Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sure the past 6 President's were toxic as well. The assertion you are making is that the mere fact that Barack Obama's lowest approval rating is still higher than past President's makes him a asset to Democrats facing election. Considering that many Democrats are running from the President, I'd say your assertion is far, far from reality.
Local senators and congressmen dont depend on a presidents approval to get elected.
See-congress ratings, vs your congressmen ratings.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Republicans will gain seats this coming election. But I don't think its accurate to point to a presidents ratings to say thats why.
Jimmy Carter version 2.0 continues to be unimpressive. What a terrible President.
And, yet, Darth Barry is still in office because the media simply won't do its job. He is an embarrassment to his own political party and its reputation solely lies on every thing he says and does.
Local senators and congressmen dont depend on a presidents approval to get elected.
See-congress ratings, vs your congressmen ratings.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Republicans will gain seats this coming election. But I don't think its accurate to point to a presidents ratings to say thats why.
If the President is unpopular it generally does help the opposing party, look at the Dems in 2006. The problem for the GOP is their #'s are also abysmal, and considerably worse than what it was in 2010.
I happen to think the GOP will pick up seats in the Senate, however regardless of the political dynamc in November that could be viewed as likely based off the seats that are up in November (Dems are defending more seats overall, and more seats in swing states because of the gains they had in 2008). Likewise in 2016, regardless of the political dynamic at the time the Senate likely favors Democratic gains due to which seats are up.
The House I think is a bit unpredictable, at this point I think you would see some from each side go down. Quite simply with the amount of gerrymandering combined with the fact the ratings of both parties flat out suck, its hard to imagine any major change in seats.
Not stunning to me at all, I don't always approve of Obama's performance. That doesn't mean I would not vote for him over Romney right now. But if it was him vs Huntsman right now I would vote for Huntsmen.
But historically after being elected presidents approval numbers decline. Obama's lower numbers don't surprise me at all, I don't see why they are stunning to you. Its very predictable.
You misunderstood. I'm stunned that a Democrat would abstain from rendering an opinion. I don't think any of them can comprehend the term "Don't Know"
Obama's numbers were the highest in 2009 before he did anything. It's like winning the Peace Prize before accomplishing anything other than a black dude becoming President. His approval rating sank all the way to 2012, when he got a slight bump after winning a second term.
For the most part, Obama has been one of the lowest rated two term presidents in history. Again, take away that cushion and he would be well down on the list. History will prove the devastation his policies and agenda wreaked on the US.
I'd vote for Jon Huntsman over Obama in a heartbeat. I hope Paul wins, but either way it will signal the turning point for independents and Libertarians.
IMHO, we'll only be given Clinton or Bush to choose from. The winner has already been selected, I'm sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
Don't get me wrong, I think the Republicans will gain seats this coming election. But I don't think its accurate to point to a presidents ratings to say thats why.
I'm thinking that in this cycle the lions share will be the candidate's history on the ACA. Those who were vocal supporters of it... can pretty much kiss their seats buh bye.
Why do 41% still think he's doing a good job. I mean 15% of that 41% are black, so who are the others?
That 41% would be Democrats who will not question anything Obama does because he is Democrat, if a Republican was in office he would not be allowed to do what Obama has done as far as starting and continuing wars or what he has done for corporations, Obama is the best friend the Republicans ever had.
For Blacks although Obama has made life worst for them since he has been in office can do no wrong, don't even try to tell a Black person that Obama did something wrong they just don't want to hear it, so again Obama is the Republicans best friend.
I originally thought it was a step forward electing a Black president now I see it was the worst thing that could have happened.
I see a dark cloud forming over the White House in 2016 when women will vote for Hillary Clinton just because she is a woman, she is to women what Obama was to Black people.
And if Hillary gets in the Republicans should be thankful again because she is a warmonger who is in bed with the elite corporations.
IMHO, we'll only be given Clinton or Bush to choose from. The winner has already been selected, I'm sure.
If its Bush Vs's Clinton.....I am voting green party. Seriously, we don't need families playing ping pong with the presidency, and neither of these two have impressed me. *
*-barring one side or the other saying something so over the top stupid that I feel the need to vote against them.
Approval ratings for Obama or any other lame duck president aside from posterity and a few other purposes really don't matter. The man cannot run for re-election and the best the party of any lame duck president can hope for is that some of the "good" and or energized parts of the base will show up next time around.
Obama was and still is a political lightweight. The "blonde blue eyed boy" if you will that came along at the right time and rose quickly mainly because persons liked his story. That and the Republicans learned nothing and kept putting up alternatives that seemed designed to cost them elections.
In neither of his runs for the WH did Obama ever lay out anything real or concrete. Aside from his healthcare plan all you heard was basically "elect me because I'm not that white conservative Republican....).
Scores of liberals/left/Democrats and whites simply caught jungle fever in the prospect of sending a *black* man to the WH especially after eight years of GWBII. Same was true for much of the world including Western Europe it seems as well where they just lapped up whatever drivel the American and other media was pouring out. Remember Obama's European "Evita Peron" tour the summer before the election? Then there were persons like the man from Sweden that came to NYC to purchase scores of the NYT on the day after election day announcing Obama's win. Apparently even the Nobel Prize committee was in thrall and having orgasms because they gave the man that award for what amounts to being elected the first black POTUS.
Approval ratings for Obama or any other lame duck president aside from posterity and a few other purposes really don't matter. The man cannot run for re-election and the best the party of any lame duck president can hope for is that some of the "good" and or energized parts of the base will show up next time around.
Obama was and still is a political lightweight. The "blonde blue eyed boy" if you will that came along at the right time and rose quickly mainly because persons liked his story. That and the Republicans learned nothing and kept putting up alternatives that seemed designed to cost them elections.
In neither of his runs for the WH did Obama ever lay out anything real or concrete. Aside from his healthcare plan all you heard was basically "elect me because I'm not that white conservative Republican....).
Scores of liberals/left/Democrats and whites simply caught jungle fever in the prospect of sending a *black* man to the WH especially after eight years of GWBII. Same was true for much of the world including Western Europe it seems as well where they just lapped up whatever drivel the American and other media was pouring out. Remember Obama's European "Evita Peron" tour the summer before the election? Then there were persons like the man from Sweden that came to NYC to purchase scores of the NYT on the day after election day announcing Obama's win. Apparently even the Nobel Prize committee was in thrall and having orgasms because they gave the man that award for what amounts to being elected the first black POTUS.
Republicans are energized. Barack Obama is considered toxic. Those are pretty good indications that Democrats are in a heap of trouble.
Not stunning to me at all, I don't always approve of Obama's performance. That doesn't mean I would not vote for him over Romney right now. But if it was him vs Huntsman right now I would vote for Huntsmen.
[b]But historically after being elected presidents approval numbers decline[/B]. Obama's lower numbers don't surprise me at all, I don't see why they are stunning to you. Its very predictable.
Actually Reagan and Clinton had higher approval ratings their second term in office. And Eisenhower, Johnson, Reagan, Clinton had higher second term ratings than Obama at the same point in their second term. But nice try though, I knew the sheep would be on here trying to spin the numbers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
New WaPo-ABC Poll: Obama Approval Drops to Lowest of His Presidency
