Obama Sets New Record

[skyrider 0]

The president's job approval rating plummets to the lowest level ever recorded for a president at this point in his term, according to latest Gallup poll.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/

[JohnRich 4]

I'll go ahead and say it, before any of the Obamao worshipers get it in:

"It's George Bush's fault!"

Oh, and the irony is so thick with this item, that you can cut it with a knife - News:

Shocker polls: That Sarah Palin-Barack Obama gap melts to 1 point

"Obama's new Gallup Poll job approval number is 47%.
The new CNN/Opinion Research Poll shows Palin now at 46% favorable."

Source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/12/sarah-palin-barack-obama-poll-gap-narrows.html

So, all you Obamer worshipers who have been bashing Palin, well, guess what - your man is now in the same toilet. So, since their approval ratings are now virtually equal, that means that when you bash Palin for being unpopular, you will now also be bashing your own beloved president, with the same breath.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

The president's job approval rating plummets to the lowest level ever recorded for a president at this point in his term, according to latest Gallup poll.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/

Comparison with previous presidents is illuminating:

George W. Bush, 86 percent
-- Bill Clinton, 52 percent
-- George H.W. Bush, 71 percent
-- Ronald Reagan, 49 percent
-- Jimmy Carter, 57 percent
-- Gerald Ford, 52 percent
-- Richard Nixon, 59 percent
-- Lyndon Johnson, 74 percent
-- John Kennedy, 77 percent
-- Dwight Eisenhower, 69 percent
-- Harry Truman, 49 percent

Note Carter better than Reagan, GW Bush very high (turned out to be one of the worst presidents ever), Nixon better than Truman, Reagan or Clinton. What a joke. These figures are completely meaningless.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

The president's job approval rating plummets to the lowest level ever recorded for a president at this point in his term, according to latest Gallup poll.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/

Comparison with previous presidents is illuminating:

George W. Bush, 86 percent Among the very worst presidents (source)
-- Bill Clinton, 52 percent Easily re-elected despite sham "impeachment" by penis-less Republicans. Oh - no deficit.
-- George H.W. Bush, 71 percentDidn't know what a cashier's scanner was. Booted out
-- Ronald Reagan, 49 percentWill be 5th head on Mt. Rushmore
-- Jimmy Carter, 57 percentKiller rabbits. Booted out
-- Gerald Ford, 52 percentLikeable guy, but tainted by Darth Vader. Booted out.
-- Richard Nixon, 59 percentNot a bad score. Oops, most evil president in history. Skipped town while he still could.
-- Lyndon Johnson, 74 percentCrashed and burned on Vietnam. Skipped town after 1st full term.
-- John Kennedy, 77 percent Yeah, and you saw what they did to him.
-- Dwight Eisenhower, 69 percentAh. Meatloaf, mashed potatoes and Howdy Doody when we needed some serious down-time.
-- Harry Truman, 49 percentWow, a terrible poll number. Oops! Now widely regarded as the 5th best president so far.

Note Carter better than Reagan, GW Bush very high (turned out to be one of the worst presidents ever), Nixon better than Truman or Eisenhower.

What a joke.

[skyrider 0]

This just cracks me up, some folks just can't admit they fell for a pretty package, that has turned out to be Socialism!

Or simply voted for him because he is black , and they felt guilty!

[airdvr 210]

Quote

What a joke. These figures are completely meaningless.

Hmmm...I guess the meaning is lost on you then. Bloom is off the rose, shine is off the penny. What people are beginning to see is a less than 1 term jr. senator running the show.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

This just cracks me up, some folks just can't admit they fell for a pretty package, that has turned out to be Socialism!

Or simply voted for him because he is black , and they felt guilty!

Hmm. When Clinton was running, people voting for him knew that he had been a Rhodes Scholar, a graduate of Yale Law School and a law professor before entering government. They didn't think of him as "just another white guy".

When Obama ran, I paid attention to things like his degree in political science from Columbia U., his having been President of Harvard Law Review, his having taught constitutional law as a law professor, and his career both in and out of government. Yet you devalue all that for the fact that he's black. You're personifying the very thing that you're bitching about.

Myself, after 8 years of being embarrassed by a "president" who couldn't even string 2 sentences together intelligibly, I was overjoyed to have a choice that was this side north of Stupid.

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Myself, after 8 years of being embarrassed by a "president" who couldn't even string 2 sentences together intelligibly, I was overjoyed to have a choice that was this side north of Stupid.

He might not have been an eloquent speaker but I really think he was genuine, and I don't neceesarily think he was stupid.

Can't say as much for the current model. He's smoooth..and that always bothers me a bit in a politician.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

What a joke. These figures are completely meaningless.

Hmmm...I guess the meaning is lost on you then. Bloom is off the rose, shine is off the penny. What people are beginning to see is a less than 1 term jr. senator running the show.

Before he became president, Lincoln had only been a 1-term congressman, a state legislator and had lost an election for the US Senate. And lest we lose our perspective, Jesus Christ had a pretty skimpy secular resume, too, as I recall.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

How does that saying go? Those who can not do teach.

Obama is a great public speaker and yes he is more intelligent the GWB ... then again who isn't. But Obama has no leadership experience. Contrast this to someone like Mitt Romney who has successfully lead in business, lead in State government and help put the Salt Lake Winter Olympics back on track. Either the Republicans knew they were toast in 2008 and wanted to save Romney for the future, or they are just fools who can't look past the man's Mormon religious background. But Romney has leadership experience, something the junior senator from Illinois does not have.

Am I to understand Obama no longer does daily matinees parting the Red Sea? He still does his 7pm and 9 pm shows though? Yes Obama is the savior alright. Who needs to work when Obama will be there to spend the future generation's prosperity on his socialist agenda.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Quote

Quote

What a joke. These figures are completely meaningless.

Hmmm...I guess the meaning is lost on you then. Bloom is off the rose, shine is off the penny. What people are beginning to see is a less than 1 term jr. senator running the show.

Before he became president, Lincoln had only been a 1-term congressman, a state legislator and had lost an election for the US Senate. And lest we lose our perspective, Jesus Christ had a pretty skimpy secular resume, too, as I recall.

Obama and JC in the same paragraph? Is your leg tingling?

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[BDashe 0]

Happy "Cinco de cuatro" to you all as well.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

How does that saying go? Those who can not do teach..

I've always thought that was an idiotic saying, so quoting it doesn't hold much value with me.

In any event, I was initially replying to a post that essentially said that the reason why people voted for him was because he was the black man. Way to basically dismiss a person's credentials just because he's... you know, a darkie.

[grimmie 186]

Comparing Obama, who is actually in a job he isn't quitting anytime soon, to a notorious quitter...puleeeze.

You can dislike Obama all you want, but don't compare him to that Alaska trailer trash loser Palin.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

In any event, I was initially replying to a post that essentially said that the reason why people voted for him was because he was the black man. Way to basically dismiss a person's credentials just because he's... you know, a darkie.

Take your stereo types and shove it up your you know what. Where did I say anything about Obama's race? Typical for people to resort to the race card. I couldn't care less what race Obama is. I do care that a junior senator with no leadership experience was given the most powerful job in the world. Sarah Palin (who in my opinion is NOT qualified for the job) has more leadership experience than Obama.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[skyrider 0]

Quote

Comparing Obama, who is actually in a job he isn't quitting anytime soon, to a notorious quitter...puleeeze.

You can dislike Obama all you want, but don't compare him to that Alaska trailer trash loser Palin.

I may 100 percent Anti Obama, BUT 100 percent in agreement with that comment, She is a quiter, I will never vote for her for any office,Period!

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

In any event, I was initially replying to a post that essentially said that the reason why people voted for him was because he was the black man. Way to basically dismiss a person's credentials just because he's... you know, a darkie.

Take your stereo types and shove it up your you know what. Where did I say anything about Obama's race? Typical for people to resort to the race card. I couldn't care less what race Obama is. I do care that a junior senator with no leadership experience was given the most powerful job in the world. Sarah Palin (who in my opinion is NOT qualified for the job) has more leadership experience than Obama.

You misunderstood, but it may be my fault for not being precise. When I said "Way to basically dismiss a person's credentials just because he's... you know, a darkie, " I was referring to skyrider's post #5, which raised the matter of Obama's race - not to yours, or to you.

Do I still have to stick it up my ass?

[skyrider 0]

Anyone that was at the Polls KNOWS there was a turn out like never before, of peopel voting souly for "The Black Guy" anyone that fails to admit that, is either Blind or reall, reaalllllly stupid!

I have never seen so many Adults, that had never voted in their lives, Holding up lines trying to figure out the process!

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Anyone that was at the Polls KNOWS there was a turn out like never before, of peopel voting souly for "The Black Guy" anyone that fails to admit that, is either Blind or reall, reaalllllly stupid!

I have never seen so many Adults, that had never voted in their lives, Holding up lines trying to figure out the process!

Well, there's nothing unusual about people voting for candidates of their own ethnic group; that happens all the time. So while race may explain the overwhelming nature of the Black vote, I don't think that explains the votes of the non-Black moderate "swing votes". My dad is a Northern, life-long registered Democrat who is a Marine vet and had a career in engineering and management. The kind that voted for Carter in '76, but for Reagan in '80 - a classic "swing voter". I was sure he'd vote for McCain. He voted for Obama, partly because he was impressed with the man's credentials and intelligence, and partly because he was appalled by the McCain-Palin ticket. If anything, Dad set aside considerations of race when he cast his vote. And no, it wasn't because he felt guilty about anything (trust me: that's not him).

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Comparison with previous presidents is illuminating:

George W. Bush, 86 percent Among the very worst presidents (source)
-- Bill Clinton, 52 percent Easily re-elected despite sham "impeachment" by penis-less Republicans. Oh - no deficit.
-- George H.W. Bush, 71 percentDidn't know what a cashier's scanner was. Booted out
-- Ronald Reagan, 49 percentWill be 5th head on Mt. Rushmore
-- Jimmy Carter, 57 percentKiller rabbits. Booted out
-- Gerald Ford, 52 percentLikeable guy, but tainted by Darth Vader. Booted out.
-- Richard Nixon, 59 percentNot a bad score. Oops, most evil president in history. Skipped town while he still could.
-- Lyndon Johnson, 74 percentCrashed and burned on Vietnam. Skipped town after 1st full term.
-- John Kennedy, 77 percent Yeah, and you saw what they did to him.
-- Dwight Eisenhower, 69 percentAh. Meatloaf, mashed potatoes and Howdy Doody when we needed some serious down-time.
-- Harry Truman, 49 percentWow, a terrible poll number. Oops! Now widely regarded as the 5th best president so far.

Note - Clinton was impeached after reelection. The 96 win was a shoo-in, as shown by the GOP putting up likeable, not not winnable, Bob Dole.

Bush ranked high at this point for the obvious reason - we had been attacked and were striking back. We could have elected Hitler's grandson in 2000 and he'd have just as high as rating.

Truman was rated poorly because he wasn't FDR. It's like replacing Michael Jordan or John Elway.

Reagan is the closest analog to Obama, and shows a very similar rating. 1981 was ugly.

----
If this was intended to be honest, and not just data mining, the big benchmarks are Sept 2010, just before the midterms, late 2011, when you have nearly 3 years to judge and before the election BS begins, and of course Nov 2012, when judgement is passed.

Much of this last one will depend on who the GOP runs. As Canuck notes, this is a jr senator. I wasn't in favor of his candidacy at this time either. But if the choice was him or the GOP maintaining the White House with McCain/Palin, then I'll take the inexperienced guy and let him get replaced in 2012. I'm hoping for a clear slate of candidates now - no more Clintons or Bushs or McCains. Basically - no one that ran in the past, so drop Romney as well since the GOP won't elect a Mormon.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

This just cracks me up, some folks just can't admit they fell for a pretty package, that has turned out to be Socialism!

Or simply voted for him because he is black , and they felt guilty!

Socialists say that Obama is not a socialist:

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/may2009/db20090522_329825.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

What a joke. These figures are completely meaningless.

Hmmm...I guess the meaning is lost on you then. Bloom is off the rose, shine is off the penny. What people are beginning to see is a less than 1 term jr. senator running the show.

Negative, the IRRELEVANCE is lost on you.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

What a joke. These figures are completely meaningless.

Hmmm...I guess the meaning is lost on you then. Bloom is off the rose, shine is off the penny. What people are beginning to see is a less than 1 term jr. senator running the show.

Negative, the IRRELEVANCE is lost on you.

Except, of course, when the poll is bad news for conservatives. It's relevant as hell then, isn't it?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Actually, airdvr and kallend are both right. Just in different ways.
As airdvr said, the approval ratings show the "newness" of Obama has worn off and he is being viewed for what he has done and not just for the hope of him fullfilling promises made.
OTOH, kallend is correct in asserting the numbers mean very little to nothing as far as predicting future performance and popularity are concerned. Obama could very well turn those numbers around rather quickly, or he could trip on his dick and continue to slide. Political popularity is a fickle demon.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Except, of course, when the poll is bad news for conservatives. It's relevant as hell then, isn't it?

year 7 and 8 are always more telling than year 1.