Quinnipiac University Poll: Obama worst president since WWII

[Paul Kemp]

Barack Obama polarizes America because of what he is.  

He is incompetent, without any justification, and that's what turns people off. He's an intelligent person someone, who went to Yale and seems to have respectable moral discipline, yet he fails quite spectacularly to wrangle Congress or achieve anything, without rampant deficit spending.

This is the story of Barack Obama George W. Bush, they guy who looks good on paper, but who gives in to his self-indulgent political impulses to the detriment of the nation.

I understand why people defend him, but he is easily the worst post-WWII president.

ftfy

[pbrower2a]

Barack Obama polarizes America because of what he is.  

He is incompetent, without any justification, and that's what turns people off. He's an intelligent person, who went to Yale and seems to have respectable moral discipline, yet he fails quite spectacularly to wrangle Congress or achieve anything, without rampant deficit spending.

This is the story of Barack Obama, they guy who looks good on paper, but who gives in to his self-indulgent political impulses to the detriment of the nation.

I understand why people defend him, but he is easily the worst post-WWII president.

No. Dubya is still the worst since at least WWII by objective standards. He failed to heed intelligence that indicated that Osama bin Laden had begun show interest in jetliners. Because the MO of al-Qaeda was to transform heavy equipment into weapons of mass destruction, such should have raised more red flags than one could expect on May Day in Moscow under Communist rule. This would have been a good time to arrest anyone connected to al-Qaeda.

He let Karl Rove exercise power as a political boss contrary to the delegation of powers as delineated in the Constitution, making the Republican party a de facto branch of government. Unelected Party bosses wielding real power is one way to create a dictatorship. A hint: Joseph Stalin ruled the Soviet Union entirely as a Party Boss through a weak formal government.

He fostered an economic bubble whose shaky basis was reckless borrowing against gains best described as pure speculation upon predatory lending. A wise conservative would have based prosperity upon greater investment in job-creating plant and equipment that allows people to earn solid incomes that support home ownership and purchases of high-ticket items. The Dubya-era bubble cut into the manufacturing base and promoted imports.

His economic reforms were promoted solely to enrich people who were under no economic distress.

He got America into a bungled war based on lies. People around him outed a CIA operative as revenge against an American hero who had exposed that Saddam Hussein

He grossly mismanaged a response to a natural disaster, failing at what most Presidents have done well.

Despite having compliant majorities in the House and Senate for the first six years of his Presidency he has little record of legislative achievement other than tax cuts for the super-rich.

He took a country well regarded internationally and inspired anti-Americanism that one can ascribe completely to him and not to some design in Moscow or Beijing.

As one commenter said, he is the antithesis of the three highest-regarded Presidents (Washington, Lincoln, and FDR) who took a deeply-divided America and brought it together -- taking a country with few rifts and, through his incompetence, creating new rifts and expanding those that already existed.

Foreign policy -- disaster.
Economic stewardship -- atrocious.
Maintaining credibility of the US -- awful.     

I'm a liberal -- but if some liberal President had failed to respond to intelligence against al-Qaeda, had let a Democratic Party boss wield un-Constitutional power, fostered a real estate bubble on predatory lending that subsequently imploded much like the Crash of 1929, had gotten America into a war based on lies, had mishandled a natural disaster, and had little success in enacting legislation despite a compliant Congress, I would have to rate that President very low.       

[angus]

This poll was released today. Do you believe the poll?

yes.

[pbrower2a]

This poll was released today. Do you believe the poll?

yes.

Partisan bias is obvious. Nearly 40% of the American public believe that Barack Obama is completely wrong almost all the time. The choices among Republicans are split between Dubya and Nixon (for very different reasons).

People have short memories.

[Lincoln Republican]

Wait, Winfield commented in this thread, and he didn't pick up on this question in the poll?

"In the Presidential election of 2012, if Mitt Romney had become President instead of Barack Obama, do you think that, in general, the nation would be better off than it is today or worse off than it is today?"

better off 45%
worse off 38%

I don't want to rub it in and say I told you so.

Besides, the OP was concentrating on what an absolute and abject failure Obama has been, not on what a great President Romney would have been.

[IceSpear]

Wait, Winfield commented in this thread, and he didn't pick up on this question in the poll?

"In the Presidential election of 2012, if Mitt Romney had become President instead of Barack Obama, do you think that, in general, the nation would be better off than it is today or worse off than it is today?"

better off 45%
worse off 38%

I don't want to rub it in and say I told you so.

Besides, the OP was concentrating on what an absolute and abject failure Obama has been, not on what a great President Romney would have been.

Yes, it's such an accomplishment that Romney got a percentage who think we'd be better off which was lower than his actual percentage in the election.

[AggregateDemand]

Foreign policy -- disaster.
Economic stewardship -- atrocious.
Maintaining credibility of the US -- awful.         

If Bush, or any other president, had access to the kind of cash Obama is pumping through the economy, he'd be hailed as the greatest president since WWII.

Obama may be the first post-WWII president to run deficits higher than GDP-growth throughout his entire presidency. He's also the most prolific spender in history, and his solution to every problem seems to be more transfer payments.

He earned a J.D. from Harvard. He does not lack intellect, nor does he lack political capital. Obama underachieves because he prefers political indulgence to leadership. He's useless as a president.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Wait, Winfield commented in this thread, and he didn't pick up on this question in the poll?

"In the Presidential election of 2012, if Mitt Romney had become President instead of Barack Obama, do you think that, in general, the nation would be better off than it is today or worse off than it is today?"

better off 45%
worse off 38%

I don't want to rub it in and say I told you so.

Besides, the OP was concentrating on what an absolute and abject failure Obama has been, not on what a great President Romney would have been.

Yes, it's such an accomplishment that Romney got a percentage who think we'd be better off which was lower than his actual percentage in the election.

     If you want to play that game, the percentage who think we'd be worse off with Romney than with Obama is pathetic compared to the percentage that voted for Obama. As for the undecideds in this poll, well we just won't talk about those people.

[angus]

This poll was released today. Do you believe the poll?

yes.

Partisan bias is obvious. Nearly 40% of the American public believe that Barack Obama is completely wrong almost all the time. The choices among Republicans are split between Dubya and Nixon (for very different reasons).

People have short memories.

Maybe.  Sampling is difficult.  Moreover, The Vorlon always pointed out that (1) people lie to pollsters and (2) the question you ask will affect the answer, so wording is very important.  With all that in mind, your interpretation of the question in this thread also matters:  "Do you believe the poll?"  Well, I believe that they were honest when they said that the poll was conducted over a a six-day period in June.  I believe that they asked 1446 people their question.  I believe that they tried to get a fairly random sample.  This particular organization has a fairly long experience in conducting scientific polls.  I believe that they tried. 

Are you interpreting the question as:  "Do you believe that this poll accurately reflects the views of the voting public in the United States?"  That's a bigger question and one that is impossible to answer.  Also, it isn't particularly relevant.  Who goes around thinking things like "Hmmm, I wonder which is the worst president ever."  Outside this forum (where folks seem to have a great deal of time on their hands) and maybe a few historians (who get paid to do that) I don't think people do.  I went with the more relevant interpretation of the question and in my answer to that is yes.  I think they tried to get a good sample and they asked their question and this is the answer that they got.  It is also not surprising.  The sitting president will always get the blame (or credit) for whatever is going on in the world.  Hurricanes, civil wars, girls being sold into slavery, the sorry test scores from public schools, bad roads, bad sidewalks, earthquakes, alien invasions, zombie attacks, and your failure to achieve a satisfying orgasm are all the fault of the president.

[IceSpear]

Wait, Winfield commented in this thread, and he didn't pick up on this question in the poll?

"In the Presidential election of 2012, if Mitt Romney had become President instead of Barack Obama, do you think that, in general, the nation would be better off than it is today or worse off than it is today?"

better off 45%
worse off 38%

I don't want to rub it in and say I told you so.

Besides, the OP was concentrating on what an absolute and abject failure Obama has been, not on what a great President Romney would have been.

Yes, it's such an accomplishment that Romney got a percentage who think we'd be better off which was lower than his actual percentage in the election.

     If you want to play that game, the percentage who think we'd be worse off with Romney than with Obama is pathetic compared to the percentage that voted for Obama. As for the undecideds in this poll, well we just won't talk about those people.

It's not a game, it's a statement of fact. Neither side has anything to brag about in that statistic, other than the fact that Romney voters were more loyal to their choice.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

ROFL at the left-wing hacks voting for Bush 2 or Reagan and the right-wing hacks voting for Obama.  The only sane answer to this is Jimmy Carter.  People are either too young or didn't pay attention in history.  Stagflation, misery index, long lines at the gas pump, hostages in Iran...need I say more?  The Peanut Farmer is the only real contender for this title.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

ROFL at the left-wing hacks voting for Bush 2 or Reagan and the right-wing hacks voting for Obama.  The only sane answer to this is Jimmy Carter.  People are either too young or didn't pay attention in history.  Stagflation, misery index, long lines at the gas pump, hostages in Iran...need I say more?  The Peanut Farmer is the only real contender for this title.

were you alive in 2008

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

ROFL at the left-wing hacks voting for Bush 2 or Reagan and the right-wing hacks voting for Obama.  The only sane answer to this is Jimmy Carter.  People are either too young or didn't pay attention in history.  Stagflation, misery index, long lines at the gas pump, hostages in Iran...need I say more?  The Peanut Farmer is the only real contender for this title.

Nixon's policies indirectly caused most or all of those things. Arguably a tag team of Johnson and Nixon for a couple of them. Again, it's nice to know that you think ineffectually treading water makes someone a worse President than the no fewer than three conservative Republican Presidents since World War II who actively made America worse.

[angus]

Jimmy Carter.

That's who I'd vote for in an open-ended poll question asking the worst president since 1945.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Wait, Winfield commented in this thread, and he didn't pick up on this question in the poll?

"In the Presidential election of 2012, if Mitt Romney had become President instead of Barack Obama, do you think that, in general, the nation would be better off than it is today or worse off than it is today?"

better off 45%
worse off 38%

I don't want to rub it in and say I told you so.

Besides, the OP was concentrating on what an absolute and abject failure Obama has been, not on what a great President Romney would have been.

Yes, it's such an accomplishment that Romney got a percentage who think we'd be better off which was lower than his actual percentage in the election.

     If you want to play that game, the percentage who think we'd be worse off with Romney than with Obama is pathetic compared to the percentage that voted for Obama. As for the undecideds in this poll, well we just won't talk about those people.

It's not a game, it's a statement of fact. Neither side has anything to brag about in that statistic, other than the fact that Romney voters were more loyal to their choice.

     I called it a game specifically because there was nothing positive to be inferred from it. Bringing it up tends to precipitate a race to the bottom, just like so many other things in the political realm.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

ROFL at the left-wing hacks voting for Bush 2 or Reagan and the right-wing hacks voting for Obama.  The only sane answer to this is Jimmy Carter.  People are either too young or didn't pay attention in history.  Stagflation, misery index, long lines at the gas pump, hostages in Iran...need I say more?  The Peanut Farmer is the only real contender for this title.

Nixon's policies indirectly caused most or all of those things. Arguably a tag team of Johnson and Nixon for a couple of them. Again, it's nice to know that you think ineffectually treading water makes someone a worse President than the no fewer than three conservative Republican Presidents since World War II who actively made America worse.

Sure, because neutralizing relations with Red China, raising the civil rights enforcement budget, and creating the EPA (as bureaucratic as it is) actively made America worse.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

ROFL at the left-wing hacks voting for Bush 2 or Reagan and the right-wing hacks voting for Obama.  The only sane answer to this is Jimmy Carter.  People are either too young or didn't pay attention in history.  Stagflation, misery index, long lines at the gas pump, hostages in Iran...need I say more?  The Peanut Farmer is the only real contender for this title.

Nixon's policies indirectly caused most or all of those things. Arguably a tag team of Johnson and Nixon for a couple of them. Again, it's nice to know that you think ineffectually treading water makes someone a worse President than the no fewer than three conservative Republican Presidents since World War II who actively made America worse.

Sure, because neutralizing relations with Red China, raising the civil rights enforcement budget, and creating the EPA (as bureaucratic as it is) actively made America worse.

Those are hardly the only things Nixon did. He extended the Vietnam War until past his re-election for fear that, without the war, voters would think about their pocketbooks and vote Democratic. He instituted a loose monetary policy, shirking the advice of conservatives in his cabinet, merely to inflate the economy until, again, after his re-election. The combination of Nixon and Johnson economic policies would be a major contributing factor to the "stagflation" that Carter himself suffered from. Detente had little real positive effect in terms of somehow making us safer, as it largely resulted in us reducing our stockpiles while the Soviets pretended to do the same. His invasion of Cambodia he himself neutered by limiting the incursion, so that a key Vietcong fort was just out of reach of our troops. He came to possess the rather paranoid view that he and only he could fix America's problems; this resulted in him knowingly exacerbating them so as to buoy himself until after the 1972 election, which would theoretically free him up to focus on the very issues he had helped create. In short, the entire domestic and foreign policy of Nixon's presidency was a scam for re-election, and resulted in needless misery and death. Carter, while incompetent, wasn't malevolent, and we would have been far better under his leadership than Nixon's, I have reason to believe.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

ROFL at the left-wing hacks voting for Bush 2 or Reagan and the right-wing hacks voting for Obama.  The only sane answer to this is Jimmy Carter.  People are either too young or didn't pay attention in history.  Stagflation, misery index, long lines at the gas pump, hostages in Iran...need I say more?  The Peanut Farmer is the only real contender for this title.

Nixon's policies indirectly caused most or all of those things. Arguably a tag team of Johnson and Nixon for a couple of them. Again, it's nice to know that you think ineffectually treading water makes someone a worse President than the no fewer than three conservative Republican Presidents since World War II who actively made America worse.

Sure, because neutralizing relations with Red China, raising the civil rights enforcement budget, and creating the EPA (as bureaucratic as it is) actively made America worse.

Nixon stalled desegregation as much as he could to court the support of the South for his re-election campaign (which clearly worked) and had precisely nothing to do with the creation of the EPA other than signing the legislation creating it. For the most part he left domestic policy to the Democratic Congress and dealt with foreign policy himself.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

ROFL at the left-wing hacks voting for Bush 2 or Reagan and the right-wing hacks voting for Obama.  The only sane answer to this is Jimmy Carter.  People are either too young or didn't pay attention in history.  Stagflation, misery index, long lines at the gas pump, hostages in Iran...need I say more?  The Peanut Farmer is the only real contender for this title.

Nixon's policies indirectly caused most or all of those things. Arguably a tag team of Johnson and Nixon for a couple of them. Again, it's nice to know that you think ineffectually treading water makes someone a worse President than the no fewer than three conservative Republican Presidents since World War II who actively made America worse.

Sure, because neutralizing relations with Red China, raising the civil rights enforcement budget, and creating the EPA (as bureaucratic as it is) actively made America worse.

Nixon stalled desegregation as much as he could to court the support of the South for his re-election campaign (which clearly worked) and had precisely nothing to do with the creation of the EPA other than signing the legislation creating it. For the most part he left domestic policy to the Democratic Congress and dealt with foreign policy himself.

Nixon didn't oppose desegregation; he simply opposed forced busing because he believed it undermined the quality of education.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoDGR4gcn4Y