Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:03 PM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,902,217 times
Reputation: 7458

Advertisements

Quote:
[LEFT]President Barack Obama's job approval rating has sunk to the lowest levels of his presidency in a dramatic reversal of the commanding lead he held over Republicans in the wake of his re-election victory of just a year ago, a new poll has found.

According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted Dec. 12-15 , approval rates of both parties in Congress continue to be worse than the president's, but Obama's approval numbers have plummeted the most as the public pins more blame on him for the country's policy setbacks, including the botched rollout of Obamacare.
Link: Washington Post/ABC Poll: Obama Popularity Plummets to Lowest Level

Well, here's some good nuews...

I still can't believe this lying incompetent boob bamboozled people into voting for him a second time. Once, I get. Twice, that's just dictionary definition stupidity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:13 PM
 
1,825 posts, read 1,412,484 times
Reputation: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trace21230 View Post
Link: Washington Post/ABC Poll: Obama Popularity Plummets to Lowest Level

Well, here's some good nuews...

I still can't believe this lying incompetent boob bamboozled people into voting for him a second time. Once, I get. Twice, that's just dictionary definition stupidity.
Does it really matter? I mean he is not up for re-election and no one is really paying attention. As to why people voted for him twice, it should be a priority for Republicans to find out really why that was. I think part of why Obama did win in 2008 is because Democrats focused a lot of time figuring out why Bush won in 2004 and were able to develop a strategy to counter it and even incorporate some of Bush's strategies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:14 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,032,740 times
Reputation: 9407
Quote:
"Preference for the GOP approach over Obama’s in handling budget cuts vs. maintaining needed programs has risen since the shutdown by 18 points among independents and also by 18 points among adults younger than age 30, customarily a strong Obama group but one in which he lost ground sharply last month," ABC said in its report of the poll.
This quote right here says it all. He's toast. He won't recover....Democrats will lose the Senate. I'm willing to make a wager if anyone is interested.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:15 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,032,740 times
Reputation: 9407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egbert View Post
Does it really matter? I mean he is not up for re-election and no one is really paying attention. As to why people voted for him twice, it should be a priority for Republicans to find out really why that was. I think part of why Obama did win in 2008 is because Democrats figured out why Bush won in 2004 and were able to develop a strategy to counter it.
It definitely matters for those who voted for him twice and have their own personal integrity at stake. He was the "Hope" and "Change" President....he was supposed to bring hope and change to Washington. Millions upon millions believed in that. To see this dramatic reversal in his fortunes....and that of Democrats....is very relevant to the people who thought he would in fact bring "hope" and "change."

It matters for liberals/Democrats....it matters for Democrats' hold on the Senate....it matters for Barack Obama's legacy.

You can't run away from it now. Nice try though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:16 PM
 
1,825 posts, read 1,412,484 times
Reputation: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
This quote right here says it all. He's toast. He won't recover....Democrats will lose the Senate. I'm willing to make a wager if anyone is interested.
If betting on federal elections were legal I would make that wager, but politics aside how do you believe 2014 will go in terms of specific senate races? Which candidates do you see being strong and weak on your and the Democratic side and why.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:20 PM
 
1,825 posts, read 1,412,484 times
Reputation: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
It definitely matters for those who voted for him twice and have their own personal integrity at stake. He was the "Hope" and "Change" President....he was supposed to bring hope and change to Washington. To see this dramatic reversal in his fortunes....and that of Democrats....is very relevant to the people who thought he would in fact bring "hope" and "change."

It matters for liberals/Democrats....it matters for Democrats' hold on the Senate....it matters for Barack Obama's legacy.

You can't run away from it now. Nice try though.
If I recall correct "Hope" and "Change" were used as attacks by Republicans on Obama in 2012 to target the perception that he did not really change Washington in his first term and to suggest that 2008 Obama voters were disillusioned with him or that they should feel hoodwinked...Yet he still ended up winning despite that criticism and his 2008 supporters by and large stood with him despite those attacks. So do you really think that argument of Obama being for "hope and change" and not delivering is something that explains why a majority of voters backed him in 2012 when Republicans invested a lot into critising that angle or is it something else that kept voters with him in 2012?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:23 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,032,740 times
Reputation: 9407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egbert View Post
If betting on federal elections were legal I would make that wager, but politics aside how do you believe 2014 will go in terms of specific senate races? Which candidates do you see being strong and weak on your and the Democratic side and why.
Mark Pryor....gone

Mary Landrieu....gone

Kay Hagan.....gone

Max Baucus seat.....gone

That's 4 of the 6 needed to flip the Senate. It's not out of reach.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:29 PM
 
1,825 posts, read 1,412,484 times
Reputation: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Mark Pryor....gone

Mary Landrieu....gone

Kay Hagan.....gone

Max Baucus seat.....gone

That's 4 of the 7 needed to flip the Senate. It's not out of reach.
Why would you say those four are "gone"? Is there any particular reasoning behind that? What about the candidates running in those seats. Do you really know enough about them?

I will give you an example of the sort of thing I am looking for.

I will say I think the GOP will win the West Virginia Senate seat. This is because the Democratic incumbent (Rockefeller) is retiring. Furthermore the GOP has recruited a strong candidate in Capito-Moore who seems to be popular statewide. Additionally, many of the top democrats in the state have taken a pass on the state and as such Democratic recruiting there has been poor. Finally, Capito-Moore has been polling very strongly. That is why I think Capito-Moore will win.

Basically I am not looking for one word pronouncement as to seats I think to really be credible you have to go deeper and have more of a basis for conclusions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:36 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,032,740 times
Reputation: 9407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egbert View Post
If I recall correct "Hope" and "Change" were used as attacks by Republicans on Obama in 2012 to target the perception that he did not really change Washington in his first term and to suggest that 2008 Obama voters were disillusioned with him or that they should feel hoodwinked...Yet he still ended up winning despite that criticism and his 2008 supporters by and large stood with him despite those attacks. So do you really think that argument of Obama being for "hope and change" and not delivering is something that explains why a majority of voters backed him in 2012 when Republicans invested a lot into critising that angle or is it something else that kept voters with him in 2012?
I don't recall many criticisms about "hope and change" in the official campaign themes for Republicans. Did it exist in some form or fashion? Of course. But it certainly was not a main plank of the GOPs outreach. There were plenty of real, legitimate points to argue against Barack Obama....Hope N Change didn't rank high on the list.

Now we know that Barack Obama is a bald-faced liar, which means its reasonable to assert that he was elected off of lies. His approval ratings reflect that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2013, 12:40 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,032,740 times
Reputation: 9407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egbert View Post
Why would you say those four are "gone"? Is there any particular reasoning behind that? What about the candidates running in those seats. Do you really know enough about them?

I will give you an example of the sort of thing I am looking for.

I will say I think the GOP will win the West Virginia Senate seat. This is because the Democratic incumbent (Rockefeller) is retiring. Furthermore the GOP has recruited a strong candidate in Capito-Moore who seems to be popular statewide. Additionally, many of the top democrats in the state have taken a pass on the state and as such Democratic recruiting there has been poor. Finally, Capito-Moore has been polling very strongly. That is why I think Capito-Moore will win.

Basically I am not looking for one word pronouncement as to seats I think to really be credible you have to go deeper and have more of a basis for conclusions.
At this point, the candidates are only a minor consideration. The states in question are Red States....they already lean conservative. Short of a Todd Akin "legitimate rape" moment...Obama and Obamacare will ensure that those seats are solidly red after 2014. Again, I'm willing to wager.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top