 2010 or any other election.
It could be with the right candidate. We had soon-to-be-President Reagan running then. If another Dole or McCain (or any of the other clowns in the class of 2008 primaries) is put up, it won't be.
Bump for truth. I attended a Bob Dole campaign rally and "lackluster" is probably the nicest word I could apply to it.
While that would have been true if one were to forecast this last year, recent changes, including Specter's conversion and Clinton's and Biden's departures, now puts the numbers as 18 current Republican and 18 current Democratic seats to be contested in 2012.
I agree we must ship all of them to Devil’s Island in chains to serve hard time.
2010 looks pretty good, with or without a US invasion of Iran.
"From tiny ACORNs grow mighty oaks."
2010 is looking better by the day.
The low approval ratings of President Clinton were partly due to an American public withholding judgment on his presidency. Unlike President Obama, Clinton had been elected with a mere plurality (43%) of the vote. Clinton’s disapproval ratings peaked at 49%. In 1996, he was again elected with a mere plurality (49%) of the vote.FDR got a majority of the popular vote in 1944. LBJ did it in 1964. Obama got just over a majority of votes cast (the minor party candidates pooled just over 1.2 per cent of the popular vote), a slightly better showing than Jimmy Carter, who (it sez here) got a shade over 50 per cent in 1976 (the counts vary, but the most complete I could find shows "Clean Gene" McCarthy with over 700K votes, and 810K to all other minor candidates combined; LaRouche for example polled a little over 40K; also, this more complete info shaves 16K votes off McCarthy). JFK didn't quite get there, and Clinton of course enjoyed Perot's major (millions of votes) showings in 1992 and 1996, which greatly helped him reach his two minority terms as president.
Whoops, sorry, neglected to remove you from the “to” box. [blush]
Yes, we do know that. Scary times these are!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
