Poll: Obama daily approval negative going on 8 straight months

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
Well the US woke up early on this dude. BHO went negative on the daily tracking poll and has stayed there since late June. There are some thinking it is possible for the GOP to take the House and Senate in November. While a bit of a stretch-the more BHO stays on TV the lower he goes.
Now this is my Hope, Change I can believe in.
If the GOP screws this one up, and it is likely lets face it, what a lost opportunity.
In generic polls of RNC vs DNC the RNC has been up for awhile, of course if the Tea Party runs candidates and pull a Ross Perot-then the DNC wins again.
Well either way BHO has lost the political capitol he once had with the population on whole (not in PRSI of course).

link

another link

Bonus link
 

freeny

macrumors 68020
Sep 27, 2005
2,065
5
Location: Location:
I dont believe there is a single political body that has a positive report card right now. People are pretty angry at politicians in general.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,364
UK
I dont believe there is a single political body that has a positive report card right now. People are pretty angry at politicians in general.
And so they should be, the US politicians are astonishingly incompetent.
 

Dont Hurt Me

macrumors 603
Dec 21, 2002
6,056
6
Yahooville S.C.
Congress has a lot of controls and the current batch is as screwed up as the republican batch before it. A president who cant get both of these idiot partys to compromise or find middle ground is sunk. I think Obama is trying but both partys put their party's stupid philosophy ahead of the countrys needs everytime. We just saw it with the Jobs Bill with a Dumba... Harry Reid and the party of No. Throw them all out! The only time they agree on something is when Big Corporations Pay off both sides. Prostitutes to the Multinational Corporations and little else. I almost feel sorry for Obama that he has to deal with these two childish party's.
 

niuniu

macrumors 68020
Shame, he had the the right idea on a lot of stuff. Just was perhaps too idealistic with his timelines for change. Either that or he lacked the muscle to make policy move. Politicians world over are distrusted in any case. Can't think of a world leader of any sort besides Putin that I actually like.
 

pooky

macrumors 6502
Jun 2, 2003
356
1
It cracks me up... there's a group of people who, when faced with GWB approval numbers consistently in the 20's, shouted that polls and approval ratings don't matter, he's the C-in-C, he's the decider, he does what he thinks is right without regard for public opinion, etc. Now these same people are rejoicing that Obama is polling around 50%, and shouting that it's the end of the Democrats as we know it.
 

leekohler

macrumors G5
Dec 22, 2004
14,162
19
Chicago, Illinois
It cracks me up... there's a group of people who, when faced with GWB approval numbers consistently in the 20's, shouted that polls and approval ratings don't matter, he's the C-in-C, he's the decider, he does what he thinks is right without regard for public opinion, etc. Now these same people are rejoicing that Obama is polling around 50%, and shouting that it's the end of the Democrats as we know it.
Yep, and I bet the OP was one of them.
 

Macky-Mac

macrumors 68030
May 18, 2004
2,589
1,142
..... of course if the Tea Party runs candidates and pull a Ross Perot-then the DNC wins again.....
a very real possibility;

Tea partiers pull back from alliance with South Carolina's Republican Party

The alliance between the South Carolina Republican Party and the state’s tea party organizations seems to have lasted less than a week, as grassroots groups chafed at the idea of being absorbed into the party apparatus.

The partnership announced Monday by state GOP Chairwoman Karen Floyd and Harry Kibler of the Upstate Coalition of Conservative Organizations, an umbrella group of tea party organizations, was intended to create liaisons between the state party and the grass roots and help the two work together to elect more conservative Republicans.

“This agreement is a start,” Kibler said Monday. “Having our groups work together will be of great benefit to the Republican Party and the state of South Carolina.”

But after getting calls from tea party groups across the country accusing the South Carolina organizations of selling out to the GOP, Kibler and the groups he represents are backing away from the state party.

“Everybody started dumping on Harry. He was getting calls from tea party people in California asking ‘Why did you sell us out?’” Roan A. Garcia-Quintana, executive director of the South Carolina group Americans Have Had Enough, said in an interview Friday.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32911.html#ixzz0fS0uethv
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
ya, like I had said before, the GOP is trying to slip into the movement. The movement is full of Democrats that are not "progressives", independents that regret their Obama vote, and many republicans. Of course according to the media and beliefs of many here it is just right wing redneck radicals.
The Tea Party, imo, should remain a loose formation of fiscal conservatives that work from the outside to shape policy. Once they move to DC as legislators they become part of the problem. If the GOP thinks they are going to horn in they will get their butts beat. The only news in this poll is that many are upset with BHO and would retract that vote, and that the point this happened was earlier than the usual president has seen.
You have to laugh when the Dems had a supermajority then blame the Reps for stopping things. Hilarious.
And for the record, I would still vote for Bush over Kerry every day of the week and twice in Chicago.
 

bobber205

macrumors 68020
Nov 15, 2005
2,182
0
Oregon
ya, like I had said before, the GOP is trying to slip into the movement. The movement is full of Democrats that are not "progressives", independents that regret their Obama vote, and many republicans. Of course according to the media and beliefs of many here it is just right wing redneck radicals.
The Tea Party, imo, should remain a loose formation of fiscal conservatives that work from the outside to shape policy. Once they move to DC as legislators they become part of the problem. If the GOP thinks they are going to horn in they will get their butts beat. The only news in this poll is that many are upset with BHO and would retract that vote, and that the point this happened was earlier than the usual president has seen.
You have to laugh when the Dems had a supermajority then blame the Reps for stopping things. Hilarious.
And for the record, I would still vote for Bush over Kerry every day of the week and twice in Chicago.
Fillibuster?

And I'm sorry the Dems don't consist of a group of people that think exactly like on every issue or are sheepish enough to be forced into breaking a fillibuster.
 

yojitani

macrumors 68000
Apr 28, 2005
1,855
10
An octopus's garden
Should tea baggers become more than a curious footnote to the quackery of early twentieth century politics in the USA, it would be high time to leave.

P.s. Would it be too much to ask you Stu, if you could change your avatar? That face is really disturbing!:)
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
Fillibuster?

And I'm sorry the Dems don't consist of a group of people that think exactly like on every issue or are sheepish enough to be forced into breaking a fillibuster.
What about Fillibusters?
Are you suggesting that the Dems are or are not sheepish enough to be forced into breaking a fillibuster with their super majority?!:p
WOW, just WOW.
 

NT1440

macrumors G5
May 18, 2008
12,141
13,986
What about Fillibusters?
Are you suggesting that the Dems are or are not sheepish enough to be forced into breaking a fillibuster with their super majority?!:p
WOW, just WOW.
Don't you need 60 votes to break a filibuster?
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
Don't you need 60 votes to break a filibuster?
Yes, you lost a seat, so its not likely to be broken. I think the filibuster should return back to the "old way" where they actually had to take a stand until another opposer replaced them and so on. If the old ass republicans can keep it up for more than 48 hours I would be impressed.
 

bobber205

macrumors 68020
Nov 15, 2005
2,182
0
Oregon
Yes, you lost a seat, so its not likely to be broken. I think the filibuster should return back to the "old way" where they actually had to take a stand until another opposer replaced them and so on. If the old ass republicans can keep it up for more than 48 hours I would be impressed.
The Democrats need to grow some balls and make them actually do this.
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
The Democrats need to grow some balls and make them actually do this.
I don't think they can anymore, I think there was a rule change. It used to be that as long as the dems didn't add anything to the agenda they had to vote on the current issue unless there was someone up there speaking. I don't know what exactly changed this (probably the old bastards complaining about having to stand to get their way).
 

bobber205

macrumors 68020
Nov 15, 2005
2,182
0
Oregon
I don't think they can anymore, I think there was a rule change. It used to be that as long as the dems didn't add anything to the agenda they had to vote on the current issue unless there was someone up their speaking. I don't know what exactly changed this (probably the old bastards complaining about having to stand to get their way).
There was never a rule change.
There is an unwritten rule to not call them out on this.
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
Don't you need 60 votes to break a filibuster?
Yep, that is what a supermajority is. So the GOP could not fillibuster while the Dems had 60 seats unless they could peel off an independent. The only people that were stopping the Dems from passing anything were the.....wait for it........it's coming.......THE DEMS!!!!
Of course they had to blame the Republicans saying they were obstructing, when the FACT is the Reps couldn't stop an ant from crossing the street. They were so powerless the Dems wouldn't even let them in on the conversation and locked them out. So back to blame Bush and then GOP. The GOP has it's problems, let us not forgot, but to have a supermajority and blame the Republicans is like saying you can't go on vacation because a stranger didn't think it was a good time for you to go. That is why Bobber's post was so confusing, I don't think he/she knew what he/she was saying or didn't understand what a supermajority was and jumped on the Reps were obstructing...hilarious.
 

63dot

macrumors 603
Jun 12, 2006
5,271
339
norcal
It's the short coattails I have seen with every President after Jimmy Carter.

RR had the White House but often dealt with a very hostile House of Representatives. Both Bushes knew what it meant to get blocked. Clinton felt the backlash of the Newt Gingrich revolution of 1994. Obama had this narrow window of support, but if like precedent since the post-Carter days, he will have to deal with a House or Senate either not in control of his party, or not in step with his ideas.

In the last 30 years, when one party takes the White House, the other party usually rallies in the same election, or a later one, to take control of either the House or the Senate.

My guess is that a lot of the poor economy will be blamed on Obama and many will feel that he did little to help us in two years thus giving the GOP a chance to regain the House or Senate, or both. People pay very little attention to the polls when the Congress gets low numbers, and look to see how the President's rating is.

Anything below 60% percent for POTUS and then you have a vulnerable party in midterms.

South and central Midwest:

the GOP stronghold will continue here

Upper Midwest:

GOP can gain seats

Mountain states:

another area where GOP can gain

West coast and Northeast:

will probably stay a Democratic stronghold

I predict the GOP will definitely gain a slight majority in the Senate and may tighten the gap in the House (but this will not be as easy). The downside for Obama is that he will face more opposition. The upside is that if this country does not pull out of the wars and recession as fast as most Americans envisioned, then the blame can go around to both parties. If Obama's party retains control of Congress and we are still "recovering" inches at a time, then say hello to a Jindal or Romney in the White House (something that scares me to death).

The only hope Obama can have if we are at November 2012 and we are still in recession is if a significant moderate-right or right wing force comes in as a third party, such as Palin (or similar maverick) fronting the Reform Party or the Tea Party with the backing of at least one strong supporter from the likes of Pat Robertson, Rush, Ann Coulter, or Mike Huckabee. This will have the 1992 effect when Ross Perot came in and split the conservative vote and made a condition where it left only one person (Clinton) vying for the liberal vote. With a country evenly split, Clinton got the White House. Despite the landslide in 2008, America was still pretty evenly split and Obama won not on his message, but on people's anger against George W. Bush.

I think the President is yet to have true believers and the only way he can get street cred is to "appear" to be a leader bringing us out of the recession decisively. Once out, going from deficit to surplus won't be unthinkable. And the real measure of pulling out of this recession is success combating high unemployment and woes of main street. Any idiot can pull out Wall Street and the Fortune 500s and government help to big auto in the '80s and bankers after '08 did not score any brownie points.
 

Rt&Dzine

macrumors 6502a
Oct 8, 2008
736
5
If Obama's party retains control of Congress and we are still "recovering" inches at a time, then say hello to a Jindal or Romney in the White House (something that scares me to death).
If they do, it'll be interesting to see the Teabaggers fade out.
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
If they do, it'll be interesting to see the Teabaggers fade out.
Well, the Tea Party will fade out IF the party in power cuts costs, reigns in spending, stops bailing out private enterprise. BUT they will be mad as h3ll if the next group-Rep or Dem doesn't do it, especially if the newly elected promise to do it. IMHO