Posted on 10/10/2009 11:23:48 AM PDT by Zakeet
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that 32% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-five percent (35%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -3. That’s the President’s best Approval Index rating in nearly a month and matches his best rating since early July.
Forty-three percent (43%) give the President good or excellent marks on national security matters and 30% say he is governing on a bi-partisan basis.
Most voters say a middle class tax cut is more important than new spending on health care.
On the economic front, 75% say the U.S. is still in a recession while only 11% disagree. Sixty-two percent (62%) oppose a second stimulus package and 67% oppose a national sales tax.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
Essentially, the Big Wee Wee's passionate approval has stabilized at about 30 percent, and his passionate disapproval has dipped from 40 percent to around 33 percent.
FWIW, I fearlessly predict that once it dawns on a few more idiots that: (1) Porkulus Maximus is an economic disaster, and/or (2) the RATS pass some really stupid legislation such as ObamaCare or Cap and Tax, or Card Check, and/or (3) RAT caused inflation begins to roar, Obozo's fall from grace will resume with a vengeance.
Now that it appears that Obamacare is going to be shoved through come Hell or high water, the parasites are approving of him again.
weird that strongly disapprove has lowered so much at a time when the economy is clearly getting even worse and nothing else seems to be going right. The guy screwed up on Afghanistan, the Olympics and gave away our defense to the UN. Weird. Health care numbers stay in our favor, so it is not that.
Just wait until health care passes. Obama will get the majority of the credit (without the stigma of why it took so long), and he will end up in positive territory on Rasmussen.
Americans are proud of their Nobel Prize Winner.
Don’t count on it. As things get worse, folks might well be drawn to someone who is saying he will take care of all their needs and solve all their problems.
I think it’s more a measure of abstract emotion. The swing 15%, if they’re feeling good, if they haven’t heard his whiny little voice threatening their life in a week or so, then suddenly they don’t “strongly disapprove” any more.
“30% say he is governing on a bi-partisan basis.”
There are those unfortunate few who can not accept reality...
30% - isn’t that about the network audience
“Americans are proud of their Nobel Prize Winner.”
Then Americans are morons. But we already knew at least half of them were.
The award might be helping now, but it is based on his anti war and neutralizing USA—pleases the radicals. If the economy gets worse next year, people realize more and more that he talks and talks with no clout, the DEMS could really suffer. If the Repubbies can show MORE TAXES as the DEM’s theme, we have a good chance of gaining seats. If they think we will vote for them because they are not DEMS and just sit back, they will not do well.
odumbos passing of healthcare will be the gift that keeps on giving for the GOP
These daily tracking polls are nonsensical and meaningless.
Do you realy think that many people are getting up this morning and changing their minds, as these daily numbers suggest?
People make their minds up gradually over a long period of time and observation. Barring some significant event - an attack or a Lewinsky blue dress, they will settle into their opinion and pretty much remain there. The only people who are changing their minds daily are the intellectual lowlifes you see on Jay Leno’s Jaywalkers, who couldn’t tell you their congressman from a condom.
Actually, they probably know their condoms better than their congressman.
Any party or candidate basing their strategy on winning over these fools is going to lose, save for a freakish event like an Obama, where they wanted to show how non-racist they were, otherwise clueless to who this empty suit was.
They wish it was.
The alphabet nitworks used to pull in around 60 percent to 65 percent of the public in the early to mid-60's. Their audience has been dropping like a rock ever since. Combined, they stand at about 20 percent.
Individual newscasts range from about 7+ percent draw (on the All Barack Channel) to about 5+ percent (on SeeBS).
The only segment with a decent viewership (around 50 percent) is old women. The prime purchasing segment the nitworks really want to attract -- persons aged 20-45 -- has almost vanished.
OK, maybe including the watchers of other political propaganda like the letterman show?
Its only the fake Nobel Prize bump. This will all go away as he destroys our economy and there are no jobs for Americans.
Thinking about that, we ought to look at the demographic and geographic makeup of his support. First and most obvious observation to make is that Obama has 12% of the population which amounts to about 10% of the voters which will never leave him: African-Americans. This means that somewhere around 20% of his support comes from this one demographic. Moreover, this demographic is geographically concentrated which becomes very significant for House elections.
While the crimes of Charlie Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means committee, will not cause his losing an election in Harlem, the reaction to the condoning of his crimes by the Democrats in the House is likely to increase the vote against Democrats in those congressional districts where blacks are underrepresented. If the Republicans are clever they will make Charlie Rangel the proxy for Barack Obama.
As I have been saying countless times in these threads, the dominant influence in American politics is race, but that can also cut both ways. If we are talking about a presidential, senatorial, or a gubernatorial race where the count is statewide, the monolithic nature of the African-American vote could be decisive for Democrats. But in House congressional races the Democrats will find a large portion of their faithful unfortunately for them concentrated in sure districts, especially located in the northeast and midwest, leaving many many districts vulnerable to a Republican come back.
Should the Republicans refrain from making Obama the issue? Especially when it might boomerang against them in senatorial and editorial races? I believe the numbers which support Obama are reflective of hard-core Democrats such as African-Americans, a number somewhat less than 70% of Hispanics, a decreasing number of Jews, and people who confuse action in an executive officer with effective governance. Of these groups, clearly African-Americans are not going to be moved and they should be written off immediately because pandering to them will only inhibit attacks on Obama.
I have said before the presidential election, Obama must be morally destroyed if he is to be defeated. That is not necessarily true in this upcoming by- election but I believe it will be true in the presidential election of 2012. Nevertheless, it is necessary for Republicans to have a wide scope of action in order to wage their congressional campaigns. I believe that the Democrats might find themselves in serious trouble with Jews in the upcoming campaigns in view of Obama's approval rating in Israel which is in the single digits. Some of them might just be coming to understand that they have created a Frankenstein. Although Jews do not account for much more than 3% of the population, their voting used to be concentrated in swing states but, alas, the battle lines have been drawn more tightly around the Confederacy so the importance of Jews changing their allegiance becomes mainly a question of influence and finance.
The polls show that independents are moving away from the Democrats toward the Republicans. In order to encourage this trend, Obama and his policies will have to be ruthlessly attacked thus risking the boomerang effect. It is, after all, those policies which are bringing independents to our lines in the first place. To repeat, to win the election of 2010 decisively enough to take back the house requires that the election be nationalized; to nationalize the election requires that Obama's policies as well as the man himself be made the issue.
I believe the boomerang effect will be largely isolated to congressional districts out of reach to Republicans anyway. I believe that the senatorial races will be more adversely affected but there is no help for it. Moreover, the boomerang effect in a state like Connecticut where we have an uncommon chance against Dodd will, of course, be entirely different from the effect in the Florida Senate race. But the same principle predictable in House races to some degree will apply to the Senate: the boomerang effect will be most potent in places where we don't really have a chance anyway.
This of course assumes a robust boomerang effect which is not necessarily assured by any means because much of the blowback will be in the African-American demographic. The Hispanics will not be so invested in Obama. That is why you can expect him to raise the amnesty issue at a time calculated to drive a wedge between Hispanics and Republicans for maximum electoral advantage.
Obama will clearly play the race card because he has done so at every turn so far. It won him the primaries against Hillary and, with the support of the media, it convinced enough of white America that they should do the right thing and show they were not prejudiced by putting an African-American in the oval office. But many of those white Americans feel betrayed by Obama and realize they were duped. My guess is that the race card will not be nearly as effective as it was in the presidential election and all this will be greatly to the dismay of the media.
So the approval ratings of Barack Obama might not be what they seem to be on the surface. Moreover, one thing is clear, they will change tomorrow.
[Obama must be morally destroyed if he is to be defeated. That is not necessarily true in this upcoming by- election but I believe it will be true in the presidential election of 2012}
The 2012 Republican candidate will not do that. Republicans are afraid of being called racist. Also, GOP donors could face boycotts from minority activism if they approve such behaviour in their candidate.
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.