Posted on 09/20/2011 6:37:18 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 21% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21.
Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-two percent (52%) at least somewhat disapprove.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
I'm not sure charming is the word. Hussein is an exceedingly good speaker, comes across as decent and genuine and most Americans WANT to like him. Almost half the country is still emotionally wedded to him, and it is very difficult for them to move past it.
Unfortunately, in politics, being right just isn't even close to being enough. Obama is wrong about pretty much everything, but people tend to like him and want to give him the benefit of the doubt. Obama knows that, and as long as he distracts, deflects and otherwise blames others for his failures he has a good chance to win again in 2012.
“Can Obama really be charming?”
Once said of Louis Jourdan in his PBS role of “Dracula”;
“He is charmingly sinister”
Frankly, he gives me the worst case of skin-crawling heebie-jeebies I’ve ever had.
I’d spend the whole night in Charlie Manson’s cell before I’d spend 10 minutes with The Won *anywhere*.
He’s mega-creepy.
That is a good analysis. I remember a time even Rush said if he had to pick between Clinton and somebody—sorry, I can’t recall who—he’d go w Clinton in a heartbeat. He said the same thing you did: that it would be a fun evening of drinking, jokes and camaraderie.
Does anyone think an evening with Obama would be fun? Unless you wanted to talk about racial grievances and economic justice, it would rival a trip to the dentist.
“The main thing that keeps 0bama afloat is his melanin-based criticism shield,
but even that is wearing thin.”
Nailed it.
I just haven’t heard many ‘average rubes’ speaking of Obama in a warm, fond way. Clinton was good at establishing an emotional connection. Obama isn’t. His average rube supporters mostly talk about how Republicans are thwarting him. They are attached to the great things Obama would do for them if only the GOP would get out of the way, but as for personal attachment, MrB nailed it. It’s either due to skin tone or it’s nonexistent.
If he gets 45% of the vote legitimately, fraud will make up the difference easily. Do not discount that, for the Dems, retaining control of at least one branch of government is life-or-death for their long-term plans, and they will do whatever they need to do, legal or illegal, to make it happen.
Baraq needs to be whipped AT LEAST 60-40 for the fraud machine to give up.
Jesse Jackson said a while back that they’d lose 11% of their vote count in some precincts if photo id was required to vote.
He inadvertantly admitted how much they estimate their voter fraud is worth to them.
I’m not trying to be argumentative, but in what way is Obama a good speaker? He has a monotonous singsong delivery, undercut by constant head-swiveling as he reads his teleprompters. When has he ever spoken a really great or memorable line? Fewer and fewer people even listen to him; many, when they do, acknowledge they’ve heard the speech before. He says nothing new or inspiring; he’s a very limited speaker with one mode: campaign.
Reagan could shift gears and talk about anything in a powerful yet engaging way. Obama just looks like what he is: a teleprompter reader.
I have heard some speak in warm terms about him. Among those attending his speeches in 2008, many were convinced he was talking to them directly. Remember how he'd bring them to tears? It was a very weird, cult-like response from people who should know better.
‘Frankly, he gives me the worst case of skin-crawling heebie-jeebies I’ve ever had.
I’d spend the whole night in Charlie Manson’s cell before I’d spend 10 minutes with The Won *anywhere*.
He’s mega-creepy.’
Lol! You have a way w words!
It’s only funny ‘cuz it’s true.....;D
I totally agree w you about ‘08. Obama was a novelty w 24/7 media hype. People saw in him what they wanted to see, and there was an enthusiastic level of personal attachment. Plus, he could still utter his tired cliches w conviction because ‘hope and change’ hadn’t yet become a national punchline/the butt of a thousand jokes.
‘Charm’ is what would have carried him over once the hype faded. Now that people are used to having a ‘black’ president, and Obama’s promises have been reduced to, ‘it’s all Bush’s fault’, the lack of charm—plus the lousy speechifying—are coming home to roost. Hence, the fading poll numbers and increasing talk of a primary challenger.
I have him buried.
We could run my dog and win.
Someone help me understand what has changed since the 2010 shellacking? No, Obama wasn't on the ballot, and that's the bad news for Dems this time-he is on the ballot.
We elected a pro-lifer in New Jersey, an evangelical in Virginia, formerly blue and purple states respectively. Record numbers of governerships and state houses changed hands. In the house and senate, heavily backed Democrat machines were dumped by newbies who came into the races with no name recognition.
The Dems lost because they were carrying Obama's water on healthcare, and they scared the bejesus out of all private sector workers. They went to the polls in droves. What has changed is that the private, non-union sector has gone from scared to angry.
The 2012 election is not about demographics, it is about where do you work-or not.
Unions and government workers still do not comprise a plurality of voters, especially when the private sector feels (rightly) threatened.
The media? The people instinctively know that it was they who sold this bill of goods to us. They have lost their credibility. Completely. The mainstream media will not be able to shill for him effectively. They're toast too.
So what has he resorted to since the election of 2010? Speeches. Angry speeches. Same old policy content. Obama is now the only one in the room not aware that his oratory has lost its effectiveness, except that it hasn't, he's turning people off.
Now we have scandals. Scandals that further illuminate the bankruptcy of liberalism, that's what's changed since 2010.
My dog was born in the USA. I have papers.
This is why I'm closely following Pennsylvania's plan to award electoral votes by congressional district instead of "winner takes all". If passed, it would mean that vote-fraud in Philly would only affect Philly's electoral votes (which the Dem would get regardless), rather than throwing the whole state to the Dem.
Wisconsin, Michigan, and other states with large Dem cities should follow suit.
There are those that disagree with me on this but I think the ‘issue’ here is Rasmussen and not Obama. Obama’s approval’s continue to sink. Every single poll in the world shows it (except Rasmussen) and every single bit of available evidence supports it (increasing criticism of Obama from dems, from the media, Obama becoming more shrill, talk of a primary challenge, campaigning to his base, horrible approval numbers in key battleground states etc).
The only morsel of data that show’s Obama remaining at the same approval as he was in 2009 is the Rasmussen poll. If you remember, Rasmussen was the first to show the drop (2008 - 2009). The white house went on the attack and suddenly Rasmussen’s numbers started looking like everyone elses. In my opinion, this was not a coincidence.
For Obama to win in 2012, things have to get considerably better for him. The public must by-in to the fact that he is doing a better/more effect job as president than he’s doing right now. As long as the economy does not improve, I find it highly unlikely for that dynamic to play out...
If you don't see it, there is no way for me to explain it to you. Hussein is a man with a thin resume, who got where he is on pretty much charisma alone. He can communicate very well, inspire people (hope n change), comes across as very likable, etc. The result is, Americans were fooled by him once and STILL want to like the man.
Fewer and fewer people even listen to him; many, when they do, acknowledge they’ve heard the speech before. He says nothing new or inspiring; he’s a very limited speaker with one mode: campaign.
It's true, more and more people ignore him now. That is why he shifted back to campaign mode. For the next 14 months as the economic data keeps coming in "unexpectedly" bad we are going to hear "it's because the Republicans won't pass my bill" instead of "things are getting better slowly, our policies are working".
I read so many comments on FR from people that are so sure Obama is going to lose, and I have to think these people must have cocooned themselves in an echo chamber and are not seeing reality. Notice how well Hussein's polling has generally held up considering how awful things are and how obviously miserable his policies have been? The guy should be in the low 30's now, but today's Ras poll has him at 46% approval. The problem is, most Americans still WANT to like Obama. It isn't enough to defeat Obama's ideas, we have to literally defeat the idea of Obama.
I think apportioning EVs by congressional district is a good idea, for the very fact that you mentioned - it isolates voter fraud, usually to the districts where the dems would win anyway.
Someone on FR equated this with the National Popular Vote movement and opposed it greatly, but in reality, it is the EXACT OPPOSITE of the NPV.
Those indicate that the approval polls don't matter, since the approval might be wide, but it is not deep enough to motivate a voter.
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.