Posted on 06/05/2010 10:15:36 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
TALK of the New Politics in Britain, at its most inflated, is understated compared to the millenarian, "Millions now living will never die" hysteria that swept the United States on 20 January, 2009, the day of Barack Obama's inauguration as President.
That was little more than 16 months ago, but it seems like another age. Never has any US politician's reputation crumbled so quickly.
Obama's position is beyond dire. According to Rasmussen's latest ratings, just 25 per cent of Americans "strongly approve" of Obama's performance, while 41 per cent "strongly disapprove". His presidential approval rating is -16. His ratings for honesty and for being firm and decisive have plummeted. Nor is this simply a backlash from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill: as long ago as last November, Obama had reached a point where fewer than half of Americans thought he would make the right decisions for the country. Even then he had negative ratings on the economy, Afghanistan, Iraq, unemployment, illegal immigration, the federal budget deficit – and on health care, his supposed flagship policy.
What's to like? is the evident response of a formerly infatuated electorate to Obama's car-crash presidency. On his current showing, he could not win an election against George W Bush; but it is not Obama who is up for election – it is his hapless Democrat colleagues who have a rendezvous with the voters at the Congressional elections in just five months. Psephologists have been making much of the fact that black voters, the only constituency among whom the President's popularity remains high, are inflating his otherwise low rating in the Rasmussen surveys by an estimated seven points.
So what? is the layman's natural response: they are real voters and their votes are as good as anyone else's. The pointy-head polling analysts, however, are not indulging in dismissive racism, but trying to establish the underlying realities of the Congressional elections. Traditionally, a president's personal rating is assumed to read across to the House and Senate contests. At national level, it is a basic guide to the relative prospects of the Democrat and Republican parties. If, however, one clearly identifiable demographic within the polling data – in this instance black voters – is registering an anomaly in the shape of a popularity spike, it is possible to analyse its electoral significance.
The US population is approximately 75 per cent white, 13 per cent Hispanic and 12 per cent black. The Hispanics are in tune with the majority of the electorate, since Obama's popularity among them has tumbled by 20 per cent. So the Democrats must rely on black voters. The bad news for the Democrats, as they well know, is that black voters are heavily concentrated in a limited number of electoral areas. There are 31 congressional districts with a black population of more than 40 per cent; altogether, there are 132 districts where the black population is above the national average. Against that, there are 303 districts where the numbers of black voters are less than the national average, including 177 where fewer than 5 per cent of the population are black.
It is an electoral situation vaguely comparable to the disadvantage suffered by the Liberal Democrats in Britain under the 'first past the post' system, compared to PR. It means, in bald terms, that the prospects for the Democrats in the Congressional elections are even worse than Obama's low poll ratings would suggest. He is dragging his party down with him: the number of declared Democrats in the United States is now at its lowest figure since Rasmussen began tracking it eight years ago. The imagined jewel in the crown, Obama's health care law, has turned into a millstone: beyond resenting it, 60 per cent of Americans today actively want to repeal it.
Another problem for Democrat candidates is that the black voters whom they are hoping will come to their rescue do not share their values or social agenda. This was demonstrated when homosexual marriage in California was repealed by referendum on the day Barack Obama was elected, ironically as a consequence of the increased black voter registration that organisations like Acorn had promoted as part of the Obama campaign. The kind of issues that float the boats of Nancy Pelosi and white liberals in Washington sink like a stone among the black electorate.
Obama's foreign policy, from day one, was an excursion into humiliation and impotence. Now his cack-handed, cantankerous reaction to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill ("I've seen rage from him," reported White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, referring to the President's "clenched jaw" at meetings) has further discredited a president who was never more than a soundbite-emitting hologram. From The One to zero in just 16 months – the myth has ended.
Ouch! When he's finally turned out, impeached or driven from office, it'll be the Democrats that do it, not the Tea Party, GOP, militias or some other bogeyman. He's hurting the left much more than us.
Ah, the infelicities of a bear market...puffery of all types is downgraded.
Oh, hell! I’ve referred to him two or three times, starting about 3 months ago, as “a hologram in search of a teleprompter”.
Isn’t ‘strange’ that the foreign press ‘gets it’, but the US press kisses his butt?
Obama is a communist and Muslim and was selected; not elected. He needs to step down.
I can’t wait for November.
If Obama were not African-American, or Democrat, the mainstream media would have crucified him for this truly vicious and despicable act.
In any event, the racism of the African-American "community" in voting for Obama is an advantage to him and his party only in some statewide races and the national contest for president and vice president. The trend clearly works against the Democrats in local elections and even in some senatorial elections.
which The press has inexhaustible energy to point out how conservative Republicans and tea party enthusiasts are allegedly driving the Republican Party to the right and costing them votes in the middle which will decide the election against them. It takes a foreign newspaper from Scotland to point out the very obvious parallel in the Democratic Party that pandering to the corrupt and mindless vote of the African-American inner-city is setting the Democrat party at odds with great middle of America.
He’s hurting the left much more than us.
You’re right. He’s turned into a very big and painful thorn in their side and they don’t quite know how to deal with it yet.
“fact that black voters, the only constituency among whom the President’s popularity remains high, are inflating his otherwise low rating in the Rasmussen surveys by an estimated seven points.”
From The One to zero in just 16 months – the myth has ended.
Soundbite-emitting hologram ping.
I pray to God he’s right.
Everywhere is
Freaks and hairies
Dykes and fairies
Tell me where is sanity
Tax the rich
Feed the poor
Till there are no
Rich no more
I’d love to change the world
But I don’t know what to do
The author hits the nail on the head and doesn’t mince any words.
I Googled him and found another gem written by him, about a year ago (April 2009) and his predictions were right on the money:
Barack Obama: President Pantywaist - new surrender monkey on the block
“Watch out, France and Co, there is a new surrender monkey on the block and, over the next four years, he will spectacularly sell out the interests of the West with every kind of liberal-delusionist initiative on nuclear disarmament and sitting down to negotiate with any power freak who wants to buy time to get a good ICBM fix on San Francisco, or wherever. If you thought the world was a tad unsafe with Dubya around, just wait until President Pantywaist gets into his stride.”
one of the nicer things I could be calling him right now....
;0
Maybe he should wear a capital "H" on his forehead. What a great description.
It is an electoral situation vaguely comparable to the disadvantage suffered by the Liberal Democrats in Britain under the 'first past the post' system, compared to PR. It means, in bald terms, that the prospects for the Democrats in the Congressional elections are even worse than Obama's low poll ratings would suggest. He is dragging his party down with him
Ouch!!
“Obama’s position is beyond dire. According to Rasmussen’s latest ratings, just 25 per cent of Americans “strongly approve” of Obama’s performance, while 41 per cent “strongly disapprove”. His presidential approval rating is -16. His ratings for honesty and for being firm and decisive have plummeted. Nor is this simply a backlash from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill: as long ago as last November, Obama had reached a point where fewer than half of Americans thought he would make the right decisions for the country. Even then he had negative ratings on the economy, Afghanistan, Iraq, unemployment, illegal immigration, the federal budget deficit – and on health care, his supposed flagship policy. “
I hope this will be reflected in the Nov 2010 elections.
“...never more than a soundbite-emitting hologram.”
LOL.
The same can be said for the democrat party TV media (i.e. every thing but Fox and some CNBC).
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.