Gallup: Obama Under 50% for First Time; Charlie Cook Report: Obama "Beyond Radioactive" In Many Districts Held By Democratic Reps
Finally. The fourth fastest fall below majority support of any president, coming in just days after Reagan fell below 50%, for similar reasons.
Reagan of course became very popular, but he had an advantage Obama doesn't: Reagan installed a low-tax regime that spurred economic growth.
More interesting is Charlie Cook's report. The last time I mentioned him, he was stuck with his previous prediction of solid, but not major, Republican gains. He seems to be walking that back now, and walking towards a potential Democratic disaster.
The problem, it turns out, isn't all those moderate freshmen Democrats who won in purple districts in 2006 and 2008. The problem is the old guard of the Democratic regime, the Blue Dogs serving for years and years in red districts. They've long been considered untouchable, simply due to their eternal incumbency; but Obama is delivering some unwelcome change in this regard.
Plenty of veteran Democrats who haven't had to break a campaign sweat this decade are quickly losing their aura of invincibility. Next fall, some in this category are likelier to face tough races than many of the 42 less tenured Democrats who populate the "Frontline" list. As of today, eight House Democrats elected prior to 2006 sit in our "Lean Democratic" and "Toss Up" columns, and another 20 whom we view as potentially vulnerable sit in our "Likely Democratic" column.
This is not to say that highly influential and venerated fixtures such as Reps. Ike Skelton (MO-04), John Spratt (SC-05), Bart Gordon (TN-06), John Tanner (TN-08 ) and Rick Boucher (VA-09) are goners next year. Their eventual vulnerability is highly dependent on the quality of GOP nominees and the discipline of their "time for change" messages. But if these party elders decide to seek reelection rather than retire, the underlying dynamics of their districts suggest at least several will need to fight to survive.
Many watchers of House politics are tempted to downplay the potential for real races in these districts after taking one look at immediate past election history. How could Republicans possibly threaten the likes of Skelton or Spratt, both of whom won more than 62 percent of the vote in 2008? Or Gordon, Tanner, or Boucher, all of whom were unopposed last year? But that was before they were saddled with a sitting Democratic president who is beyond radioactive in their districts. History is history.
Less than a year out from Election Day, it's time to rethink who the vulnerable Democrats are. And if President Obama is the dominant issue of the 2010 midterms (and rarely has a midterm not been a referendum on the incumbent president), Democrats ought to be seriously concerned about districts where reliable surveys suggest voters are in open revolt against him. Democrats would rather not draw attention to their problems in these districts, but both parties recognize the sea change underway.
This is painfully obvious but I guess I'll say it anyway: After the blowout in Virginia, none of these guys can count on ObaMagic to help them out if they vote against their constituents' strong and strengthening wishes.
At the moment, the Real Clear Politics average has Obama at his lowest level of support yet, at just barely over 50%. That will change, I presume, when the silly-ass WashPost/ABCNews poll (56% -- right) drops off the average.
Dorgan In Trouble? Even Dorgan?
This is another finding of that Zogby poll I mentioned yesterday. Skepticism is warranted, because the poll was commissioned with the specific goal of threatening Democratic Senators with electoral trouble if they vote for ObamaCare. Nevertheless, there is something going on here. Maybe exaggerated or tarted up, but still, something.
Versus a likely -- but not yet announced -- challenger (Governor John Hoeven), Dorgan's behind and not by a little.
In a potential 2010 election match-up Republican Governor John Hoeven leads Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan 55% to 36% with 9% undecided. Senator Dorgan, however, leads another possible challenger, Republican Duane Sand, by a similar margin, 60% to 28% with 10% undecided.
Twenty-eight percent of likely North Dakotan voters support the healthcare bill proposed by President Obama compared with 62% who oppose the proposed legislation, including 48% who strongly oppose the bill. A plurality of respondents believe that both North Dakota Senators Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad support the proposed bill.
When asked how a vote by Senator Dorgan in support of the healthcare bill would impact their potential vote for the Senator in the 2010 election, 12% of likely voters say they would be more likely to vote for Senator Dorgan as a result, while 40% would be less likely. Forty-six percent say Senator Dorgan's vote on health care makes no difference, including 62% of likely-Dorgan voters.
As Charlie Cook noted, so much depends on what quality of opposition the Republicans recruit. But if it looks like a Republican year, possible candidates tend to become actual candidates. Giuliani, for example: Many assumed he would never want the job of Senator, and, honestly, it's probably not his dream job. But if it looks like he can actually win it -- and maybe even easily -- it's a lot more appealing.
So is Governor Hoeven a likely challenger? Well, if he can confirm this poll, he's a hell of a lot likelier to try.
One more bit of good news: I linked the Fox poll -- 46% approve, 46% disapprove -- yesterday, but failed to see the sorta-shocking data point Allah highlighted: Among independents, support for Obama is at... 34%, with 51% opposed.
His overall approval rating’s pretty grim too — 46/46, down five points since last month — but I’m highlighting the indies because (a) this is the same Fox News poll with the suspicious Republican sample that I cited earlier, and (b) a -17 among the group that’s going to decide the midterms is eye-popping, especially when you compare it to last month. In October, among indies, he was at 49/34. This month, a 15-point swing. What happened?
I'm a little skeptical of this poll. It just seems odd and doesn't make a lot of sense to me. (Democrats are only sampled by 2% more than Republicans, 38-36; and Independents are heavily against Obama, yet he still has a 46% approval rate? Lot of weird stuff.) But... again, still. One doesn't have to believe every single crosstab of every single poll to realize that something bad has turned here for Obama.
Like, for example, this:
A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday morning indicates that 38 percent of the public blames Republicans for the country’s current economic problems. That’s down 15 points from May, when 53 percent blamed the GOP. According to the poll 27 percent now blame the Democrats for the recession, up 6 points from May. Twenty-seven percent now say both parties are responsible for the economic mess.
Every Obama promise has an expiration date -- how's that sub-8% unemployment rate working for everyone? -- and so now, finally, does Obama's go-to excuse of Blaming Bush.
Thanks to AHFF Geoff and CraigA.
Posted by: tachyonshuggy at November 20, 2009 03:35 PM (yUybe)
4
Perhaps moderate voters are beginning to see the fallacy of voting for "moderate" Democrats when the party itself is so extreme?
Posted by: 18-1 at November 20, 2009 03:37 PM (7BU4a)
5
Bring back cardigan sweaters and malaise speeches!
Posted by: Cicero at November 20, 2009 03:37 PM (QKKT0)
6
I wish there were some way to get rid of that asswipe druken wife beating anti-semite Jim Moran. He has a gerrymandered district which is composed of two areas 20 miles apart, Alexandria and Reston. Both area went Obama 65% in 08. He pretty much runs unopposed, is corrupt as hell, takes huge amounts of beltway money and has middle eastern doners. Almost anyone would be an improvement.
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 03:37 PM (ec6zm)
7
Oh, and it is nice to see the mushy middle waking up to having been had.
Amusingly both conservatives and leftists knew what Obama was - but the voters that determined the election couldn't be bothered to look into the man's history on their own...and we are all now paying the price.
Posted by: 18-1 at November 20, 2009 03:38 PM (7BU4a)
8Mark Levin wants you to call Senators Nelson, Landrieu, Lincoln, and Bayh
I have Durbin and Burris. I feel like that chicken.
Posted by: CUS at November 20, 2009 03:39 PM (wOGfT)
9
Moderates are a bunch of bed-wetters. I almost like moonbat convictions more than none at all. Maybe we can drop some "Grow-a-spine" in their drinking water to help them get some integrity.
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 03:40 PM (ec6zm)
10
Uh-oh! That means the majority are now paying attention.
Posted by: t-bird at November 20, 2009 03:40 PM (FcR7P)
11Reagan installed a low-tax regime that spurred economic growth.
No he didn't. St. Ronnie expanded government spending, increased taxes, and quickened the pace of the financialization of the economy. Hardly anyone sucked Wall St. cock more slavishly.
And here we are today.
Posted by: David Stockman at November 20, 2009 03:42 PM (RdKK8)
12 I don't know if Cook considered this, but conservative dems used to winning unopposed in conservative districts could switch parties once the certainty of a bloodbath firms-up.
Posted by: MikeO at November 20, 2009 03:42 PM (dYNrR)
And I'll repeat, there is no such thing as a "moderate Dem". There are "worried" Dems who will now not vote with the Party unless they get bribed.
Posted by: Vic at November 20, 2009 03:53 PM (CDUiN)
23
I love the way the left blames Wall St. (stockholdes? capitalism?) and not the forced loan expansion programs forced on the banks by dems? They think everyone is too stupid to know the difference and if they repeat the lie enough times it will become another one of their "truths" like "choice", the "right to privacy", gay "marriage", a "living" constitution, "implied" powers, etc.
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 03:53 PM (ec6zm)
Posted by: President Barak Obama at November 20, 2009 04:00 PM (HylJ6)
32More accurate to say that Reagan cut income taxes but raised other taxes.
Most accurate to say that Reagan stopped the government from stealing so much money from the people, but Congress couldn't stop spending.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at November 20, 2009 04:03 PM (ZJ/un)
33It's even more accurate to say that Regan cut income taxes 25%. The social security increases didn't bite that hard.
Yes, in essence he shifted the burden around and stimulated consumer spending. But the whole question is a red herring anyway; Bambi's taxes are historically unprecedented, Reagan spurred an unprecedented economic expansion, and erg is a cocksucker.
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 04:03 PM (RD7QR)
and of course if you read ben smith's article he tries to liken it to reagan's numbers. of course he gives no context. reagan's numbers were hovering in the mid-50s when he took office. obama's approval was at 70 in gallup and as high as 74 in other polls right after he was inaugurated.
yeah, that sounds like an accurate comparision to me.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 20, 2009 04:04 PM (pLTLS)
35 AOL anounced today that it will axe 2300 employees. In fact my local paper was just about wall to wall layoffs today in its metro section, but yet the LSM says we're in a recovery. I expect Bambi to be well below 30% by next summer.
Posted by: Blazer at November 20, 2009 04:04 PM (+FzLa)
36They've long been considered untouchable, simply due to their eternal incumbency; but Obama is delivering some unwelcome change in this regard.
I'd welcome that change...
Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 20, 2009 04:05 PM (NtiET)
37
You knuckleheads can be sure that no matter who's running the show, the response will be the same: government spending as far as the eye can see.
There's nothing else to do.
Posted by: David Stockman at November 20, 2009 04:05 PM (RdKK8)
Moran's a good face for the democrat party. Jackasses like him and erg@11 remove the moral doubt from the necessity of pogroms after the collapse.
Moran is such a disgrace that the gay couple across the street tape through his name on their campaign sign. Even the hard core libs don't like him but elect him anyway because no one opposes him --a real lib--could beat him easily in the primary.
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 04:05 PM (ec6zm)
39
There's no justification for a state like North Dakota to send two Dem Senators to DC, other than the criminal incompetence of the GOP leadership. It's as if NJ elected two Republican Senators.
This is the real problem with the party, not the mythical hard-liners being run in squishy districts.
Posted by: flenser at November 20, 2009 04:05 PM (H/yko)
40
I'd love it if VA-9 finally sent that weaselly jerk Rick Boucher home. That dude has no business representing a district as red as VA-9.
Posted by: fiatboomer at November 20, 2009 04:05 PM (0Wf6c)
Yep, a heavily gerrymandered district. He will die in office.
Posted by: Vic at November 20, 2009 04:07 PM (CDUiN)
45
The question is just really "where are all the good Republican candidates?".
It looks like they may have an unprecedented opportunity here. . .if they materialize.
Posted by: looking closely at November 20, 2009 04:07 PM (6Q9g2)
46Every Obama promise has an expiration date -- how's that sub-8%
unemployment rate working for everyone? -- and so now, finally, does
Obama's go-to excuse of Blaming Bush.
Remember when *some people* were wringing their hands over a poll back in January or February that said folks were willing to give him two years to sort his shit out? And *some other people* thought that it's a lot easier to say you'll have two years of patience than it is to actually have two years of patience when things went as badly as they must under his policies?
Good times.
Posted by: Methos at November 20, 2009 04:09 PM (CoDwG)
47 Reagan spurred an unprecedented economic expansion
Oh dream the fuck on.
Wage rates declined for working Americans during St. Ronny Halcyon years. Never recovered.
You have very short memories needed for your dreamy apotheosis of dumb old Ronnie Reagan.
Posted by: David Stockman at November 20, 2009 04:09 PM (RdKK8)
48But how many jobs has AOL saved? Hmmmm? That's how they count them now.
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 04:06 PM (ec6zm)
I'll suspect all of the layoffs will be here in America as usual, so Bambi saved or created at least 2300 jobs in India..
Posted by: Blazer at November 20, 2009 04:10 PM (+FzLa)
49
I wouldn't get too excited about Obama's popularity being below 50%.
He can still do lots of damage even while unpopular, and has plenty time left to bring it up to do yet more.
Posted by: looking closely at November 20, 2009 04:10 PM (6Q9g2)
Posted by: David Stockman at November 20, 2009 04:09 PM (RdKK
Define "working american," shithead.
Posted by: fiatboomer at November 20, 2009 04:12 PM (0Wf6c)
57Wage rates declined for working Americans during St. Ronny Halcyon years.
If so, why did the voters re-elect him by overwhelming margins?
Never recovered.
How is what happened in the twenty years since RR left office his responsiblity?
Posted by: flenser at November 20, 2009 04:12 PM (H/yko)
58AOL anounced today that it will axe 2300 employees. In fact my local
paper was just about wall to wall layoffs today in its metro section,
but yet the LSM says we're in a recovery. I expect Bambi to be well
below 30% by next summer.
We are likely in a technical recovery already but it probably won't have any impact on jobs. It's completely possible to be at 12% unemployment and 2% GDP next year. So expect to hear a lot about "earnings" and "worker productivity" and other positive indicators that have fuck-all to do with jobs.
BTW, the situation that the Democrats have engineered all but guarantees that companies will look overseas for business growth (and jobs). Weak dollar and shitty consumption. . .what would you do?
Posted by: tachyonshuggy at November 20, 2009 04:14 PM (yUybe)
59 Something that reflects poorly on the unicorn jockey gets posted and not one, but two trolls show up almost instantaneously to defend their master. I mean, you can almost set your watch by it.
At least as long as Barry is in office axelturfing will be well funded. So enjoy those juice boxes and pudding cups while you can dear trolls.
Posted by: Blazer at November 20, 2009 04:15 PM (+FzLa)
Wage rates declined for working Americans during St. Ronny Halcyon years. Never recovered.
You have very short memories needed for your dreamy apotheosis of dumb old Ronnie Reagan.
Which says nothing whatsoever about economic expansion. Oh, and do your bosses at Colorado Department of Education know what you're doing on their dime?
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 04:16 PM (RD7QR)
62
Ben Smith is a Democratic Party water carrier. See no evil, hear no evil.
Posted by: WTFCI at November 20, 2009 04:16 PM (GtYrq)
Wage rates declined for working Americans during St. Ronny Halcyon years. Never recovered.
You have very short memories needed for your dreamy apotheosis of dumb old Ronnie Reagan.
Nice code word: The "working American"--that mythical creature that exists only in the minds of those who believe that non-union workers do not, in fact, work.
Tell us the part about how Jimmah would have been better. We like that. Because my memory is just fine about the grounds for that particular choice, genius.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at November 20, 2009 04:17 PM (B+qrE)
So will Bambi once he gets health care passed, manages to make our utility costs sky-rocket, "solves" Afghanistan, balances the budget, spreads the wealth, pays off our mortgages and wins the Olympics for Chicago.
OK, maybe not that last thing, but once he does all these other things, he'll be very popular.
Posted by: rockhead at November 20, 2009 04:18 PM (RykTt)
By "working American" erg means cocksuckers and leeches like himself.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at November 20, 2009 04:15 PM (ZJ/un)
I wonder if he can tell us how many Glory Hole jobs his messiah has saved or created? If he has any money to spend, that didnt come from a welfare check, I'd say at least one.
Posted by: Blazer at November 20, 2009 04:18 PM (+FzLa)
67Something that reflects poorly on the unicorn jockey gets posted and not one, but two trolls show up almost instantaneously to defend their master. I mean, you can almost set your watch by it.
This is a good point. The first thing erg did was try to get the conversation away from how rapidly, one would even say deliciously, Bambi is tanking. I'll have to stop taking that bait.
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 04:19 PM (RD7QR)
There's no justification for a state like North Dakota to send two Dem Senators to DC, other than the criminal incompetence of the GOP leadership. It's as if NJ elected two Republican Senators.
Except for the Indian vote and farm subsidies. But yes the GOP could do a better job in ND.
Posted by: polynikes at November 20, 2009 04:19 PM (m2CN7)
69
>>>Remember when *some people* were wringing their hands over a poll back in January or February that said folks were willing to give him two years to sort his shit out? And *some other people* thought that it's a lot easier to say you'll have two years of patience than it is to actually have two years of patience when things went as badly as they must under his policies?
If that's directed at me, I always said the same thing, and predicted 6-12 months.
I also predicted a collapse when it happens, as the bubble is pricked. I can't stand by that prediction anymore, since it appears the bubble isn't bursting, but just continuing to erode, in a non-bubble-like fashion.
Although there does seem to have been a more-dramatic-than-usual fall this last month. That fox finding about independents is so shocking I can't really believe it.
Posted by: ace at November 20, 2009 04:19 PM (jlvw3)
70
Why is it a minority approval rating is a bad thing? Minorities are bad? RACIST!
Posted by: Commissioner John Wiley Price, Dallas Tx at November 20, 2009 04:19 PM (xhPKT)
71
So when do we find out which tunnel erg is working, since he has decided to not honor his own promise to leave is asked?
Posted by: wiserbud at November 20, 2009 04:20 PM (tWf3S)
Why, I can't remember a single instance - oh, wait. That's happened to every president since they started taking polls, hasn't it...?
Not one where the media painted him as the greatest thing ever in all of ever. Ever.
But, since you don't seem to want to discuss the facts...
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at November 20, 2009 04:20 PM (B+qrE)
73
I'll worry about a democrat comeback to salvage the 2010 elections when they show any sign of compromise or flexibility that actually includes republican ideas in legislation ( tax cuts, less regs.)
Which means I never have to worry about it.
Enjoy your incoming beating.
Posted by: jjshaka at November 20, 2009 04:20 PM (rsMoR)
74
I am an independent and tend to vote for the man, also throw some votes to the L party every now and then.
This next election? Straight R, down the line motherfuckers.
Same with my wife.
Posted by: Uniball at November 20, 2009 04:20 PM (27iEn)
75the situation that the Democrats have engineered all but guarantees that companies will look overseas for business growth (and jobs).
and yet, the Dems seem hell bent on pushing Obamacare. I guess they believe that seats come and go, but once you get the bureaucrats in, everything else is window dressing.
Oh well, it looks like a whole new set of lobbyists will be hitting K street in january 2011.
Posted by: eddiebear at November 20, 2009 04:25 PM (wnU1W)
Posted by: wiserbud at November 20, 2009 04:27 PM (tWf3S)
90
ace I don't think I was talking specifically about you, I don't remember your position on that poll. I do remember you stating at one point that either the economy was going to suck even worse as time wore on or none of us understand it all, so yeah, you were right generally on that. I just remember a lot of 'woe is us' when that poll was out and I'm taking a moment to enjoy the vindication.
We're still screwed though, at least until Dem senators get this through their heads.
Posted by: Methos at November 20, 2009 04:28 PM (CoDwG)
Shit, all I have is the Michelin man. Must be telling me something
Posted by: eddiebear at November 20, 2009 04:30 PM (wnU1W)
93 haha, yeah the 'wage rates' for air traffic controllers declined when we had Ronald Reagan in the White House.
With Obama, millions of people's 'wage rates' have declined BECAUSE THEY'RE UNEMPLOYED.
Posted by: goforitbillbelichik at November 20, 2009 04:37 PM (JY1gZ)
94
Dayum, now hubby's gon' be all down and dumpy tonight and won'ts be down with eating some black taco.
Posted by: Michelle Obama at November 20, 2009 04:38 PM (ynkTh)
95
Of course, Reagan's record isn't what the post is about. The post is about the way Obama's destroying the Democrat party.
Which erg doesn't even bother to deny.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at November 20, 2009 04:38 PM (ZJ/un)
96"Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach work in the bureaucracy."
It's more about job security than about the inability "to do". The only "all" or "more the educator truly pursues is that of knowing all the arguments so they can adopt the most widely held.
Wasn't David Stockman largely correct though? He couldn't stop the spending. Did he just suck at the argumentation?
Posted by: WTFCI at November 20, 2009 04:41 PM (GtYrq)
97 Once this democrat congress and their kenyan princess destroy our country's ability to borrow, the game is over in Washington, D.C.
Posted by: MikeO at November 20, 2009 04:41 PM (dYNrR)
Posted by: Rob Crawford at November 20, 2009 04:38 PM (ZJ/un)
when you start actually claiming that someone with the record Reagan has was a bad President, that's when you know they don't know crap about Presidents, the economy boomed under him & in 1984 he won 58% (won 49 states-only lost oppionent's home state by .5%) of the vote just as the economy began recovering, imagine if the election had been held a little later after that...
Obama so far has had the economy erode under him, spending go crazy, deficits and national debt reach record levels and went under 50% faster then dubya did who took years & a natural disaster to get there
Posted by: YRM at November 20, 2009 04:43 PM (eySZ7)
We should all be writing to Boehner and Mitchell to demand that they and every GOP congresscritter and senator put a sentence into every speech stating "We will REPEAL Obamacare the second we retake Congress. We will run "repeal" candidates in every district in 2010. "
IOW "ObamaCare delenda est."
Posted by: effinayright at November 20, 2009 04:44 PM (7M8Py)
100I wish there were some way to get rid of that asswipe druken wife
beating anti-semite Jim Moran. He has a gerrymandered district which is
composed of two areas 20 miles apart, Alexandria and Reston. Both area
went Obama 65% in 08.
There is a way. You must elect a repub majority in the state house and senate, because they will be responsible for the redistricting after the census. Moran can be redistricted out.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at November 20, 2009 04:45 PM (DIYmd)
101
The polls are interesting. It almost makes one wonder what they would be like without a fawning press sucking him off every five minutes.
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at November 20, 2009 04:45 PM (SVIJA)
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at November 20, 2009 04:45 PM (SVIJA)
take out the fawning press and I argue he wouldn't have even won in the primaries, remember count the FL & MI votes correctly in the primary & Obama loses, Hillary won the popular vote in the primaries
Posted by: YRM at November 20, 2009 04:48 PM (eySZ7)
In the RCP avg.: CBS +17, CNN +13, ABC +14. riiiiiiiight.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at November 20, 2009 04:49 PM (DIYmd)
104 You know what the 2nd best thing about this is?
Of course you don't because you're not too bright. So I'll tell you.
The 2nd best thing about Obama's numbers going down is that the OMG's (Obama Media Group) numbers sink with Obama. As long as the media carries Obama's water while Obama pisses on the People and tells them it's raining, the People will foment a deep resentment for the media.
For example, you can only tell people who are struggling and paying more and more taxes that we're in a recovery so often until there's a backlash.
Posted by: goforitbillbelichik at November 20, 2009 04:54 PM (JY1gZ)
105-- and so now, finally, does Obama's go-to excuse of Blaming Bush.
"The sand is running out of that hourglass." - Dana Perino
Posted by: franksalterego at November 20, 2009 05:03 PM (GKyIE)
106
Ace: "Although there does seem to have been a more-dramatic-than-usual fall
this last month. That fox finding about independents is so shocking I
can't really believe it."
Growing perception of real failure at an accelerating rate?
The "independents" (aka the generally trendy and contemporaneously malleable along with some subset of real independents) were sold - and bought - a bill of goods. Team Obama ran as the moderates they never were. It takes a while for that illusion to expire. And now it has. Abruptly. Abruptly because of the size, speed, and scope of the socialist grab along with the corresponding corruption that was only supposed to bedevil the GOP.
Independents now understand the scope of the illusory "change" and find that Obama isn't anything near what they thought he was. Politics as usual and actually, with Pelosi and Reid driving the bus, worse than expected. What's more, projections for national improvement are non-existent as the realization of an anti-capitalist and anti-liberty ideology that's driving this government sets in. Tangible business contraction is evident, real, and widespread. Now almost everyone realizes it'll be long-lived contraction barring dramatic reversals. No one, not even independents, see this kind of change on the horizon.
So, yes, while the shift in polls is dramatic, I think it's entirely explainable.
The GOP should start campaigning on the reversal of everything Pelosi et al. advance.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at November 20, 2009 05:06 PM (3nPNg)
107
Damn! I must have been asleep! Did Al Q hit DC? Or was The (yellow) One in some China nuke sight? Yikes!
Obama "Beyond Radioactive"
Posted by: hous bin pharteen at November 20, 2009 05:08 PM (pU4D7)
108
My parents live in John Spratt's district in SC. They are in a rural southern part, but the northern part of the district is quickly pushing it Republican thanks to the mass exodus from Charlotte specifically, and NC in general. It'll be a good race next year. The last GOP guy got caught with hired illegals (hello! dumb!) mowing his lawn.
Posted by: Paul Revere at November 20, 2009 05:19 PM (epgqp)
No problem, but obviously I want to be credited for a prediction that bore out, and not charged with predicting the opposite.
I remember I was down in the dumps for months and then around March I started realizing we could do this, that a god can bleed, etc., and started posting optimistic stuff and making these predictions.
Posted by: ace at November 20, 2009 05:19 PM (jlvw3)
110I remember I was down in the dumps for months and then around March I
started realizing we could do this, that a god can bleed, etc., and
started posting optimistic stuff and making these predictions.
That's also when the stock market bottomed. I think if you plotted the SP500 and Ace's optimism it would track nicely. . .
. . .boy.
Posted by: tachyonshuggy at November 20, 2009 05:21 PM (yUybe)
111
Two observations to make here: One, Obama will hit a point at which his approval will plummet as people stop being apologists. Look at the popular culture for this. African American support will crater all at once, as soon as it becomes cool to oppose him.
Two, Obama's support among African Americans is very high, even for a Democrat. With racial gerrymandering, that means those blue-collar blue-dog mostly white Democrat districts are not showing the support for him that a 49% approval rating would ordinarily indicate.
Posted by: AmishDude at November 20, 2009 05:22 PM (T0NGe)
112
per the vote tomorrow, how about if the Louisiana AG threatens to charge Mary Landrieu for taking a bribe? Preferrably before tomorrows vote.
Posted by: elliot m at November 20, 2009 05:23 PM (0a6dS)
113African American support will crater all at once, as soon as it becomes cool to oppose him.
I've always wondered if there will be a "this black guy ain't really black" backlash. I mean. . .he's not. He doesn't come from slave stock. He was raised by white people, mostly. He was fasttracked through the Ivy League because he had awesome lefty cred and didn't "sound black."
The second that the identity group thing fails. . .he loses like 10% of the electorate overnight. How likely that is I have no idea.
Posted by: tachyonshuggy at November 20, 2009 05:30 PM (yUybe)
They should produce Billy Beer again. Then O can send everyone in America a six-pack (his AA czar can tell him which houses to avoid as this information is already on file with the Ministry of Truth). Then we can have a 2009 version of "Hands Across America" where we all pause and sip some Billy Beer at that same time. It's America's beer summit with O. The healing can began and we can both simultaneously weep and sip.
I like the symbiotic feel of aligning our countries shittiest memories in one fell swoop.
Billy up!
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 20, 2009 05:37 PM (pLTLS)
Posted by: wth at November 20, 2009 05:45 PM (wAQA5)
116
Seen the pollster.com rolling polling average? Pollster.com uses ever reputable national poll on Obama's approval, not just cherry-picked ones. That average has had Obama's approval numbers essentially flat over the last three months in the low 50's.
Or, we could just pick and choose the polls we want to report on to support whatever false idea we want to push (like that Obama's support is plummeting!...the numbers show it is not). Do you care at all about facts?
Posted by: Sally Ann Cavanaugh at November 20, 2009 06:04 PM (FRErk)
117
Sally Ann -- c'mon, erg, you're not fooling anyone.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at November 20, 2009 06:09 PM (n2wxa)
100There is a way. You must elect a repub majority in the state house and senate, because they will be responsible for the redistricting after the census. Moran can be redistricted out.
Actually I think this gerrymandering was the product of a republican legislature. They gave the 8th district away by putting all the super libs--Alexandria and really loony hippie Reston into one district so that the surrounding districts in Fairfax county could all go republican without these areas screwing up more than one district. I just have the misfortune of living in one of them.
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 06:11 PM (ec6zm)
Sally Ann--quit hanging out with Fletch. Seriously, Chevy Chase will turn your brain to shit.
Even if we are to take your polls at face value, it's still almost a 20 point dip in 11 months time. That's not anything to write home about now is it toots?
Now go skidaddle--go play tennis with the Underhills.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 20, 2009 06:13 PM (pLTLS)
120The second that the identity group thing fails. .
.he loses like 10% of the electorate overnight. How likely that is I
have no idea.
Posted by: tachyonshuggy at November 20, 2009 05:30 PM (yUybe)
His election represented something African Americans always wanted. A kind of acceptance in the mainstream culture. Conservatives knew Barack's skin color was a net asset and he would have gotten nowhere as a boring old white politician.
Of course, even if Barack were a successful president, his approach will bring divisions, but now he's bringing black people down with him. Jesse Jackson's remark about people who cannot be black and oppose health care I took to mean "cannot be black and oppose Obama."
If Obama becomes uncool, it'll be more than that 10%. A lot of what liberals support, they do so because they think minorities support it.
Posted by: AmishDude at November 20, 2009 06:22 PM (T0NGe)
121
119 - a 20-point dip in 6 months? First, it is actually more like a 15 point dip. And when we're talking about the first six months of a presidency, that is quite normal. Almost all presidents start out with approval numbers in the 60's. After six months, almost all presidents have approval numbers in the 50's. GWB's numbers were dropping until 9/11 hit. Clinton had this kind of numbers decline. So did GHWB. So did Reagan. So did Carter, and Nixon and.....
See a pattern here?
Posted by: Sally Ann Cavanaugh at November 20, 2009 06:24 PM (FRErk)
you have no idea what you're talking about Fletch mistress.
Reagan's numbers were barely above 51% coming in--so his slight dip down is a nonissue compared to O's 15 (or 20 depending on the poll you read) point dip. But sure we'll give you 15 points because you still look like a colossal ass in making such a ludicrous argument.
Way to pick the wrong hill to die on sweetheart. you sound like a moron--and not the good kind.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 20, 2009 06:33 PM (pLTLS)
Not one where the media painted him as the greatest thing ever in all of ever. Ever.
But, since you don't seem to want to discuss the facts...
This is news like the sun rising in the east is news. Oh wait, circa, that's not news either...
Posted by: JEA at November 20, 2009 06:37 PM (xTCi0)
124I've always wondered if there will be a "this black guy ain't really black" backlash. I mean. . .he's not. He doesn't come from slave stock.
Nope. On NPR today, there was a poet who had also written a book about a mixed race character during the days of slavery. She actually called it 200 years Before Obama, or 200 BO. The interviewer then helpfully said, "And his father was most likely of slave heritage," and she replied, "Oh, yes, yes, of course." They are very much on it, but laying it on a bit thick. Makes me think they need to keep the fully committed in line.
Posted by: Sally Ann Cavanaugh at November 20, 2009 06:49 PM (VLYnh)
The candidate thing is important. If it looks good, better people will risk a run because a loss won't kill them electorally forever. Otherwise you get 'show the flag' candidates. For instance, a friend of mine ran for Wayne County (Michigan) prosecutor because the party needed a candidate and he was the only one available. And he had just graduated from law school, and his bar results would not be in until the week before the election (he passed the bar).
It had to be done, but no serious Republican was going to run against John D. O'Hair.
Posted by: Mikey NTH at November 20, 2009 07:13 PM (TUWci)
you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but you can not fool all the people all the time.
Obama managed to fool 52% of the people on Nov 3. He managed to let another 20% give him the benefit of the doubt. Those people have judged him and found him wanting. Now some of those 52% are waking up. I can see landslides from my porch.
Posted by: unseen at November 20, 2009 08:00 PM (aVGmX)
128feel very bad for whatever miscreant is standing in 15 degree arc directly in front of this weapon.
Posted by: ugg cheap boots at November 20, 2009 09:03 PM (b1hdx)
Never mind he is the first black president with far, far, left ideas and radical friends and has severely stupid effects on the economy and dealing with Muslim nut jobs. It will have no effect on the chance of another African-American getting elected president. As far as I know when the numbers start falling into the - numbers, I think they stop at 0. Not -0,000,001
Posted by: hous bin pharteen at November 21, 2009 03:11 AM (pU4D7)
Yeah, I like how His Majesty is now wearing his crown upon a troubled brow when it comes to deficits.
Problem is, His Majesty and his good-time Donk buddies are only now muttering to each other, "Uh, we might have f***ed up," after having performed the equivalent of maxing out all their credit cards, taking out multiple mortgages, hocking everything in the house, taking out cash advances on their paychecks for the next three years, and borrowing money from all their friends and family after telling them, "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday after the Power Ball Grand Prize is announced. Don't worry--I'm a lock to win."
I am going to sooooooooo f***ing enjoy voting against Obama's Too-Live Crew in November 2010.
Posted by: MarkJ at November 21, 2009 05:04 PM (JA4GT)
It is a great idea especially for relatively new blogs. I’d like to try this.
ugg bailey button Just got my ugg classic mini! They are absolutely beautiful, and the quality is just amazing. No wearing them in, no blisters just absolutely snug strait out of the box.
138
hot news for brand shoes online store ,do you want to win more discount ?and popular for younger,and nike air maxwith top quality A ,come on all air max shoes with lowest price for highest quality !
Posted by: nike air max at December 01, 2009 10:04 PM (OKj2x)
Posted by: reviewups at December 02, 2009 02:37 AM (fZN4w)
140
to provide the best louis vuitton replica products and service to our customers at the lowest prices possible. All of our replica handbags are made to look and feel just like the originals. No one will be able to tell you’re carrying one of our replica handbags, because our imitation LV bags are identical to the real thing. The replica louis vuitton handbags,bags,purses and clutches in our online shop has three advantage.
Posted by: scccc at December 03, 2009 03:31 AM (5Ewaz)
141
high quality replica watches of well known brands - Jacob & Co, TAG Heuer, Cartier, Panerai and much more. *If you want to buy replica watch, you have come to the right place! We are leading supplier of all kinds of REPLICA WATCHES. The leading name in luxury watches, rolex watches has been the pre-eminent symbol of performance and prestige for over a century. Rolex men's and ladies' watches omega watches Sale is a Discount Omega Watches Store.We Offer Cheap Omega Replica Watches With Best Quality And Other Replica Brand Watches For Sale.
Posted by: rfvrrftghftgrhnjgjnygj at December 03, 2009 05:15 AM (5Ewaz)
142
Everything dynamic and very positively! Ugg Classic Cardy,discount, free shipping!
143
The cheap ugg boots sale for women are stylish, they are comfortable and what¡¯s more, they keep your feet. theres a pair of fellow sufferers,ugg australia uk to complement your personal preferences, why do we not take the traditional high discount ugg boots on salefor cold winter?
As a matter of fact, with the passing time, the love for ugg usa is increasing among girls in this modern world. The growing demand for these womens ugg made the manufacturers UGG Boots Sale to revamp the looks of these boots with different hues.come our website and buy a pair of ugg uk.UGG Classic Cardy are popular as shoes for cowboys. The SHOES close the whole parts of the foot. The ugg cardy are important to protect your feet from any dangerous things during your walking activities. There are many oatmeal ugg available in the Market and if you are interested to get one you can directly go to the store that sells it.
Posted by: reviewups at December 03, 2009 10:21 AM (OKj2x)
Posted by: uggboots at December 07, 2009 11:25 AM (Cooh2)
145
Today ugg boots online have become a phenomenon.Every winter,the ugg classic crochet are one of the hottest goods in the market all over the world.So now don't be hesitation,own a pair of ugg usa immediately.
Posted by: ugg boots sale at December 10, 2009 05:20 PM (I3/dZ)
155
Un total de once comunidades autnomas estn este jueves en alerta naranja Christmas gift ugg tall boots (riesgo importante) por nevadas y bajan las temperaturas en toda Espa09a, segn la Agencia Estatal de Meteorologa (AEMET). En concreto, se Christmas gift ugg napoule sandal trata de Aragn, Cantabria, Castilla-La Mancha, Catalu09a, Christmas gift timberland classic boots Madrid, Navarra, Comunidad Valenciana, Galicia, Pas Vasco, Asturias y Murcia. La cota de nieve bajar a menos de 200 metros en el CantbricoLa Pennsula Ibrica est bajo dos borrascas y un anticicln que crearn un pasillo que permitir el paso de una corriente de aire muy fro, como la que est provocando un temporal de fro glaciar en Europa, aunque es esperan que el fro que suframos no sea tan intenso como en otros pases. An as, se espera que las bajas temperaturas se mantengan hasta el domingo. La cota de nieve baja en el Cantbrico a menos de 200 metros
Posted by: replica rolex at February 03, 2010 04:29 PM (CPNio)
168
Certainly watches are Replica Watches used to help people record rolex Watches time, but rolex watches nowadays its functions have enlarged. Replica watches are now tag heuer Watches not only objects that tag heuer watches can tell you what time it is, they are also a status symbol. You should not feel strange when you find someone wearing a watch on his wrist, but use the cell phone to tell time. In that situation, the watch is just showing its luxurious function cartier watches. It is normal and cartier watches perhaps also happens to you. .If asked that among the watches of various brands, which one can suit your taste? There is no doubt that most people will choose Rolex. Whichever social class you are in, it is naturally Rolex was known breitling Watches and cherished breitling watches for a long time. However, the elements do not usually enter the market alone, always come with the price tag up to the hand. For this reason, many people, especially men, their dreams of luxury Rolex watches are buried in omega Watches his heart omega watches. What should I do? Rolex watches are simply stunning worn by the rich and famous, right? No, this world is not the world's richest men, is the world of each. All are equal before the search of luxury and be men's watches respected. Within men's watches, the law, when consumers are in the market, women's watches they should women's watches receive the same treatment. This is the real reason why replica Rolex watches are ladies watches ladies watches more welcome than Rolex. Because in this world are not difficult to understand that the rich are much less than people with low income, you agree with me? You are forced to nod and say with certainty that is the reality. These low-income people do not have enough money to save every month. They can not afford such luxury Rolex watches
Posted by: replica watches at February 04, 2010 08:57 AM (CPNio)
Posted by: replica watches at February 05, 2010 07:46 AM (0uEN8)
171
this replica watches replica watchWhoever wants replica watches timekeeper that does the job of a tachometer will be crazy for. The operation is performed by the copied replica rolex 's bezel. The Daytona also applies automatic movement ¨C just one of many breitling watches characters and functionalities that ensures the precision of time. Originally created to measure lap time and the cartier watches overall time of a race, Rolex Daytona replica omega watches timepieces can measure elapsed time for omega any sporting event. The power of this breitling replica item is made possibly by its internalized perpetual rotor mechanism. Known for its precision, this special Rolex replica cartier watch model only has to be set once to the cartier watches standard time of the owner's choice. Once rolex watches being created, it updates itself during time changes, making upkeep of the replica's time setting replica watches nonexistent. Even though these replica watches were made for sporting events, (specifically those involving laps or circuits), it's not so adversible to put them tag heuer in water since they are not fake watches waterproof. Even thought most of the time, the replica watches do not bear the tag heuer same functionalities as the original ones, they are still the most desirable alternatives of the expensive real models.
Posted by: replica watches at February 06, 2010 05:47 AM (KbTNE)
Posted by: rolex at February 06, 2010 09:55 PM (TUJDt)
174
Factors Replica Watches About The Rolex replica watches Oyster The Oyster is so closely get in touch with Rolex, and it is inevitably that some people think these are the only Replica watches Rolex manufacture. Others suppose that there is a single Oyster watch. But as a matter of fact, the name Oyster does not actually meant for a rolex Watches particular watch you can buy rolex watches or even to a series but to a type of case that available in some of the Rolex ranges. History The Oyster case was first released in 1926. The objective was to protect the workings of the watch from dust and moisture. Early watches were far from waterproof. The Oyster tag heuer Watchescase was an tag heuer watches innovative design to eliminate these problems. It had a new double locking crown that screwed into place. It has been compared to the hatch on a submarine. Like a submarine, the Oyster case was waterproof. In 1927 Mercedes Gleitze swam the English breitling Watches Channel breitling watches . Before she set off she was presented with a Rolex Oyster. When she arrived, the watch was still working perfectly. The resulting publicity gave the new case a massive boost. Why is it called Oyster? Legend has it that Hans cartier Watches Wilsdorf cartier watches, who invented the Oyster, chose the name because the new case reminded him of the difficulty he had experienced prising open oysters at dinner. Since then the Oyster has further, particularly advanced. Many Oyster watches today are omega Watches perpetual-self-winding, in other omega watches words, it does not require to expose the mechanism to the outside world in order to wind it. The Osyter Perpetual is one of the toughest, most durable, most reliable watches (under truly adverse conditions). It is probably the best mechanical watch money can buy.
Posted by: replica watches at February 07, 2010 01:25 PM (TUJDt)