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.
This thread is absolutely ridiculous. The idea that Obama can't win in 2012 has to be one of the most dense things I have ever seen posted on here (wanted to use other words, but didn't want a TOS violation). Obama's approvals are HIGHER than Reagan's was at this point in 82, yet he is done?? His approvals are pretty much right around what Bush had heading into Election Day in 04. This thread is a complete and utter joke.
I suppose that if Barack continues to tax and spend with wild abandon his approval rating will improve.
Making sure I don't say anything to offend the monitors too badly I will just say this.
Once America gets back on the right track in 2012 you'll still have your picture of Barack Obama hanging over your bed. A never ending love affair.
Last edited by CaseyB; 03-13-2010 at 12:27 PM..
Reason: rude
This thread is absolutely ridiculous. The idea that Obama can't win in 2012 has to be one of the most dense things I have ever seen posted on here (wanted to use other words, but didn't want a TOS violation). Obama's approvals are HIGHER than Reagan's was at this point in 82, yet he is done?? His approvals are pretty much right around what Bush had heading into Election Day in 04. This thread is a complete and utter joke.
Smash, I know you are a die hard democrat and probably liberal as well. You also are very knowledgable when it comes to politics, but to say his number are higher than Reagan at the same time is a little misleading. They may be a point or two, depending on the week but there is very little difference. I don't think 2 or 3 points one way or the other is much of a differerence. Are you using Gallop for your comparison? If so, enough said..
As for his winning in 2012, using todays polls compared with 1982, were you voting in those days, do you remember much about what was going on? I only ask you this because that was a totally different time in history. Today the mess we are in is much worse than it was 30 years ago. I am neither defending Reagan or knocking Obama, I am simply saying it is a totally different world..
This thread is absolutely ridiculous. The idea that Obama can't win in 2012 has to be one of the most dense things I have ever seen posted on here (wanted to use other words, but didn't want a TOS violation). Obama's approvals are HIGHER than Reagan's was at this point in 82, yet he is done?? His approvals are pretty much right around what Bush had heading into Election Day in 04. This thread is a complete and utter joke.
You need to look at your polls and see if they are polling adults or likely voters or registered voters for the approval rating. Some pollsters just poll adults which may be nice to know how the public at large thinks but it doesn't translate to votes on election day. Then you have to know that the pollsters who got Reagan's approval ratings at this point in '82 were also polling the same group (adults vs registered voters vs likely voters) in order to compare them.
I disagree with your general feel, Obama is very conscious of what others think of him, he is very flexible to criticism and from my judgement the kind of highly influencable character- if america were a 3rd world country he is the kind of person you would expect to take a bribe in my dealings of past.
Obama has lots of leftist rhetoric and besides healthcare I have no seen much left wing action from him.
Who Will Run For President On The 2012 Democratic Ticket? Obama Can't Win. So Who?
It is obvious to ...bunch of nonsense...
Hillary won't run again either.
8 horrific years of Republican village idiot tells us that:
1) The great president Obama here for two terms.
2) Republicans don't have answers to any problems.
3) Republicans don't even know the questions.
4) The GOP's ideology has no place in modern society.
5) The GOP no longer qualified to operate as a major political party.
6) Palin represents the new GOP as the most farcical political party in history.
7) The GOP had 8 years of "no taxes" and we were headed into another Great Depression.
The better question is: Who will run for President in 2016? We'll have a Democrat and hopefully an opponent from a more enlightened, more progressive political party than one from the supremely backwards GOP.
8 horrific years of Republican village idiot tells us that:
1) The great president Obama here for two terms.
2) Republicans don't have answers to any problems.
3) Republicans don't even know the questions.
4) The GOP's ideology has no place in modern society.
What do you mean by "modern society"? And why doesn't conservatism have any place there?
Quote:
5) The GOP no longer qualified to operate as a major political party.
6) Palin represents the new GOP as the most farcical political party in history.
7) The GOP had 8 years of "no taxes" and we were headed into another Great Depression.
Much of the reason that the economy fell off is due to the 2006 Democratic Congress and their encouragement of risky home ownership.
Quote:
The better question is: Who will run for President in 2016? We'll have a Democrat and hopefully an opponent from a more enlightened, more progressive political party than one from the supremely backwards GOP.
The more that you wish to push America into "Progressiveness" the more you are promoting total governmental control. It is obvious that this is what you want.
I mentioned that Barack would lose in 2012 mainly because middle America is sick of wreckless spending. I don't think any Democrat could win in the next election.
The way Alexus talks it would seem that someone like Kucinich might fit the bill.
Since when does enlightenment equal more government control, higher taxes and wealth redistribution?
The Democrats will likely run Barack as their headliner. But, America will vote for a leader, not an apologizer.
Hillary. Either she'll run as the party nominee when Obama refuses to run for a second term, or she'll have maneuvered herself into being the sitting president if Obama steps down for any reason.
Smash, I know you are a die hard democrat and probably liberal as well. You also are very knowledgable when it comes to politics, but to say his number are higher than Reagan at the same time is a little misleading. They may be a point or two, depending on the week but there is very little difference. I don't think 2 or 3 points one way or the other is much of a differerence. Are you using Gallop for your comparison? If so, enough said..
As for his winning in 2012, using todays polls compared with 1982, were you voting in those days, do you remember much about what was going on? I only ask you this because that was a totally different time in history. Today the mess we are in is much worse than it was 30 years ago. I am neither defending Reagan or knocking Obama, I am simply saying it is a totally different world..
Nita
According to Gallup, Reagan pretty much stayed in the low 40's approval wise throughout all of 1982, he dropped down to a low of 35% in Jan of 1983. Over the past couple months Obama's approvals (with Gallup and other pollsters) have generally ranged from the mid 40's to low/mid 50's. His approval with Gallup now stands at 47%. Taking a look at all the polls now, as well as all the polls over the past couple a months, his average approval is generally in the 48/49% range. So based off the polls Obama's approvals now are pretty much 5 points higher than where Reagan was at this point in his Presidency, slightly higher than what Bush had in the summer of 04,, and pretty much exactly where Bush was heading into election Day in 2004.
My whole point in bringing up Reagan was to show approval ratings early in the 2nd year, more than 2/ 1/2 years away from when you would run for re-election have no real barring on how you will do then. Although each one had a different situation I do think it is interesting to note than out of the last four Presidents, the two with the lowest approval ratings at this point cruised to re-election. Meanwhile out of the two with the highest approvals at this point, had trouble. One lost re-election, the other did win, but won by the smallest margin any Incumbent ever won by.
As far as remembering 1982, well I wasn't a voter then in fact I was born in May of 1982. I do, however have a Bachelor's in History and specialized in American History, so I have a pretty good understanding of the time.
Both Reagan and Obama took over with a difficult economy. They both took over with similar unemployment rates as well (Obama 7.7, Reagan 7.5). However, the problems the two of them faced at least initially were a bit different. Obama took over during a period of immense job loss, 2.2 million people lost jobs in the three months previous to Obama taken over. The job market when Reagan took over, wasn't the greatest, but wasn't really where the problem was in fact 546,000 jobs were added to payrolls in the three months before he took over. Reagan's problem was dealing with double digit inflation. However, late in 81 and throughout all of 1982 unemployment soared. In fact unemployment under Reagan wound up higher than it has been so far under Obama. In August 1981 it was at 7.4%, by the time November and December of 82 rolled around it was at 10.8% (unemployment under Obama topped out at 10.1%, now stands at 9.7%) This was the time period Reagan was at the bottom with his ratings, but soon after the economy started to slowly improve throughout the first half or so of 1983, and Reagan's ratings slowly improved with it. Then from the fall of 83 through late winter/early spring of 84 the economy sharply rebounded as did Reagan's ratings.
That was a bit long winded, but the point remains just because Obama's #'s aren't the strongest now, doesn't mean they will be that way 2 1/2 years from now. Reagan's #'s at this point were a bit worse, and almost a year further were far worse than Obama's #'s are now yet he rebounded and won in a landslide. Not saying Obama will have the same result, in fact I know he won't. Reagan benefited from having his high point in approval during his 8 years come at the exact moment of his re-election, the chances of that happening to anyone else be it Obama or someone down the road is pretty much zilch. With that being said its down right absurd to count someone out whose approvals are generally in the upper 40's, from winning 2 1/2 years from now. Hell it would be absurd to count that out on Election Day, considering its exactly where Bush was in 04.
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.
Yet another sour grapes post
