Obama's Popular Support - Does it Matter?

[August1991]

Rasmussen (accused of being Right Wing) has Obama in negatives now.

07/21/2009

-5

07/20/2009

-7

07/19/2009

-7

Rasmussen

-----

I think Obama will suffer from raised expectations. Truly successful politicians lower expectations, and then reap the benefits. Obama chose a different strategy.

What happens when the Messiah doesn't deliver? Is Obama a different/new politician?

[Bonam]

Naw I think the extremely high expectations at the start of his presidency are definitely gonna be a problem for him, as people grow disillusioned.

[Riverwind]

I think Obama will suffer from raised expectations. Truly successful politicians lower expectations, and then reap the benefits. Obama chose a different strategy.

Obama would have never have beat Clinton in the primaries if he had run on the pragamatic, low expectations platform.

[Shady]

Obama would have never have beat Clinton in the primaries if he had run on the pragamatic, low expectations platform.

Or if the Rev. Wright issue had come up in January, instead of March.

[bush_cheney2004]

President "Joe Cool" Obama has encountered the challenge of actual governing versus the glory days as presidential candidate. His job approval numbers are not much better than Dubya's at this point in the first term:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/pr...val-tracker.htm

[August1991]

In Washington, there are signs that Mr. Obama’s personal popularity has not translated into support for his policies, and now comes the first sign it may no longer be translating into support for other Democrats either.

WSJ

This is intriguing because it implies that people don't like what Obama is doing, won't do what he asks them to do - but they still like him. IOW, his approval ratings may go lower but his personal popularity will remain high.

Obama would have never have beat Clinton in the primaries if he had run on the pragamatic, low expectations platform.

I tend to agree. Edited July 23, 2009 by August1991

[enviralment]

Obama has played on the tremendous support that he garnered during the election to provide some movement to very encompassing and fundamentally pervasive legislation in energy nad health policy. People have started to catch on to this and realize that beyond that professional demeanor lies a man that wants to actually change quite a bit. Maybe not the status quo?

[bush_cheney2004]

Still, something isn't quite right. Obama's election momentum has not translated in the convincing way that Reagan's did. He is fighting with his own party at a time when they have a clear majority in Congress.

Where is the beef?

[Riverwind]

People have started to catch on to this and realize that beyond that professional demeanor lies a man that wants to actually change quite a bit.

Obama wants to be perceived as agent of change. Actually accomplishing real change is not as important to him.

The politics behind the W&M climate bill is a perfect illustration. This 1200 page monstrosity is so bad that even ardent AGW activists like Jim Hansen oppose it because it simply entrenches the status quo while giving billions away to politically favoured groups.

Yet, Obama pushed congress have a quick vote on a flawed bill because he wanted to look good at the post Kyoto climate meetings.

You can expect no more from 'healthcare' reform. All posturing - no substance.

Edited July 23, 2009 by Riverwind

[bush_cheney2004]

Obama wants to be perceived as agent of change. Actually accomplishing real change is not as important to him.

Obama is coming off as a lightweight, easily frustrated by the tangled political process and special interest infighting. His eyes storm at anyone who dares question his "vision". The honeymoon is definitely over, except for a press corps happy so far to serve him softballs.

Contrast this with what happened in 1981....President Reagan turned things upside down with tax cuts by rallying public opinion...even the Democrats got on board. Did I mention that he got this done even while being shot in the street like a dog?

The First 100 Days:

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/histor...government.html

Edited July 23, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[Moonlight Graham]

Yes, expectations will not be met. He is now a part of the "machine" and is puppy to all the interest groups that control White House policy. But as far as U.S. Presidents go, he'll probably still go down as one of the better ones post WWII.

Maybe as his term goes on we'll see a dip as exceptions sour, and then a slow climb as reality hits it that he's doing ok. Though he might get some big blame in a couple years when people realize the Afghanistan policies of Bush/Obama are a joke.

[Shady]

Zogby has him at 48% now!

Zogby

[bush_cheney2004]

Zogby has him at 48% now!

Zogby

He is taking some hits....some self inflicted by a frenetic pace while driving blind. What is his hurry?

[August1991]

IMV, this is an idea to follow.

Rasmussen has Obama's "strongly approve" bouncing around 30%. I think that on this number, Obama has hit rock bottom. He will always have the black vote (about 95%) and he'll also have the hard left Democrats, the white-guilt liberals and the limousine liberals. Together, these people amount to about 25-30%. I reckon that Obama will also always get at least another 10% of people who simply will never vote Republican.

So, Obama as candidate will never fall below 35-40% and his "strong support" will never fall below 25-30%.

Unlike Canada which has had federal leaders like Laurier and Trudeau, America has never had a leader with such a strong minority core support. Kennedy was the closest.

I suspect that Obama's numbers are going to confuse American polling analysts.

----

BTW, I see Obama's speech in Cairo in early June as critical in moving his "strongly approve" to the rock hard bottom of 25-30%.

Edited August 3, 2009 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

....So, Obama as candidate will never fall below 35-40% and his "strong support" will never fall below 25-30%.

That's what Jimmy Carter thought too....he was wrong. President Obama has already alienated many hard core progressives by not meeting their expectations for swift changes in domestic and foreign policy.

Edited August 3, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[August1991]

That's what Jimmy Carter thought too....he was wrong. President Obama has already alienated many hard core progressives by not meeting their expectations for swift changes in domestic and foreign policy.

McGovern got 40% in 1972 but I'm referring to poll numbers.

Obama is unlike Carter (indeed any American presidential politician except maybe Kennedy) because Obama has a core constituency that will strongly support him regardless of what happens. To give an absurd example, Barack Obama could go to jail but Oprah Winfrey would still say in a poll that she "strongly supports" Obama. Like Adam Clayton Powell or Wilfrid Laurier, for some, Obama can do no wrong.

I think this support will confuse US pollsters. In Canada, we understand this but Americans are new to this kind of voting pattern.

[Shady]

Obama's popularity may hit bottom faster than anyone could have predicted.

Developing—Obama hits record low in Zogby Interactive—45% approve

Zogby

[Riverwind]

Obama's popularity may hit bottom faster than anyone could have predicted.

I want to see Obama crash and burn because if he able to ram through the anti-CO2 legislation it will so serious damage the Canadian economy.

But these daily polls are like the weather. Wait awhile and they will change.

Edited August 21, 2009 by Riverwind

[bush_cheney2004]

Obama's popularity may hit bottom faster than anyone could have predicted.

Developing—Obama hits record low in Zogby Interactive—45% approve

Zogby

Krikey......Bush was much higher at this point in the first term....45% ain't good for a rookie.

[BubberMiley]

It think the question in the thread title says it all: Does it matter?

[Shady]

It think the question in the thread title says it all: Does it matter?

It definitely does. When a President has a high approval rating, he can better influence other lawmakers. When his approval is low, they basically can ignore him.

[bush_cheney2004]

It think the question in the thread title says it all: Does it matter?

Yes....it does matter. Maybe he can save the day with "Cash for Appliances". Bush just gave us the money to spend as we please.

[Riverwind]

It definitely does. When a President has a high approval rating, he can better influence other lawmakers. When his approval is low, they basically can ignore him.

It will take a few more months of low ratings before that happens. If the elections in November show any sign that the dissatisfaction is turning into real republican gains then Obama will be in big trouble.

[daniel]

For those with short memories:

"As far as overall approval, Bush's approval ratings, as measured by the Gallup organization, did not see a stark drop as suggested by Fahrenheit 9/11. Bush's approval rating fluctuated up and down from a high of 63 percent to a low of 51 percent over the pre-9/11 period. However, Bush's disapproval rating did see a largely steady increase over the period, apparently as more people who initially had no opinion about Bush came to disapprove of his handling of the presidency."

http://newsaic.com/f911chap1-4.html

Then after 9/11 his approval rating shot up (hmm?) and suddenly he's the world's saviour. Well we know how that turned out or we would be discussing President Cheney right now.

Meanwhile, Obama's rating is steady at 58% in that same time-frame.

[bush_cheney2004]

Then after 9/11 his approval rating shot up (hmm?) and suddenly he's the world's saviour. Well we know how that turned out or we would be discussing President Cheney right now.

Has nothing to do with the world....this metric is for American domestic consumption. Caring about what "the world" thinks is not helping Obama either.

Meanwhile, Obama's rating is steady at 58% in that same time-frame.

Not any more....and it will never be as high as Dubya's record rating...but it could be as low.