Barack Obama's Job Approval Ratings Matter in the 2012 Election

131
Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, GOP, 2012

Barack Obama's Job Approval Ratings Matter in the 2012 Election

In the grand arena of presidential politics, public perception and approval is everything. The lower the approval rating, the less likely people will show up to vote for that candidate. No matter what the efforts or intentions may be of the incumbent president at the time, if the crowd is against you, nothing else may matter.

President Barack Obama is gearing up for this years’ general election. While attempting to downplay the rumors that his candidacy for reelection will be the first one with a budget of nearly a billion dollars, Obama will no doubt have an arsenal at his command that will give any would-be Republican challenger a few bloody noses before November. However, if Obama’s approval ratings remain under 50%, all the money in the world might not save him.

The strategy for conservatives seems clear: Keep his approval low. To do this, Republicans will not need to release false document in an attempt to smear Obama’s character, similar to what Dan Rather did in 2004 disputing George W. Bush’s military service. All they need to do is to again and again remind the public why the president has lost his popularity.

Approval ratings are everything in an election year. Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush all had approval ratings under 50%. The other thing they all had in common?  They all also lost their bid for a second term. Fifty Percent is the magic mark. If you’re above that heading into an election year, you’re chances remain promising. This precedent is not without exception. President Harry Truman ran and won reelection in 1948, with an approval rating in the high 30’s. However, that is the only exception.

Every other president since polling like this began including Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush had an approval rating above 50% throughout their re-election year.

Merkel graph

Obama’s poll numbers give Republicans cause for hope. As of January 29th, Gallup shows his approval rating at 45%. And there are other indications of an uphill battle. As of last week, only 18% polled were satisfied with the direction of the country.

The CBO recently released a report stating how unemployment could go above 9% again, a terrible sign for Obama. His approval ratings on the economy are a mere 36%. On top of all of that, his signature legislative achievement, ObamaCare, is still very unpopular.

This would probably be the first and only time that Obama would ever want to be compared to George W. Bush instead of Jimmy Carter.

Approval and disapproval are everything. Being a member of an unpopular party can hurt you even if you’re not the individual that everyone is angry with. Obama won his first term in 2008 in large part by campaigning not against his opponent Senator John McCain (R-Ariz), but by campaigning against the outgoing president George W. Bush.

Towards the end of his presidency, Bush’s approval ratings were barely in the low 30’s. During the 2008 campaign, Obama quipped during a speech that McCain was running for George W. Bush’s “Third Term.” Many didn’t realize it, but by linking the popular senator to the unpopular outgoing president, Obama had put the final nail in McCain’s coffin months before the election ever took place.

Now the tables have turned, and it’s Obama who is struggling with his poll numbers. At the time of the inaugural, Obama’s approval was in the high 60’s. That number has dropped over 20 points. If Obama can’t climb above 50% by mid-summer, the chances of his re-election will dwindle.

Pollsters from both sides of the aisle like Dick Morris and Doug Schoen, have both talked about the difficulty of a candidate winning with approval ratings under 50%. Others, such as DNC Chairperson Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, claim that despite any unfavorable ratings the president might have, no Republican is up to the challenge of defeating him.

This year, the GOP nominee may not be the issue. If Republicans want to take back the country and help right the its economic course, all they need to do is constantly remind the public why they turned on the president in the first place. Obama and his surrogates can show all of the Paul Ryan look-alikes pushing granny off the cliff that they want, and it won’t matter. If his approval numbers are low, his support will be as well.

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

131

Sign up to join the discussion

Reply to this article
view profile

Jesse Merkel

A Rochester NY native, Jesse began writing professionally in January 2011 after receiving his Associate’s from Genesee Community College. Jesse...

Most Mic'd Response

weekly-winner-headshot-fpo

Jesse Merkel

Don't feel bad dude, I'm only 29.

Watch the PolicyMic Video Join PolicyMic

The Discussion

You point out Truman as the exception that proves the rule, but one of the reason Truman won was because he ran against the "do nothing" congress. With the approval ratings of obstructionist congressional republicans hovering around 20% I believe we are poised for a repeat of 1948.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Yay, go red team! go blue team!

Sadly in reality it is irrelevant who will win because Wall Street owns both horses.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Excellent points Jesse. I think that Romney's advantage in this election is that he isn't a career politician. His experiences as a business man have given him more than ample knowledge of the private sector. Leadership wise, he seems to have the character to get things done. I think that with the current unemployment rate, his win against Obama is practically guaranteed.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

46 Replies

  • Laura D. 3 months ago We are at a critical juncture right...

We are at a critical juncture right now. We cannot afford another 4 years of Obama's policies!

  • Mic this! 2
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

45 Replies

  • Matthew Hipple 3 months ago We can't afford the last 3....

  • Joe Jones 3 months ago How is Romney different with his po...

We can't afford the last 3.

  • Mic this! 3
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

How is Romney different with his policies?

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

43 Replies

  • Laura D. 3 months ago Are you seriously comparing a socia...

  • Joe Jones 3 months ago If my comparison is so silly, it sh...

  • Laura D. 3 months ago Sure, let's start off with the...

Are you seriously comparing a socialist academic with a successful business man from the private sector?

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

If my comparison is so silly, it should be easy for you to provide the examples.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Sure, let's start off with the biggest difference. Obama revolves an enormous part of his economic plan around entitlement programs and heavy government involvement. Romney, on the other hand, plans to actually tackle on the economy and create a fertile environment for businesses and economic growth.

Let's not even get started with foreign policy. These are just a FEW of the major differences between these candidates.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Sorry, did you actually say something there?

All I see are hollow words without real substance. In other words, just rhetoric.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Are you not familiar with entitlement programs and increased spending on welfare? With the concept of coddling Americans instead of creating fertile conditions for business? Hmm if you don't understand this, there isn't much to discuss.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Specific Actions:

1. Cutting taxes and giving businesses the incentives to conduct their operations in this country.

2. A focus upon the manufacturing capabilities of this country.

3. Tackling the deficit by significantly cutting spending.

4. Conducting an effective foreign policy


NONE of these intentions can be attributed to Obama.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Also, most of your "predictions" below are baseless. Romney is not against the civil rights of people and you have no evidence that he would have signed NDAA.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I sure am, but I have yet to see one thing named that is aimed at it. Of course, other than rhetoric just saying "I am/will address the issue", which holds absolutely no water when taking into light the fact that he has flip flopped.

That's hollow words, it's rhetoric. That is what the liberals eat. I'm a conservative, I look for principles and philosophy. All I see in Romney is a weather vane.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

The candidates are not at a point in the current campaign where they can make detailed accounts. They can offer a glimpse into their general track and then once they secure the nomination, they can lay out their precise plan. Out of all the candidates, aside from Ron Paul, he is very principled. He has practical experience and isn't a career politician.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

All 4 things you name are again just rhetoric. I asked for policy differences.

And Romney flat out said he would have signed the NDAA. He's in favor of the Patriot Act, the TSA and all that spending. The same as Obama. And the same reasons why Obama's approval ratings are in the dump.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

No, he isn't in favor of all that spending. A great deal of it comes from entitlement programs, which Romney does not support. Also, that isn't just "rhetoric." When you have those principles at your foundation, you will pursue policies that are radically different from Obama's. Also, he has a very impressive record as governor.

Obama's approval ratings are in the dump because of the state of the economy and the high unemployment rate.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

So I can't hear detailed plans unless I elect him? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? If the man can not make detailed plans, then he shouldn't be running for president.

The man has been in politics for 20 years, and was a governor. Not a career politician? It's all lies.

That's why he won't lay out his plans. So in the meantime he can blow smoke up everyone's rear to get elected. And you think this is fine and dandy? He will say anything to get elected. He has no morals, and it flat out sickens me that the GOP is even considering such a person for their candidate.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

That's not what I said. Once Obama comes into the picture, you will get precise and detailed plans. He has been in and out of politics, but he was worked mostly in the business sector.

Additionally, what is your basis for claiming that he lacks morals? He has never been investigated by an ethics committee, doesn't have any personal scandals, etc. So what are you referring to?

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Yes he is in favor of all that spending. Do you not watch the debates when he starts talking stupid on foreign policy?

And yes it is rhetoric, check the definition. It's the use of generalizations in order for the person on the other end to fill the meaning of those with their own verson of what it means. So I can say "I will make it better". Person A imagines X, person by imagines Y, and they ignorantly go along. All the while, the real meaning is never revealed because if it was, everyone would not like it.

If it was good, then why wouldn't you scream it from the top?

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Yes, and it doesn't seem anything outrageous. Spending on foreign policy is imperative. But if you cut welfare and other entitlement programs, you can adequately address the deficit without compromising national security. His stances are hardly "stupid."

He isn't making generalizations. He has specifically stated departments he would cut and his plan to reorganize government agencies. You can find this in any of his speeches.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Oh, so I just have to nominate him for the GOP to find out what it is? Is that supposed to be better somehow? I nominate him, only to find what I suspected. He just thinks Obama mismanages everything and at the core of the biggest issues is not really any different. Great, the GOP version of Kerry 2004.

He has no morals because he will say anything to get elected. He's like a mimic octopus. Molds to fit the situation. He mimics what he see's. When he says constitution, I want to puke, because it's just a mimic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-LTWFnGmeg

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

You still have not provided any evidence for your assertion that he has no morals.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

His foreign policy is a liberal foreign policy. It's not a conservative foreign policy.

I don't know if you are just not old enough to remember or what, but this is what GWB got elected on in 2000:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc

That is the conservative foreign policy. We spend on defense. The strongest person on foreign policy is Ron Paul. If 9/11 had happened and Ron Paul had been president, Osama would have been dead within a year. He would have went over, took him out, came home and said - who wants to go next? Instead of nation building and all that.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

You are INCREDIBLY mistaken on that. Ron Paul never would have gone and found Osama in the first place because he respects "sovereignty." You have severely misinterpreted Ron Paul. Osama would still be alive to this day, plotting an even bigger attack on us from Pakistan. He has the weakest foreign policy that isn't viable in any way.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I respect and admire Ron Paul. But foreign policy is not his strength by any means.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Romney sits up there meanwhile acting like we are supposed to be the worlds policeman. And he wants to go into all these wars that bleed this country dry. Meanwhile, he only wants to cut $500 billion in spending overall, not even coming close to addressing the national debt. Which means more printing of money, more debt, more of the same, and an economy wasted on the destruction and creation of assets in other countries while Americans suffer.

It's more of the same. Anyone who wants to cut domestic spending before foreign spending doesn't have his priorities straight.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

No, that is where YOU are mistaken. Because the president isn't the one who declares war, congress does. And Ron Paul voted in favor of going after Bin Laden.

If congress declares war, or issues letters of reprisal, then it IS the job of the president to carry it out, and he would do so with that specific goal in mind, get it done, and then come home.

Failure to do so would get him rightfully impeached.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Morals are a matter of principle. Romney has none. It's not about showing he has no morals, its showing that he does. Which comes from having principles. When he flip flops, then it means he has no principles, except to whatever he thinks is going to get him the most votes.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I never said that the President declares war. Sure he voted to go after Osama, but in the end he was in a country that we hadn't declared war upon. Ron Paul himself said he would have preferred to have worked with the Pakistani Government because he respects their sovereignty ... the government harboring this terrorist. I see a flaw with this logic.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

That's a convenient debate strategy, but STILL you have yet to provide me with any concrete examples of your assertions.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Because the reason we went into Afganstian was because the Taliban refused to turn him over. Do you not remember that?

Pakistan was not given that chance. That is the difference.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Of course I do. But my point is that Ron Paul does not have a realistic policy. He suggests using a "golden rule" of foreign policy. This works fine and well in an ideal world, but in a reality where people would gladly wipe you off the face of the map if they could, not so much.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Once again, his constant change and flip flopping on just about every issue is the concrete example that he has no morals and principles.

Do you not understand what principles are?

The only reason Romney is running as a Republican rather than a Democrat is because his business record would kill him in the Democrat primary.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

The people who support Ron Paul's foreign policy need to read the famous poem by Pastor Martin Niemöller.

  • Mic this! 3
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Flip flop? That sounds like rhetoric to me. What has he flip flopped about?

You assertions are baseless. Romney is running as a Republican because he subscribes to certain ideas. Also, Democrat entrepreneurs just donate their wealth to appease their liberal guilt. Problem solved. So your suggestions about Romney seem to be unfounded value judgments.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

He has the only realistic policy. The golden rule is common sense.

Answer me this.

If China came over and took over our government, or imposed sanctions on us. Is that going to cause Americans to elect someone who appeases China? Or is it going to cause us to elect someone who is hardline with China? And yet, you think the people in other countries are the crazy ones when they do the same thing?

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

How about 14 flip flops?

http://www.businessinsider.com/14-bald-faced-mitt-romney-flip-flops-that-were-dug-up-by-john-mccain-2012-1#1-on-immigration-for-a-path-to-citizenship-then-against-1

It's not rhetoric, it's all things he actually flip flopped on. That you are acting like it's some surprise only makes me question your honesty.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Well then I have to ask, why do these countries support terrorists or develop their nuclear weapons program? That doesn't seem very friendly to me.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

No Matthew, the people who need to read that poem are the ones who disagree with him on civil rights and things like the Patriot Act - which is every other republican candidate.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

1. McCain's involvement should automatically make you question this source.

2. This is an analysis that begs legitimacy by focusing not on a shift in principle, but on a restating of ideas in a different manner.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

As far as nukes go, that is about gaining respect on the world stage. The power in nukes is in owning them, not in using them. If you use them, you will quickly be wiped off the map. But if you have them, then you command a certain amount of respect in the world.

Thus why we will never invade North Korea. You can tell who is a real threat to us by how we treat them. If we make threats, they are not a threat to us. Because if they were a threat, then we treat them diplomatically. Like we do Russia and China, which would be a major threat.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Sorry, I'm not going to assume Iran isn't going to use it's nuclear weapons once it develops them. North Korea and Iran cannot be treated as the same problem.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

McCain's involvement means nothing. There are sources directly named on each one. You can look them up for yourself.

The man switches positions and says whatever he thinks people want to hear. Maybe you don't mind being manipulated by salesman type tactics, but the man isn't fit to represent me as a candidate for president, much less for president.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

No one manipulates me. But I will not waste my time playing little word games. I've seen this article before, all it focuses upon is a play on words, not a shift in principle.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Laura,

I thank you for sticking up for me, but I can guarantee you he won't budge lol
I'm a Romney guy myself. If you haven't read Romney's 59 point plan, I suggest it. It was free for my kindle.

I find it funny he thought Romney was a career politician, and had been in government for 20 years. He ran in 1994, but didn't win. He was in office from 2003 to 2007, and then ran for president. I'll take his experience as CEO of a successful private equity firm, running the olympics and as a governor over that of a community organizer and adjunct professor.

Oh sorry, Obama was also a state and U.S. senator. Although he didn't write one single piece of legislation during either time in elected office.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I'm the same way with Ron Paul. I respect how strongly he fights for what he believes, but he's wayyyyy too naive on foreign policy for my place.
I'd make him Fed Chairman, for a wonderful bit of Irony.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

No Laura, they are topics like gay marriage, healthcare, gun ownership, bailouts and so on.

He changes based on what is most popular.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Jesse, I'd love to make Ron Paul in charge of the Fed! Haha :D

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

The problem is that republicans have to offer something different.

Romney is not something different.

The reasons WHY Obama is losing approval ratings is what is important. And that is due to his continuation of the Bush policies. He was supposed to be change, and he wasn't.

He kept the wars going - so will Romney.

He signed the NDAA - so would Romney.

He signed the Bailouts - so did Bush, so would Romney.

He's been against the civil rights of the people - so is Romney.

He did Obamacare - so did and would Romney.

You have to offer something different to take advantage.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Jesse, I don't want to fault you here, but your conclusion strikes me as a bit Madden. "Here's a guy that when he runs, he goes faster." Of course!

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

2 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago I forgot the tough actin' tina...

I forgot the tough actin' tinactin! Damn! lol

  • Mic this! 3
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

1 Replies

  • Matthew Hipple 3 months ago BOOM!...

BOOM!

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Jesse, I think it’s a bit glib or just wistful thinking to hold that “..this year, the GOP nominee may not be the issue.”
Also, if Boehner’s response of “we can do better” to the improvement in employment figures, a chant that then echoed across the conservative spectrum, is all the GOP can muster to counter Obama’s rising approval rating he really does not have a lot to worry about.
I’m not saying this is a good thing. I would rather see him either challenged more convincingly or facing a better opponent than what’s now on offer. I feel the same about all incumbents on both sides; I’d like to see them all sent packing. I even contemplated voting for Romney until I learned he picked John Bolton as an adviser.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Yup. Obama has no competition whatsoever.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

There seems to be a ton of conservative confidence and cockiness in this thread and in this article. That's totally fine! I'm happy for you. I disagree strongly (and personally predict about a 5% Obama win), but whatever.

But please, please, please, please, grant me this:

If Obama wins, he did not "steal" it. Do not couch your political science arguments about the economy/popularity/etc with a finishing touch like "Unless ACORN steals the election for him."

Conspiracies get us no where. Debate can't happen when one side or the other alleges conspiracy.

  • Mic this! 3
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

11 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago Don't worry man, I hate conspi...

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago Besides, I'm glad ACORD was ca...

Don't worry man, I hate conspiracy theorists. Thats why I despise Ron Paul- I'm sorry to say it, but his crowd spoiled him for me somewhat.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

6 Replies

  • Ben Poole 3 months ago I congratulated Romney.Paul A., I m...

I congratulated Romney.Paul A., I mic'd your comment to acknowledge your vote of confidence in your candidate. We each have a voice it that's cocky to you - get over it.

And Jesse - don't go there. You will get slammed and should when speaking conspiracy theorists. So, I'll call you out on it - what conspiracy theory are you spreading disingenuous innuendo's toward Ron Paul supporters - This better be good or I do expect a recant)

To the both of you, in debate in a thread, please if your speaking of one or more individuals, they have a right to their voice whatever they say. Refute them where it is in their thread so they can see you said it. Proof.

I acknowledge Paul A.'s prediction. Interesting but of course I believe he's incorrect

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

5 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago Ben, At least in my neck of the wo...

  • Joe Jones 3 months ago If you don't think there are g...

  • Ben Poole 3 months ago Jesse, You had some band Jesse.....

Ben,
At least in my neck of the woods, a lot of the Paul supporters are 9/11 Truther's. I was in a band with two of them, spoke to a lot more of them at his local 'Campaign 4 Liberty' meetings - The people waiting for their RFID chips to be implanted in their sleep and thinking the UN was going to outlaw all private ownership of land by the end of 2010...

My old band mates also believed all of the youtube videos about the Bildeberger's and freemasons and jews coming for their freedom, wanting to kill all but 500,000 people on Earth.

I realize of course not every Ron Paul fan believes this, but I got so sick of it! It's like dealing with fifty Jesse Ventura's at once. The ones who see holes in Paul's hands and feet.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

If you don't think there are groups of people out there who want to control the population and the world, then you are the one who is crazy.

I'm not saying they are right, or that all conspiracy theories are right etc. But if you don't think people do those kinds of things, you MUST be completely ignorant of actual history - which is FULL of such things.

I know some people go a bit too far(Alex Jones), and when it goes to far it becomes more about fear mongering than exposing the truth. But a general acceptance or general dismissal is in fact ignorant.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Jesse,

You had some band Jesse...lol. If 9/11 Truth movement is correct, we are hopelessly lost to begin with and our debate means nothing. I doubt it. For the government to pull off a conspiracy like that would be all but impossible. The 9/11 omission was more political than anything. I do believe their suspicions should have been directly answered.

I will say that suspicion can be healthy. Politicians are known to deceive. Hype serves no purpose other than someone else pulling the strings or media cashing in on tabloid rag hyperbole. Real issues need serious consideration not off the cuff unfocused or non-researched info. I actually had to look up 9/11 Truther's to even know what you meant before I could respond - I wish more would.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

If 9/11 truthers are right, then it's not "the government" that did it. It would only be certain people within the government. I'm pretty sure my mailman, who is a government employee had nothing to do with it. I'm pretty sure the people in the military in bulk had nothing to do with it.

I'm pretty sure nobody in congress voted to do such a thing. And so on.

It would only be a small group of people in key positions, not "government".

I'm personally more worried about the documented evidence in how the attacks were used to carry out a false agenda. That's government.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Joe, I can tell you one known conspiracy by all - special interests influencing our government. There are military-industrial complex, financial industry, hyper rich investors, etc. on the right and healthcare industry, subsistence living, environment,hyper rich investors etc. on the left pulling the strings. The one constant is money. Money buys power one way or another.Then we have king POTUS.

NDAA crossed the line. CIA does cross the line but we don't know; - nor is it acknowledged. Public assassination of a US citizen, went over the line. Obama should be impeached. Premeditated murder is a capital crime and offense. It is reason for a charge of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". Arrest Alwalki. but assassinate for free (hateful) speech?

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Besides, I'm glad ACORD was castrated for the most part anyways... lol
I didn't mean to come off cocky in this article. D'oh. LOL

I am a huge conservative, but I do respect Obama as a campaigner. He's got a knack, and I know he's not Jimmy Carter - by saying that I mean he won't be easy to beat. It will take everything the GOP has, with the heart of all 6 'Rocky' movies.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

3 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago Oh for godsakes. I mean ACORN. she...

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago Oh for godsakes. I mean ACORN. she...

  • Joe Jones 3 months ago If Carter had run against another d...

Oh for godsakes. I mean ACORN. sheesh....I'm tired!!! lol

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Oh for godsakes. I mean ACORN. sheesh....I'm tired!!! lol

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

If Carter had run against another democrat pretending to be a republican, he probably would have won too.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Truth and correct Jesse! (I see the Obama apologetics are here in force)

Obama hasn't even been hit with the truth from the Ron Paul crowd. The only way Obama could win is by "buying" the election through his special interest money. 2008 was a grass roots year because of the unpopular ex (yes!) president Bush. Bush's third term has become Obama in the flesh. Obama has maintained, not only Bush's personnel in many places, but also his policies. Except for extremist environmental and ACA (both of which are not popular except in the extreme left), Obama has failed miserably to lead from behind with excuses for all. His assault on the Constitution is beyond the pale. His war in Libya is now a civil war and spreading war in the region. No BO!

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

4 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago Why thank you Ben!...

  • Paul Anderson 3 months ago Ben - There are so many things w...

Why thank you Ben!

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Ben -

There are so many things wrong with this comment, but I'll just concentrate on two verifiable facts:

1. When you look at polls on the ACA, what you find is that it is popular with the center and right of the Democratic party. The extreme left of the Democratic party doesn't like it very much!! It is opposed by the "extreme left" because there is very little government control. 99% of liberals who oppose the law wanted it to do MORE and faulted Obama for being to moderate. Whether their analysis is correct or not, that's the state of Dem opinion.

2. Pundits are predicting that GOP SuperPACs will outraise Dem SuperPACS by 3-1. Obama will only (possibly) achieve parity through $2500 max donations + $70k max donations to DNC.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

2 Replies

  • Ben Poole 3 months ago Paul, You have just stated how o...

Paul,

You have just stated how out of touch the extreme left and 99% of liberals are with reality. All want universal health care if that is the poll question. When put in perspective of paying for it when the deception is removed about the savings are actual increased costs, then the entire situation is turned on its head except for those who get something for nothing. It is almost appearing that is what the left is - wanting to appease to get re-elected to promise increased giveaways to get elected. It is so ancient Roman and leads to the same collapse.

Perhaps you are right on Super Pacs or not. I honestly don't know. I do know that SuperPAC's are an abomination and shouldn't be in existence. Personhood of corporations even more so.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

1 Replies

  • Joe Jones 3 months ago Super Pacs shouldn't exist onl...

Super Pacs shouldn't exist only because people should be allowed to give directly to the candidates.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Obama himself has acknowledged the unemployment rate would go "up and down." The question is, what's Romney's Plan B if there is a sustained sense that the economy is recovering after all.

  • Mic this! 4
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

14 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago The horrible popularity of ObamaCar...

The horrible popularity of ObamaCare, the insane decifit spending, and his 'leading from behind' when it came to foreign policy. Getting us involved in libya, insulting England and Israel...theres a million things to show that he is a terrible leader.

There are a million things to attack on besides unemployment numbers. Romney and the rest of the GOP candidates have been attacking him on things like Fast and Furious, his apparent war on christianity, abortion- which for the first time ever there are more who disagree than agree with the practice.

It's also just sad how utterly volatile the economy is. And how many FEWER jobs there are in the U.S. overall. Thats why the percentage dropped...

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

13 Replies

  • Bradley Bosserman 3 months ago Haha. Dude, this isn't anythin...

  • Alex Marin 3 months ago The budget deficit would be. Yes, w...

Haha. Dude, this isn't anything even close to analysis. It's just partisan hackery. If people are interested in a bunch of Fox News/GOP establishment talking points they could just..ya know..turn on Fox News.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

11 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago I was just responding to Alex'...

  • Paul Anderson 3 months ago That's true, but Obama also ra...

  • Ben Poole 3 months ago Bradley, if you have a point of vie...

I was just responding to Alex's statement, if you're talking about my comment here. If you're talking about my article, i was just giving an example of how low poll numbers have a precedent when it comes to elections. All i was suggesting was that by remind people over and over of the things that drove down the popularity in the first time. It worked for the dems in 2007 and 2008.

Public opinion was so against Bush and the Republicans that they could have nominated Jesus Christ and they would have lost.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

That's true, but Obama also ran a pretty good campaign.

Also - believe it or not - it takes some skill as a campaigner to win the presidency if you're a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama.

Amusing aside: How funny would be be to go back in time to October of 2001 and tell someone that the US elected a half Kenyan guy named Barack Hussein Obama. People would respond, "Oh. Ok. I guess Osama won and the Calphate now encompasses the United State. That stinks!"

The idea of this random guy that no one had heard of with a Muslim sounding name rising to the Presidency would have been incomprehensible in 2001. In other words: I love this country!

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Bradley, if you have a point of view, I would like to hear it with facts. If you produce any from the left main stream media in reply, your a hypocrite for the same thing you said of Jesse's article. Don't like it? Write an article on the merits and accomplishments of Obama in rebuttal.

But don't say "Dude" like a stoner and not get up and make your point. If your truthful, I'll mic and say you spoke the truth. Jesse did even if it was his selection of facts. Actually, I'd really be interested in the things Obama has done good for there are so few and minor I can't remember them off the top of my head. I'm sure there's at least one - right?

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Ben, I made my point earlier--It's a few posts down. The point being that based on the latest NBC/WSJ poll and the last 2 months of econ/jobs numbers (and the prevailing political science modeling of their impact), the outlook is pretty good for Dems broadly and Obama in particular. Jesse's comment spewing random catch-phrases like "lead from behind...obamacare...insulting England" is, in fact, not analysis. And I'm sorry that the stylized informality of my prose offended you. I'd expect more understanding from someone who doesn't seem to grasp the difference between "your" and "you're."

  • Mic this! 2
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Birther, Birther, Birther - warning there is a Birther present...lol (oh come on if you can't take it - don't give it out - Amusing besides you did a great job of showing his unconstitutionality as POTUS as not being "au Naturele" born citizen from the Law of Nations which heavily influenced our Constitution and which the founders used much in creating the new US Republic and where the qualification "natural born citizen" in the Constitution came from - Thanks)

BS (you said as much in satire) on the Caliphate though the war on Libya was the best any radical Islamist could hope for and the bowing the Saudi King was beyond the pale along with the destruction of the US through irresponsible spending and borrowing. OK he's better than ?





  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Bradley,
As to your and you're, we are limited to characters . Pick the best one can but fair attention to detail (noticed I mic'd for that). I regard your prose and wit with acknowledgment you're no fool.

NBC and anyone is a leftist poll. Besides Obama has already bought Wall Street their bailout.

As to real unemployment look at U6. Just because people have been unemployed so long they disappear from U3 (official unemployment rate) doesn't make any difference in the lives of those who want work but are so down trodden by our government and its policy that they quit looking actively. Some of that has to do with the inept gate keepers of industry (I even was told I was not an engineer- they are clueless).

On the leading - where was he?

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Ben, a "leftist poll"? I wasn't aware that the Rupert-Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal had become a shill of the liberal movement. Huh. You're free to critique it's methodology (full, unfiltered poll results here: http://tinyurl.com/7bkccxm), but you have to at least make an argument.

Analyzing U6 and U3 numbers (and other indicators) is valuable in many instances, but in the context of its bearing on the 2012 election--the point of this article--the change in the headline number is most strongly correlated to incumbent party vote share. So that's the key number for election predictions.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I really believe there was a bit of the 'white guilt alleviation syndrome' at play. I don't believe that racism was such a factor as the pundits on MSNBC would have us believe. I think people were so swept up in the idea of being part of history that they were happy to vote for an african american.

Race shouldn't matter either way. It should be about the content of their character.

Now I'll either be called a racist, or someone who is naive about racism. I'm just making chit chat people here...just chewing the fat...

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Oh hell, I'm typing on an ipad. Nitpick nit pick nittttt pickkkkk. Yada yada yada... Your You're You Are...should i descend into onomonopeas? Lol can't anyone on here have a disucssion without being insulting, petty or not having a sense of humor? Yeesh...

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

To that you're correct. It is not fact but what people perceive as fact in most elections. Facts are against Obama but that doesn't mean he can't spin them and twist them to his advantage with his billion dollar campaign war chest. Just because they are deceived doesn't really matter in reality when the mob only wants "bread and circuses". Its been a fact since at least Roman times. You can fool the people as long as you give them food and entertainment they will cheer and vote for anyone.

Or, perhaps the people are waking up to the fact of deception and are paying attention. Not all are sheeple and more wake up everyday as though this is a new dawn.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Jesse -

I doubt anyone would call you a racist for those comments. You're just making a guess - a political science guess.

To answer your comments: I don't think that many white voters supported Obama just because of their guilt. But I won't quibble with the idea that Obama received more positive press coverage because of the historic nature of his candidacy. And this aid his campaign - though it didn't have to be that way. Plenty of black candidates for lower office haven't received positive coverage.

There's substantial CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence that Obama's numbers suffered from racism, though. If you look at uneducated white voters, he was crushed compared to down-ballot white democrats. If you isolate older white voters? Same thing.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

The budget deficit would be. Yes, we've created some jobs but at what price when you factors the CBO's deficit projections. We will end up paying like $400K for each job that will pay like $50K.

  • Mic this! 2
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Some Presidents have a specific following that is independent of the numbers. Bush had the religious right and a war that helped him get re-elected and Obama has those who idolize him. Even if he is vulnerable, which he is, the sliver of committed voters will put him over the top. That is hard to beat!

Likewise, unemployment is projected to continue to decline, as such his ratings will rise.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

2 Replies

  • Ben Poole 3 months ago Glad to see you again Lev, though I...

Glad to see you again Lev, though I disagree. If U6 (at 15%+) doesn't decline at least 3% it won't matter about the official sorted presentation to public presentation of U3. Unemployment is not something that can be deceived. Either you are or you're not unemployed.

As an example of truth, in 2000 the spread between U3 and U6 was 3.1% now its 6.9%. The spread between those numbers of 3.8% represent the increase in those who all but give up due to the economy and the deception of official U3 reporting.

http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

1 Replies

  • Lev Sviridov 3 months ago Ben -- Glad to be back and thanks f...

Ben -- Glad to be back and thanks for replying.

You are absolutely right. Unemployment is a personal and real tragedy that no set of statistics will sugarcoat. Last months report for the first time indicated growth in permanent jobs: full time, benefits, and taxes. That gives me great hope for the health of the economy.

You are also right that the real rate is significantly higher than the official rate. However, there is a large contingent that will not look at the numbers and will cast the vote for President Obama because they just will or tend to attribute the current crisis to President Bush.

Obama can be made vulnerable only if Romney is able to convince people that he will get them back to work.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

It's tough to say, but the "tipping point" approval rating is probably around 47% to win.

There's a theory out there that approval ratings tend to react to the public's perception of the opposition as an election approaches. For example: once John Kerry because the nominee and Americans could see the alternative (an alternative that they didn't much like), Bush's ratings began to rebound.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I mostly agree with your assertions here, with one exception. It seems the Republican field is simply too weak this time around to take advantage of Obama's up and down numbers. I am far from sold on Obama, but there isn't a single GOP candidate that has so much as made me think twice about voting for him.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

2 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago I thought that for a while, but cam...

  • Ben Poole 3 months ago I agree with Jesse on Romney v Obam...

I thought that for a while, but came back to Romney. As an economy guy, I just think he's better than Obama by a million miles. But, i'd never vote for Obama anyways lol

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I agree with Jesse on Romney v Obama though I would also say Ron Paul concerning the over welfare of the US. Obama's budget is a disingenuous deception at best, Romney doesn't have one, but interesting goals (Obama's broken promises allow me to discount a lot of goals vs what someone tries to do after the rhetoric ends and administration begins).

Paul is the only one who has a plan and actual expenditures that will put us back on track to prosperity as a nation, cut the bureaucracy (not like Obama or Romney in trimming the edges), and gets us out of being the world's policeman. The best part is that he has 0 special interest unlike any other candidate and the reason he is sidelined by the main stream media and the establishment. Truth.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Home run Jesse. Some excellent research here.

Obama's approval rating will obviously depend on economic performance & job creation. While it's certainly good news for him that unemployment's moving down, the part no one wants to mention is the fact that a record number of people have completely given up looking for work. Labor force participation is at 63.7% - a 30 year low. The same CBO report mentioned the real unemployment rate's over 10% if you maintain the same base number. Personally though I think if Obama & the Democrats make sure no spending cuts are enacted in welfare & food stamps throughout 2012, they can maintain this artificial drop in unemployment right into re-election...

But as you pointed out, it's all public perception.

  • Mic this! 4
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

14 Replies

  • John Giokaris 3 months ago Not to mention the last president t...

Not to mention the last president to win re-election with unemployment north of 8% was FDR in the 1930s. Funny thing is unemployment reached a 40 year low under 'Dubya' yet he still barely squeaked by in 2004 with an approval rating just above 50%. If Obama's approval remains under 50% as it has in the RCP median average since June of 2011 while unemployment remains above 8% as it has since February of 2009, he's definitely gotta be sweating. Even 'Dubya" didn't have numbers that bad in 2004.

  • Mic this! 2
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

13 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago John, great commentary. I agree e...

  • Paul Anderson 3 months ago John - What "artificial dro...

  • Paul Anderson 3 months ago Actually, I was wrong. The drop in ...

John, great commentary.
I agree entirely. If the CBO's predictions are accurate, and I fear they will be, the numbers will be going down in the fall, no matter how much Obama and his buddies cook the books.

If all else fails, we can just show a picture of Pelosi's mug in every campaign commercial. Lol

  • Mic this! 3
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

3 Replies

  • Bradley Bosserman 3 months ago "John, great commentary."...

  • John Giokaris 3 months ago Bradley, What the hell are you t...

  • John Giokaris 3 months ago "If all else fails, we can jus...

"John, great commentary." Yeah, it's actually pretty terrible commentary. Again, actual empirical analysis shows no correlation between unemployment rate and incumbent party vote share. What matters is the change in the unemployment, not the headline number, 8%, 7%, whatever. See here for a nice graph illustrating the point: http://tinyurl.com/7ws227u
And John, you really sacrifice any credibility by asserting (baselessly, of course) that the Obama Admin is cooking CBO numbers. The CBO is independent and reports to Congress, not the exectutive. But keep believing those conspiracy theories.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Bradley,

What the hell are you talking about?

I said the CBO report mentioned the real unemployment rate's over 10% if you maintain the same base number. That's a bad thing. That doesn't make Obama look good. So for course the Obama admin isn't cooking any CBO numbers, of course the CBO is independent and reports to Congress, that's why I mentioned it!

You can keep believing that I believe in conspiracy theories, but I don't. Sorry to disappoint you.

  • Mic this! 2
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

"If all else fails, we can just show a picture of Pelosi's mug in every campaign commercial." Or just air more Joe Biden "YouTube moments" ;-)

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

John -

What "artificial drop" in unemployment? I'm confused. Are you making the "sugar high" argument? Or are you arguing that Democrats are cooking the books? If you're alleging that it's a conspiracy, then I think you're being a bit paranoid.

Every time economic news comes out that benefits one party or the other, the party that's harmed claims conspiracy. Democrats did it during Bush. And now Republicans are doing it during Obama. It's utterly predictable. Probably a psychological explanation for it. Cognitive dissidence - is that it?

At any rate, the labor participation rate is concerning, though it's partly due to the beginning of baby boomer retirements. This is the first year when baby boomers hit 66.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

7 Replies

  • Paul Anderson 3 months ago Another issue for these unemploymen...

  • John Giokaris 3 months ago Paul, No conspiracy theories her...

  • Ben Poole 3 months ago Paul, I answered Lev with facts ...

Another issue for these unemployment numbers was that the BLO adjusted the numbers for the first time to account for the 2010 Census.

But beyond this unemployment report, the news is mostly positive. Aside from housing prices (which continue to stall - though these were November numbers), there are a ton of other indicators that are positive, including manufacturing, auto sales, the non-manufacturing index (up sharply), weekly unemployment claims, the stock market, interest rates, inflation, and personal income. Also, job numbers for 2011 were upwardly adjusted by 165,000.

Final caveat - Jan numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. The seasonal adjustment is just really difficult...

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Paul,

No conspiracy theories here. I'm simply pointing out the fact that a big reason why unemployment's down is cuz more & more people are dropping out of the labor force and giving up looking for work. I even have Democrat friends that tell me as long as Obama can keep em on gov't assistance (welfare, food stamps, etc.) long enough to keep em from coming back to look for work he's got nothing to worry about in November. And I mentioned the jobs report is good news for Obama, I'm not denying that. Of course numbers can be manipulated by either party. Of course there's seasonal adjustments. But the other thing the Dems should keep in mind is if/when the private sector clams up in Q3 & Q4 with the oncoming expiration of the Bush tax cuts...

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Paul,

I answered Lev with facts

http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp

Look at U6 - real unemployment. In 2000, the difference between official unemployment rate (U3) and all those who want a job but are discouraged was 3.1% the gap is just now down to 6.9%. Those 3.8% in increased gap represent true newly unemployment that are no longer counted in official figures. They are real people. U6 stands at 15.1% unemployment.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

John,

The comment about welfare, food stamps, etc. is buying into deception as sheeple as old as "bread and circuses" that the Romans used. It leads to collapse.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

John,

A couple of things:

1. There's no economic evidence that uncertainty about the top marginal tax rate causes a change in behavior. It certaintly didn't slow down the Reagan boom after he re-raised the top rate. Nor did it keep the economy from booming when Clinton raised the top rate. People simply don't behave like that.

2. The biggest worry among investors will be that another debt ceiling showdown occurs in December when debt authority runs out. Last summer, that pointlessly damaged the economy. If Romney wins, then he'll just sign a debt ceiling hike in an uneventful moment that will be hilarious for its irony. If Obama wins, then we'll have another fight that could hurt the economy pretty badly just when it's recovering...

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Highly disagree on point #1. When Bush enacted his tax cuts and gave them a 10 year life span, spending went up, stocks hit all time highs & unemployment reached a 40 year low. In the last 3 years, tax policy hasn't been ironed out for more than 1 or 2 years at a time, with constant uncertainty over where they're going to stay. Recovery's been slow at best, spending has been sporadic & unemployment has been stubbornly high. It matters. And where Dems raised taxes in the 80s & 90s, the GOP lowered others. To compensate for the Clinton income tax hikes, for instance, the GOP enacted the biggest cut ever in capital gains tax to encourage investment. And the top bracket income tax rate lowered from 70% to 28% over the course of Reagan's tenure.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

On point #2, I see where you're coming from. The sad thing is you're probably right. Until the GOP regain full control in D.C., it's definitely the case that they only act all fiscally responsible again when they're not in power. It's all cut, cap & balance when the Dems are calling the shots, but in the post-Tea Party era, we'll see how strictly they hold themselves to their newfound, born again fiscal conservative rhetoric if & when they get full power. Honestly, I think the far right will still give Romney sh*t if & when he becomes President & OKs a debt ceiling increase. The rank & file GOP may not put up as big of a fuss to stop it, but I know far right zealots that are still mad at Boehner for letting the increase thru in 2011.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Actually, I was wrong. The drop in the workforce participation rate was just a numbers glitch when they added in the 2010 Census data to January's numbers. I wrote a Policymic piece about it that you'll see shortly.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Picking out snapshots of data ignores the trends that poli sci research reveals as more important. The rate of decrease in Unemployment is a much stronger predictor than unemployment in general. 2 months of good jobs reports is good news for Obama. Consider the latest NBC/WSJ poll:

Right Track/Wrong Track is up 26 points from October.

Obama's approval is net positive for the first time since last summer.

Obama's handling of the economy is up 13 points from October.

Dem party favorability, generic congressional ballot, and heads-up vs. all GOP frontrunners all put Dems way up.

  • Mic this! 3
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

2 Replies

  • Ben Poole 3 months ago That's great humor. poli scien...

That's great humor. poli science (oxymoron). Politics - Machiavellian deception to get the sheeple to vote for you matched with the truth of science. At least polling has gotten somewhat better in understanding slant.

Obama's numbers are better but has anything really changed? No. At best he has come up to 50%
http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_ad.htm

Up 7% since last October at 57% negative.

Polling Report give good historical and other polls not just one perspective.

Obama is not doing good no matter how much money he spends or rhetoric unless you believe you can deceive most of the people most of the time.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

1 Replies

  • Georgi Ivanov 3 months ago Ever studied political science, Ben...

Ever studied political science, Ben?

Don't say things unprepared.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

This is close to the logical fallacy of presenting a sign as a cause. People don't disapprove of him because the ratings are low, but the ratings are low because people disapprove. The ratings indicate dissatisfaction they don't cause it. Let's make sure we realize that the approval ratings aren't "everything," the policies are. If the President's policies are publicly effective the rating goes up. The ratings reflect the effect of policy.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

1 Replies

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago Of course I know currently the dems...

Of course I know currently the dems overall ratings are higher than the GOP and of course I know you just don't remind the public that his RATINGS are bad.

What I'm meaning to say is that you remind the public of the things that make a president unpopular.
For three years the Dems pounded the unpopular war into the pavement, further driving W. Bush into oblivion.
Remind the public about how the dems rammed through ObamaCare at midnight on a sunday, remind them of how he's incurred as much debt in 3 years as bush did in 8. It's just good political strategy to add fuel to the fire.

You're right, ratings reflect effect of policy, and what I am saying is I'd like to see the GOP broadcast it better instead of being timid.

  • Mic this! 2
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

.....wow how misleading. The shrub's approval rating was 29% when 9/11 happened. America's propensity to rally around its president during wartime only insured another razor thin and conspicuous win for him in the following election. Following 8 straight months of job growth, even exceeding expectations this last month, Obama's numbers continue to tick upward. With the devastated economy that Bush created being the only trick pony the GOP has to harp about, this does not bode well for them. Remember terrorism, how they were the only party to keep us safe even tho the worst attack happened on their watch? We don't hear anything about that anymore since Obama's kicked butt and taken names. Funny how repugs don't want to admit that either.

  • Mic this! 3
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

2 Replies

  • Danny Keener 3 months ago Smoke and mirrors in this article, ...

  • Paul Anderson 3 months ago Lawrence - That's incorrect...

Smoke and mirrors in this article, but we still have a long ways to go before the election, and President Obama's approval rating will continue to climb the closer we get to November. Once people figure out what repubs are in the running, cause most people have not yet begun to pay attention, they will support the incumbent rather than the very scary, not to mention crazy, repub field. If unemployment continues to decrease and we continue to add jobs, people will certainly support this president come election time. The only thing I could see happening that might mar his chances is a row with Iran. Israel is looking a bit aggressive with their threats and if it comes down to it, this could put the president in a bad situation.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Lawrence -

That's incorrect. Bush's approval rating was in the mid to upper 40s when 9/11 happened.

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

The only way the Republicans will win is if Ron Paul gets the nomination, he is the only candidate that is different. Obama and the rest of the GOP is just more of the same.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Jesse: you make a good case. And props for including good ole' Truman v. Dewey as an exception that proves the rule, so to speak (btw, if you're ever in Kansas City, MO, the Truman Library in Independence is a great place to visit - no kidding!).

I also point to Truman's surprise win as a cautionary example to beware of polls and punditry. I've said this before and probably will bore all of you to stupor before the elections by repeating it: political polling is at BEST directional. At its worst, of course, it's completely bogus.

As a case in point: watch what happens in today's Nevada caucuses. Last night's polling had the candidates in this order: Romney/Gingrich/Santorum/Paul - mirroring their national standings. My personal predictions are as follows: Paul, Gingrich, Romney, Santorum. Not that I can't be wrong - I probably AM - but I'll betcha the polls are too!

  • Mic this! 2
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

12 Replies

  • Douglas Goodman 3 months ago Susan, Talking about going out on ...

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago I believe Romney will lead the dele...

Susan,
Talking about going out on a limb. If your prediction turns out to be correct, that would blow the lid off and help my prediction that the nomination will go to the floor.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

6 Replies

  • Susan Kraykowski 3 months ago LOL! As you've probably figure...

LOL! As you've probably figured out by now, Douglas, I'm never afraid to go out on a limb or to disagree with anyone...I grew up in a family that debated EVERYTHING.

I'm willing to be wrong, too. It wouldn't be any skin off my Democratic nose if Romney won Nevada. I just know from living in the west that there's a large libertarian contingent out there that doesn't do what anybody thinks they're going to do and wouldn't tell a pollster anything.

It is possible that the nomination will go to the floor - or to the smoky back rooms, is more likely. I find it endlessly entertaining that the kiddie pundits think that just because they say so it must be true. ANYthing can happen in a horse race - we know that!

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

5 Replies

  • Georgi Ivanov 3 months ago So here is the question that truly ...

  • Susan Kraykowski 3 months ago ROFL, Georgi! I'll be 59 in a ...

  • Jesse Merkel 3 months ago Don't feel bad dude, I'm ...

So here is the question that truly matters: am I counted in the kiddie pundit camp? Being only 23...

  • Mic this! 2
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

ROFL, Georgi! I'll be 59 in a few weeks; does the shoe fit?

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

Don't feel bad dude, I'm only 29.

  • Mic this! 4
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I'm shocked I beat you by 2 years Jesse! 27 ;-)

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I'm 21 haha

  • Mic this! 0
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

I believe Romney will lead the delegate count, but i wouldn't be surprised if both Paul and Santorum eventually pass an increasingly unstable Gingrich.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

4 Replies

  • Susan Kraykowski 3 months ago I'm predicting Santorum will b...

I'm predicting Santorum will be out of the race before SuperTuesday, Jesse. His little coven of rightwing Christians in Texas don't seem to have been able to funnel the amount of money he needs. The other alternative is the Koch Brothers, who happen to be holding some kind of supersecret confab this weekend.

As unstable as Newt looks - and he does seem to fly like a one-winged albatross sometimes - he is tenacious, ornery and he knows how the game is played. I keep tellin' all y'all kiddie pundits not to count him out. He's going to be there at the end of the race, making trouble as usual. He'll get a speaker's slot at the Convention or parlay his delegates into a cabinet post or an ambassadorship.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

3 Replies

  • Douglas Goodman 3 months ago Unless Romney has a 1st ballot win ...

  • Susan Kraykowski 3 months ago And that, my young-at-heart friend,...

  • Douglas Goodman 3 months ago The idea of leaving my 20's wh...

Unless Romney has a 1st ballot win locked, I believe all 4 will stay in until the convention and use their delegates to win concessions in the platform before releasing their delegates with directions for the 2nd or 3rd ballot.

I remember 59, it all a state of mind anyway.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

And that, my young-at-heart friend, is how the game is played - which the kiddie pundits have yet to learn.

You know, 59 is like 39 - one of those years you wish would just freakin' move on to the next one because nobody believes you any way. Sheesh.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!

The idea of leaving my 20's when I reached the age of no more trust was the worst birthday I ever had. BUT, after that each year got better and better. I looked forward to 40, then 50, then 60. And yes, I'm looking forward to 70.

  • Mic this! 1
  • Reply
char limit
Please wait before posting another comment to this article. Thanks!
Join PolicyMic

What is PolicyMic?