Barack Obama's Approval Ratings Are Plunging!

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by fivepoint, Nov 25, 2009.

  1. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #1
    Gallup just released some interesting numbers... It appears that president Barack Obama's rankings are in freefall at the moment. It appears to me that Americans are not happy with many things this President is trying to do, not the least of which is fundamentally changing our society through bailouts, social-re-engineering social programs, stimulus packages, cap&trade schemes, socialized healthcare, running up never-before-heard-of debt in the TRILLIONS of dollars, as well as maintaining many of George Bush's policies of big government, foreign intervention, FISA, and much more.

    Or do you think it's just because he isn't a 'new' president anymore?


    His numbers are falling especially quickly among 'whites.'

    [​IMG]


    Some interesting points...
    • His approval ratings in the past 11 months have fallen 17% for all Adults
    • During that time he lost around 18-19% for individuals over the age of 30, and only 13% for those under the age of 30.
    • His favor with 'whites' has fallen a dramatic 22% to a dismal 39%, while it has grown with 'blacks' who now give the president a 91% favorability.
    • The president's favorability rating has fallen faster with individuals who have college degrees than those with high school or less.
    • The president's favorability rating has fallen faster with married individuals than unmarried individuals.
    • the president's favorability rating has fallen almost as fast (18% to 19%) between 'moderates' and 'conservatives', while liberals have been much more positive, only dropping him 5%.
    [​IMG]



    There also appears to be some 'angry white democrats' out there:

    [​IMG]



    The complete article:
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/124484/Obama-Approval-Slide-Finds-Whites-Down-39.aspx

     
  2. IntheNet macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #2
    Well he did say "Hope & Change" - 10 months in we're still hoping and we want change already...

    Wait 'till unemployment hits 15% in January...

    Naw... as the magnitude of Obama's domestic and international failure becomes more well known Independents and even some level-headed Democrats will drop support for him. I can't think of a single thing Obama has succeeded at in 10 months except bankrupting the nation... Since Europe likes him so much I wonder if we could arrange a lend/lease for him?

    Uh oh... Expect Sharpton, Jackson, and Rahm to throw around the racist charge more...

    Married Americans have more to lose so I can understand their anger...

    The smart ones... good.
     
  3. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #3
    This has been expected for some time. This is what happens to all presidents as they expend political capital trying to get their agenda through congress. In fact, of presidents this century, it seems like it's only Bill Clinton who left office more popular than he started.


    [​IMG]



    Reagan had a terrible first couple of years, eventually slipping to 35% approval rating by January 1983. What's the similarity? They were both dealing with terrible recessions. Things turned around by the end of his first term and a landslide ensued.

    The economy is on the turn. New home sales are up. Personal income is up. Layoffs are on the decline. The foundations are only just being poured...

    Storm in a teacup.
     
  4. fivepoint thread starter macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #4
    Exactly. And the world stops buying our debt, and we enter hyperinflation.


    I'm really surprised so many Democrats support him... Democrats from 30 years ago would have thought this guy was a loon. The party has been completely taken over by individuals who don't care about common sense or financial literacy.

    The amount of activist/radical/extremist policies they've trying to push through is absolutely astounding. I mean think about it... We're in a financial CRISIS, and instead of cutting taxes to prop up businesses that actually pay people's salaries, they push cap and trade on them. When we're trillions of dollars in debt, and simply paying the interest on said debt is by very definition CRIPPLING to us in the near future, why in the world would the government even be thinking about spending TRILLIONS more on healthcare. They've successfully pulled the wool over some people's eyes by saying it's 'deficit neutral', but how dense would you have to be to actually believe that? Yeah, we're going to cover millions of more people, and it's not going to cost a thing! They don't bother to tell you that for the first 10 years (on which the calculations are based) they are TAXING you for all 10 years, and only giving you services for the last 6!!!

    Anyway, it's a sad state of affairs... that's for sure. My only hope is that these numbers continue to fall and the extremists begin to realize that what they're doing is political suicide.
     
  5. fivepoint thread starter macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #5

    Part of it, perhaps. But does the expectation of something make it ok? Also, I don't think the TRILLIONS of additional spending, one president creating more debt than all presidents in America's history combined, was really planned on... but, you bring up an excellent point... it's not just the Democrats who have spending problems... in fact, sometimes they even do better (Bill Clinton with the Republican Congress) it's the Republicans too. The Republicans have been 'liberal-lite' for quite a long time. They might talk the talk, but they all have their little pet projects, and no one stops to ask themselves if these ideas are constitutional, if we can afford them, or if they are good for our long-term interests... and not just short-term aspirations.

    The spending must stop! Big government and socialistic policies will bankrupt us all. Personal responsibility, free-market, private property, and entrepreneurship is what will pull us through the abyss if anything will.
     
  6. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #6
    I'll make a dal with you- stop using words like "socialism" to describe what's going on right now, and I'll be more than happy to discuss issues with you and InTheNet, etc. If you're going to continue to misuse words, I want nothing to do with any discussions you guys start.
     
  7. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #7

    You can't fight political gravity. Only time will tell, and anyone debating politics in good faith understands that you don't turn around an economic collapse like this in 10 months. As for the worry about inflation, buyers of 30 year bonds don't seem to be sharing your concern:



    All in all, looking at where things were twelve months ago, the global situation is looking better, except for unemployment, but that is always a lagging indicator.

     
  8. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #8
    These numbers must also be placed in the context of two important components: the snapshot in time that the exist and compared to other groups involved in governance.

    At the moment there are a lot of issues still in a state of flux for the administration - primarily health care and Afghanistan. They remain unresolved, largely covered inadequately by the media by making the least relevant aspects of the stories the most covered, and are easily demagogued by the opposition.

    Once there is clarity on these two fronts, we'll have a better trajectory of where the administration's numbers are going.

    The second deals with the numbers vis-a-vis Congressional Democrats and Congressional Republicans. The mood of the country is largely anti-incumbant. This is the phenomenon that best explains the 2009 elections - not a referendum on Obama. I would guess that the Republicans have not gained many approval points relative to the decline in Obama. Simply, people are not satisfied with anyone. I would further posit that Obama is more popular than a generic democrat or republican.
     
  9. IntheNet macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #9
    GOP is making big gains... Rasmussen Reports =>

    Generic Congressional Ballot: Republicans Post Seven-Point Lead on Generic Ballot
    Tuesday, November 24, 2009
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot
    Republican candidates have extended their lead over Democrats to seven points, their biggest lead since early September, in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.
     
  10. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #10
    Both partys wasted no time bailing out their wall street and banking campaign donators, but the U.S. worker? they both could give a s.... we need a revolution in this country that starts with eliminating both of these stinking bought off partys.. Obama's ratings are tied to our horrible economy. The President cant do much when he has to work with these bought off liars and lawyers.
     
  11. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #11
    Let me clarify: approval rating of generic Democrat or generic Republican currently holding office in Washington.

    That is inherently different from a question on an election nearly a year out, where the dynamics of not being in office almost always help the opposition candidate.

    Not that this makes any difference since you will either intentionally spin the two issues to be one in the same or in your fantasy world simply believe them to be equal.

    Recent Quinnipiac Numbers:

    http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm
    Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are handling their job?
    Approve 31% Disapprove 58% Unsure 11%

    http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm
    Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democrats in Congress are handling their job?
    Approve 36% Disapprove 55% Unsure 9%

    Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president?
    Approve 48% Disapprove 42% Unsure 10%
     
  12. IntheNet macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #12
  13. awmazz macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    #13
    Interesting probably only in that the last time George Bush had Obama's current approval ratings was 2004. And America re-elected him.
     
  14. awmazz macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    #14
    That's a very informative chart, thanks! Eisenhower seems to be the only one to consistently stay above 55% for nearly his entire 8 year term. Clearly the most popular post-war President.

    We'll never know how JFK would have done longer term. And look at those two Bush spikes over 80% - Americans love them some war and conflict. But the support appears to decline just as dramatically once the initial euphoria wears off. Ditto with Truman's Korean War spike in 1949 doubling his approval from 35 to 70%.

    So Obama just needs to go to war with some despot in September 2012 and he'll walk it in. It worked for Thatcher with the Falklands War, but she actually won that war quickly and easily. ;)
     
  15. bobber205 macrumors 68020

    bobber205

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Location:
    Oregon
    #15
    But they're in freeeeeeefaaaaaaaaaaall. :eek:
     
  16. itcheroni macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Location:
    CA
    #16
    The author of that article isn't looking at the big picture. Let's look at the data:

    16 billion in 30-year U.S. Bonds
    25 billion in 10 years
    40 billion in 3-years

    People seem to be favoring the shorter term bonds, which goes directly against the author's point. And he derides gold bulls but India's central bank recently bought over 200 metric tons($6.7 billion) in gold from the IMF and just indicated they would like to buy more. And India swooped in front of China to do it too. Although 6.7 billion might not sound like much when we're discussing trillion in deficits, but the IMF is the last seller of large quantities of gold and they sold the 200 tons without going to market. They have 200 tons left and I bet the Chinese are trying to find a way to buy it without losing face(paying more than India). As soon as their ready to sell, any number of central banks will be eager to take it. The more US debt a central bank holds, the more eager they are to buy gold. Gold has hit a new all time high for 8 or 9 consecutive days, while the dollar has reached a 14-year low against the yen. China has recently allowed their citizens to own silver to the first time in decades and now encourage them to own gold. Foreign governments are buying our bonds because they're in a difficult political relationship with the U.S. But for every bond they buy, I'm sure they're more than hedging for it with gold.

    And when considering inflation, if you want to take the CPI as the indicator, be aware of the government's use of hedonics. For example, if a widget increased in price by 10% but the government subjectively says the quality of the widget also increased by 10%, then there is no inflation according to the CPI. I would rather gauge inflation by the price of raw materials. Many commodities are at all time highs or near all time highs, gold, sugar, wheat. How can the basic cost of the raw material that we need to make or eat anything go up and there not be inflation?
     
  17. Wotan31 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    #17
    He's a simpleton who grossly underestimated the time, cost, and collateral damage caused by all these social programs. One term president. if he lasts that long.
     
  18. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #18
    Enlighten me, define "all of these social programs"
     
  19. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #19
  20. awmazz macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    #20
    I'm pretty sure that's a quote from mid 2001. And mid 1993 too.

    Ironically, not a quote from mid 1989.
     
  21. itcheroni macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Location:
    CA
    #21
    He's obviously not a simpleton, so most people will simply stop listening to you after you say that. Calling him names distracts from the real problems. If you believe his actions are wrong-turn the spotlight on those actions.

    He's a very smart lawyer. But very smart lawyers can often be very stupid at certain things. Just ask one to do a simple math problem.
     
  22. fivepoint thread starter macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #22
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/

     
  23. IntheNet macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #23
    :D

    Someone in Crawford, Texas is having a good laugh over breakfast...
     
  24. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #24
    Bush only had that high of an approval rating because that was right after 9/11 and Americans are dumb sheep who supported him no matter what.

    I'm proud to be part of the 14% that never approved of his job. Ever.
     
  25. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #25
    It's not at all surprising that his rate of decline in popularity is in rapid decline. He's much like Gertrude Stein's Oakland. Glib-tongued and slick-talking, but nothing of substance to say. Sounded good on the campaign trail, and people bought into his con-job.

    Trouble is, he hasn't and can't deliver on all his promises. Not yet and not in the future, either.

    The end of the housing bubble was predicted well before it happened. The economy was headed for the toilet by 2007. It was already there during the campaign. It was in no way an unknown.

    So he got the job and went to blaming Bush for the problems, when the problems ante-dated Bush. That right there shows an ignorance of both economics and economic and legislative history. But even now, after yowling about change on the campaign trail, he's continuing failed monetary policies. These policies are directly contributory to the harsher economic times we'll see in these next two-to-several years.

    At the same time, his ideas for new programs will increase the cost of living for everybody--which reduces the standard of living for everybody. If the Bush tax cuts are ended, that will take investment capital out of the economy. And his people in Congress are proposing new taxes. In the meantime, his people in Congress are happily--with his apparent approval--creating gigantic levels of deficits like a bunch of drunk sailors on shore leave after six months at sea.

    What's to approve?

    'Rat
     

Share This Page