Obama 50, Palin 44

[Shady]

Palin has her top showing against Obama, trailing 50-44. That's quite an improvement from March when we first tested the Obama-Palin contest and found her trailing 55-35. What's interesting is that there's been almost no change in her favorability numbers over the course of the year. She was at 39/50 then and she's at 41/50 now. That's a pretty clear sign the tightening has had little to do with her and almost everything to do with Obama's declining popularity.

Link

Poor Barry. It's getting even worse for him.

[punked]

Palin has her top showing against Obama, trailing 50-44. That's quite an improvement from March when we first tested the Obama-Palin contest and found her trailing 55-35. What's interesting is that there's been almost no change in her favorability numbers over the course of the year. She was at 39/50 then and she's at 41/50 now. That's a pretty clear sign the tightening has had little to do with her and almost everything to do with Obama's declining popularity.

Link

Poor Barry. It's getting even worse for him.

Almost as bad as it was for Reagan eh? What a terrible president he was good thing he never won that second term right? Wait one minute............those polls didn't mean a thing.

[Guest American Woman]

Palin has her top showing against Obama, trailing 50-44. That's quite an improvement from March when we first tested the Obama-Palin contest and found her trailing 55-35. What's interesting is that there's been almost no change in her favorability numbers over the course of the year. She was at 39/50 then and she's at 41/50 now. That's a pretty clear sign the tightening has had little to do with her and almost everything to do with Obama's declining popularity.

Link

Poor Barry. It's getting even worse for him.

If Palin were a presidential candidate and if the election were tomorrow and if ... oh, wait. She'd still lose.

[Shady]

Almost as bad as it was for Reagan eh?

Yes we know, Obama is Reagan, Obama is FDR, Obama is Lincoln, etc, etc, etc. Fact is, he started with an approval rating higher than any of those Presidents, and fell faster than any of those Presidents. And at this point in his term, he's lower than any of those Presidents. So spin on.

If Palin were a presidential candidate and if the election were tomorrow and if ... oh, wait. She'd still lose.

I used to think that. Now I'm not so sure.

[punked]

Yes we know, Obama is Reagan, Obama is FDR, Obama is Lincoln, etc, etc, etc. Fact is, he started with an approval rating higher than any of those Presidents, and fell faster than any of those Presidents. And at this point in his term, he's lower than any of those Presidents. So spin on.

I used to think that. Now I'm not so sure.

Actually Reagan was up to 77% approval by the first March of his first term much higher then Obama and he then fell faster and harder.

Edited December 13, 2009 by punked

[Shady]

Actually Reagan was up to 77% approval by the first March

That's simply a lie. You shouldn't have to lie to get your point across. And what's with your obsession with Ronald Reagan. He's been dead for several years. He hasn't been president for 20. But whenever somebody mentions Obama, you're right there talking of Reagan. Barry Obama is no Reagan. Get over it. If he was anything close to Reagan, he'd win a 49 state landslide in 2012. Barry ain't winning no 49 states dummy!

[punked]

That's simply a lie. You shouldn't have to lie to get your point across. And what's with your obsession with Ronald Reagan. He's been dead for several years. He hasn't been president for 20. But whenever somebody mentions Obama, you're right there talking of Reagan. Barry Obama is no Reagan. Get over it. If he was anything close to Reagan, he'd win a 49 state landslide in 2012. Barry ain't winning no 49 states dummy!

My bad his approval rating was 73% in march of 81. Still higher then Obama's was and it still fell farther and faster. I remember what they were saying in 81 "Reagan ain't winning no 49 states dummy!" but only dummies said that.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Polls/reagan_ratings_poll_040607.html

[Alta4ever]

My bad his approval rating was 73% in march of 81. Still higher then Obama's was and it still fell farther and faster. I remember what they were saying in 81 "Reagan ain't winning no 49 states dummy!" but only dummies said that.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Polls/reagan_ratings_poll_040607.html

Something for you to digest.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/presidential-approval-tracker.htm

What is really interesting compare, obama and carter, looks very similiar. The poll tracking between Obama and regan show some major differences, but what is even more of a contrast is bush sr. and obama

[Alta4ever]

Whats really pathetic is that Richard Nixon's ratings are much more favorable (until watergate) then obamas. So much for the big hype and "high" approval ratings.

[Guest American Woman]

My bad his approval rating was 73% in march of 81. Still higher then Obama's was and it still fell farther and faster. I remember what they were saying in 81 "Reagan ain't winning no 49 states dummy!" but only dummies said that.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Polls/reagan_ratings_poll_040607.html

I honestly don't know why anyone would try to make something of polls three years prior anyway, since these polls make it totally obvious how quickly the American voters can/do change their minds. Fact is, Obama's approval rating could very well shoot up again, just as as it's recently taken a dive. People aren't exactly consistent in their views, as these polls clearly show, and I don't think anyone can predict where they will be a year from now, much less in almost three years. Furthermore, having no idea who his running mate will be makes trying to predict how the voters will feel next election even more futile.

[GostHacked]

Poor Barry. It's getting even worse for him.

Poor Palin, she never got to be President. Her numbers mean less than nothing.

[Guest American Woman]

Poor Palin, she never got to be President. Her numbers mean less than nothing.

Or Vice-President, for that matter.

******

But speaking of desperate, I just got an official "Obama Agenda Survey" in the mail, which is "registered in [my] name, and affixed with a tracking code." But here's the interesting part: it says that they're "taking a sampling of Republican opinions in [my] area, so please, no matter what, do not discard or destroy your survey."

It goes on to say: There is so much about the Obama agenda that most Americans do not know, thanks to the non-stop, swooning coverage of the ultra-biased media."

"Swooning" and "ultra-biased." Scary! Evidently, we "don't have a moment to waste."

I guess they didn't get the memo that I'm a registered Democrat, and have been for years.

But of course they're also asking for a donation, since Obama and the Democrats have "lots of money," and "today Obama's team is still raising tens of millions of dollars a month." Not bad for someone for whom things are just getting worse worse.

Perhaps I should let them know what "Republicans" in my area think, though .... for shady's sake.

[wyly]

the dems will be dancin'in the streets should Palin get a nomination to run for Pres...she doesn't have to answer any tough questions between elections like, "what newspapers do you read, duh"? ...

[Shady]

Poor Palin, she never got to be President.

I was unaware of her run for President of the United States. When did that happen?

[Michael Hardner]

Perhaps I should let them know what "Republicans" in my area think, though .... for shady's sake.

L,

Never hesitate to respond to those polls ! The sample space is small, maybe a few thousand, so your answers will have more impact than 1000 votes in a federal election !

[Bugs]

L,

Never hesitate to respond to those polls ! The sample space is small, maybe a few thousand, so your answers will have more impact than 1000 votes in a federal election !

Of course, there's always the risk that you give these engineers of people's souls the information they need to more perfectly design the media strategy that they will use to deceive the public.

It isn't as if the Obama gang are into 'listening' to the people.

[Riverwind]

Of course, there's always the risk that you give these engineers of people's souls the information they need to more perfectly design the media strategy that they will use to deceive the public.

I was recently called for a EKOS poll on politics. A few questions came up like 'will a party's position on the environment affect my vote'. The correct answer is yes it would because I would never vote for a party promising to immediately waste money on brain dead CO2 regulations. Unfortunately, I knew that answer would be spun to imply I wanted action on CO2 so I had to respond that a party's position on the environment would not affect my vote. Edited December 19, 2009 by Riverwind

[Guest American Woman]

This survey has very specific questions, not open-ended questions that could be spun one way or another, and some questions are very obviously Republican-minded, so it's not unbiased, and makes no pretense to be.

For example: Do you agree with Barack Obama and the Democrats that taxes should be raised for the sake of "fairness," regardless of the negative impact it is likely to have on the economy?

Are you in favor of the expanded welfare benefits and unlimited eligibility (no time, education or work requirements) that Democrats in Congress are pushing to pass?

Are you in favor of reinstating the military draft, as Democrats in Congress have proposed?

But there are also questions such as: Should English be the official language of the United States?

Do you support amnesty for illegal immigrants?

Are you in favor of granting retroactive Social Security eligibility to illegal immigrants who gain U.S. citizenship through an amnesty program?

Anyway, as I already said, I'm a registered Democrat, so I my answers wouldn't be representative of Republicans in my area, which is the purpose of the survey; and I have to wonder how often these surveys get sent to the 'wrong' people.

[ironstone]

the dems will be dancin'in the streets should Palin get a nomination to run for Pres...she doesn't have to answer any tough questions between elections like, "what newspapers do you read, duh"? ...

I wonder what kind of things Obama reads? Red Digest? Workers Monthly?The Complete Works of Karl Marx?