The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread

[J. J.]

Is Obama improving his numbers???

Not on Rasmussen.  He was actually a bit stronger at the start of the week.

On Gallup, he's off his lows but still within the MOE.  I'm paying particular attention to when he "troughs," i.e. hit his low point and starts recovering.  He might have, but the last time it looked like he "might" have, he fell back.

Yes, I'm expecting Obama to recover prior to the election.  His low numbers are survivable, though it is getting close to the point of no return.

He's going to need to get back to at least 48% by next fall if he is going to win reelection. 

Just to be clear, that is not my comment.  Right now, Obama is in the range where hope is not lost.  He's rapidly approaching the point where he probably cannot recover.

[Tender Branson]

New Jersey (Kean University Center for History, Politics and Policy):

53% Approve
44% Disapprove

(Gov. Christie)

54% Approve
44% Disapprove

The New Jersey Speaks poll surveyed 1,000 likely voters in New Jersey on August 30. The poll's margin of error is plus or minus 3 points.

The Kean University Center for History, Politics and Policy was founded in July by Dr. Dawood Farahi, president of Kean University. “The center will provide a wealth of expertise and analysis from Kean University's faculty,” Dr. Farahi said. “Whether the conversation concerns climate change, human rights, New Jersey politics, or computer literacy, Kean University faculty have the knowledge and wisdom to enrich our civic conversation. The Center for History, Politics and Policy will bring that knowledge and wisdom into the global community.”

http://www.kean.edu/pressreleases/2011/09/02_PresidentArrivesNJ.asp

[J. J.]

Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 45, +1.

Disapprove 54%, -1.

"Strongly Approve" is at 19%, u.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 40%, -1.

Possibly some movement toward Obama or statistical noise. 

[SirNick]

I based this on the decent aggregate of polls that Wikipedia has for state head-to-head polling.

This is for an Perry-Obama matchup without me including any of my own opinions. Took the most recent poll, regardless of how close it was or who had a majority (or lack there of).



Obama-178
Perry - 17
No poll: 343

If I throw in the states that we can pretty much call already...(shaded 90%)



Obama - 385
Perry - 153

Now I think it'd be a little weird if Texas went Democrat and Georgia or Arizona didn't --so this exact result is unrealistic --but the way Perry is polling even when Obama's numbers are down isn't great.

[J. J.]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx

Gallup, meh:

Approve:  42%, u.

Disapprove:  51%, +1.

[kingthlayer]

It is going to be hard not obsess over his opinion polls over the next few days. It is hard to believe that he will manage to stay in the 40s with an economy headed back into recession.

[Yelnoc]

For the fun of it, I took the most recent polling data from here to make a map.  Call me pBrower

I did not mess with the numbers in any way.  Note that in cases where there were polls available for both "named opponent" and "generic republican," I selected "named opponent" in all cases except those in which the only named opponent is not running or the poll is extremely outdated (older than six months, so the oldest polls should date back to March).  States for which no polls that meet this criteria and that are not "junk" exist have been colored grey.

In cases where reliable results exist for more then one credible republican candidate that is currently running, I have averaged them together.  This is why Florida is colored red despite Romney's tie in the latest Quinippiac poll against Obama.  States that average out to be in a tie (actual, not statistical) are colored white.

I have shamelessly stolen the color scheme from pBrower.  Keep in mind, the map shows margins.
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5%
white                        tie (margin 1% or less)
pale blue                  Republican  under 5%
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin
deep blue                 Republican over 10%

In this map, I averaged together the scores of Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, and Herman Cain (or any combination thereof).



This map combines Romney with Perry, or Bachmann if he is unavailable (and in the case of Georgia, with Cain).  I also took the precaution of including each individual poll's margin of error in this map.  Hopefully, this one is a bit more accurate.

[pbrower2a]

New Jersey (Kean University Center for History, Politics and Policy):

53% Approve
44% Disapprove

(Gov. Christie)

54% Approve
44% Disapprove

The New Jersey Speaks poll surveyed 1,000 likely voters in New Jersey on August 30. The poll's margin of error is plus or minus 3 points.

The Kean University Center for History, Politics and Policy was founded in July by Dr. Dawood Farahi, president of Kean University. “The center will provide a wealth of expertise and analysis from Kean University's faculty,” Dr. Farahi said. “Whether the conversation concerns climate change, human rights, New Jersey politics, or computer literacy, Kean University faculty have the knowledge and wisdom to enrich our civic conversation. The Center for History, Politics and Policy will bring that knowledge and wisdom into the global community.”

http://www.kean.edu/pressreleases/2011/09/02_PresidentArrivesNJ.asp

Key:


<40% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Orange (50% if 60%-69% disapproval); 90% red if >70%
40-42% with Disapproval Higher: 50% Yellow  
43% to 45% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Yellow  
46-49% with Disapproval Higher: 30% Yellow  
<50% with Approval Equal: 10% Yellow (really white)
<50%  Approval greater: 20% Green
50-55%: 40% Green
56-59%: 60% Green
60%+: 80% Green


Months (All polls are from 2010 or 2011):

A -  January     G -  July
B -  February   H -  August
C -  March        I -  September
D -  April          J  -  October
E -  May           K -  November
F -   June         L -   December

 

S - suspect poll (examples for such a qualification: strange crosstabs, likely inversion of the report (for inversions, only for polls above 55% or below 45%...  let's say Vermont 35% approval or Oklahoma 65% approval), or more than 10% undecided. Anyone who suggests that a poll is suspect must explain why it is suspect.

Partisan polls and polls for special interests (trade associations, labor unions, ethnic associations) are excluded.

Z- no recent poll

Or here:

MY CURRENT PREDICTION OF THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

(before any campaigning begins in earnest):

assuming no significant changes before early 2012 -- snicker, snicker!




           
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater 109
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin    25
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 104
white                        too close to call (margin 1% or less) 48
pale blue                  Republican  under 5% 73
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin 41
deep blue                 Republican over 10%   26




44% approval is roughly the break-even  point (50/50) for an incumbent's win.  I add 6% for approval between 40% and 45%, 5% at 46% or 47%, 4% between 48% and 50%, 3% for 51%, 2% for 52% or 53%, 1% for 54% and nothing above 55% or below 40% for an estimate of the vote.

This model applies only to incumbents, who have plenty of advantages but not enough to rescue an unqualified failure.

Here's the rationale:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/myth-of-incumbent-50-rule.html

...and I am less charitable to an incumbent President than is Nate Silver.


But --

I have added a yellow category for states in which President Obama defeats all recognized major GOP nominees (so far Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich, Palin, and where available, Thune, Daniels, Christie, and Pawlenty). This will be a yellow category supplanting those in pale blue or and white.

I am also adding a green category for those states that would otherwise be in white, pale pink, or pale blue This can be rescinded as one of the potential nominees drops out formally or is rendered irrelevant in primaries. I am also adding a deep green color for states in which  only the 'right' nominee has a chance. So far I will label that as "H" for Huckabee or else Obama, "R" for Romney or else Obama, or other initials as appropriate for  anyone else (Gingrich? Daniels? Thune?) should such cases emerge. A tan color is used for a tie.







             
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater 109
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin    49
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 117
white                        too close to call (margin 1% or less) 18
yellow                        close, but Obama wins against any major Republican candidate  49
orange                        close, but Obama loses against any major Republican candidate 3
Obama wins against all but  Romney 9
Obama ties one candidate, but defeats everyone else  26
close, but Obama wins against someone other than Romney 101
pale blue                  Republican  under 5% 12
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin 9
deep blue                 Republican over 10%  26  

[J. J.]

Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 44, -1.

Disapprove 55%, +1.

"Strongly Approve" is at 19%, u.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 42%, +2.

No movement toward Obama. 

I think we can rule out a "debt ceiling slump" or an "Irene boost."

It looks like a slump in Obama's numbers since mid-July, with it expanding in early August.  He is not in free fall.

It is like he took a step down on the stairs in July, and then another one in August.  He has not tripped and fallen down the stairs, however.

[pbrower2a]

Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 44, -1.

Disapprove 55%, +1.

"Strongly Approve" is at 19%, u.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 42%, +2.

No movement toward Obama. 

I think we can rule out a "debt ceiling slump" or an "Irene boost."

It looks like a slump in Obama's numbers since mid-July, with it expanding in early August.  He is not in free fall.

It is like he took a step down on the stairs in July, and then another one in August.  He has not tripped and fallen down the stairs, however.

President Obama has been in the 45% territory before.  He isn't campaigning (although we will get a taste of that on the most politicized day of the year for Democrats tomorrow). The debt ceiling debate was a disaster for all involved We might find out soon enough whether the public responses to Hurricane Irene put egg on the faces of some politicians.

We have been fortunate to have some comparatively mild hurricane seasons in 2009 and 2010. We know what Hurricane Katrina did in 2005 to the GOP. Short of wars (we seem to be losing opportunities for military glory), major legislation (like it or not, President Obama got that in 2009 and 2010), and big diplomatic successes (the Arab Spring so far looks good) the test of a President as an administrator is the natural disaster. Any effects of the response to Hurricane Irene will appear next week. Sure, we have usually taken the response to a natural disaster for granted as a political matter -- but not since Hurricane Katrina.

PPP is polling North Carolina this weekend. 

[Odysseus]

Yes, that makes perfect sense. Last month his approvals were in the 30s, and now they are in the 40s.

He just keeps going lower and lower!

[J. J.]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx

Gallup, meh:

Approve:  42%, u.

Disapprove:  50%, -1.

[J. J.]

Yes, that makes perfect sense. Last month his approvals were in the 30s, and now they are in the 40s.

He just keeps going lower and lower!

Actually, there has not been that much change on Gallup.  He is at 40, +/- 2.  That's been his weekly average for 1-2 weeks.

Disapprove has dropped a bit.

Rasmussen has him fairly stable.

[The Vorlon]

[State Comptroller Atkins]

This isn't the President Forever results thread.

[J. J.]

This is a realignment map.

[pbrower2a]

California:

By 50% to 43%, voters approved of Obama's handling of the presidency, down from a high of 60% a year after his election. But the state's three most potent voter groups — women, nonpartisan voters and Latinos — remained firmly in his corner. Fifty-five percent of women and nonpartisan voters were satisfied with the job the president is doing, a judgment shared by 59% of Latinos.

"Californians have growing concerns about the state of the economy and the president's performance on economic matters, but they don't see anyone on the Republican side who they are willing to support," said poll director Dan Schnur, head of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at USC.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-0905-poll-presidential-20110905,0,6048766.story






Key:


<40% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Orange (50% if 60%-69% disapproval); 90% red if >70%
40-42% with Disapproval Higher: 50% Yellow  
43% to 45% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Yellow  
46-49% with Disapproval Higher: 30% Yellow  
<50% with Approval Equal: 10% Yellow (really white)
<50%  Approval greater: 20% Green
50-55%: 40% Green
56-59%: 60% Green
60%+: 80% Green


Months (All polls are from 2010 or 2011):

A -  January     G -  July
B -  February   H -  August
C -  March        I -  September
D -  April          J  -  October
E -  May           K -  November
F -   June         L -   December

 

S - suspect poll (examples for such a qualification: strange crosstabs, likely inversion of the report (for inversions, only for polls above 55% or below 45%...  let's say Vermont 35% approval or Oklahoma 65% approval), or more than 10% undecided. Anyone who suggests that a poll is suspect must explain why it is suspect.

Partisan polls and polls for special interests (trade associations, labor unions, ethnic associations) are excluded.

Z- no recent poll

Or here:

MY CURRENT PREDICTION OF THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

(before any campaigning begins in earnest):

assuming no significant changes before early 2012 -- snicker, snicker!




           
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater 54
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin    80
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 104
white                        too close to call (margin 1% or less) 48
pale blue                  Republican  under 5% 73
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin 41
deep blue                 Republican over 10%   26




44% approval is roughly the break-even  point (50/50) for an incumbent's win.  I add 6% for approval between 40% and 45%, 5% at 46% or 47%, 4% between 48% and 50%, 3% for 51%, 2% for 52% or 53%, 1% for 54% and nothing above 55% or below 40% for an estimate of the vote.

This model applies only to incumbents, who have plenty of advantages but not enough to rescue an unqualified failure.

Here's the rationale:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/myth-of-incumbent-50-rule.html

...and I am less charitable to an incumbent President than is Nate Silver.


But --

I have added a yellow category for states in which President Obama defeats all recognized major GOP nominees (so far Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich, Palin, and where available, Thune, Daniels, Christie, and Pawlenty). This will be a yellow category supplanting those in pale blue or and white.

I am also adding a green category for those states that would otherwise be in white, pale pink, or pale blue This can be rescinded as one of the potential nominees drops out formally or is rendered irrelevant in primaries. I am also adding a deep green color for states in which  only the 'right' nominee has a chance. So far I will label that as "H" for Huckabee or else Obama, "R" for Romney or else Obama, or other initials as appropriate for  anyone else (Gingrich? Daniels? Thune?) should such cases emerge. A tan color is used for a tie.







             
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater 54
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin    104
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 117
white                        too close to call (margin 1% or less) 18
yellow                        close, but Obama wins against any major Republican candidate  49
orange                        close, but Obama loses against any major Republican candidate 3
Obama wins against all but  Romney 9
Obama ties one candidate, but defeats everyone else  26
close, but Obama wins against someone other than Romney 101
pale blue                  Republican  under 5% 12
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin 9
deep blue                 Republican over 10%  26  

[Senator Sbane]

Who would be the Republican candidate under this scenario? It's going to take someone of some caliber to win California, though I do agree it's not impossible. Republicans refuse to do that though. It goes against their values or something. I don't understand them.

[J. J.]

Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 44, u.

Disapprove 55%, u.

"Strongly Approve" is at 20%, +1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 43%, +1.

[J. J.]

Who would be the Republican candidate under this scenario? It's going to take someone of some caliber to win California, though I do agree it's not impossible. Republicans refuse to do that though. It goes against their values or something. I don't understand them.

Other than the percentages, either Romney (and Romney has a shot at MA) or Perry, provided that Rubio is on the ticket and that he he appeals to voters of Mexican ancestry (note that I did not say the broader Hispanic ancestry.)

Ironically, I could see this as well, which is a realignment map:



Romney/Rubio, with swinging some of the voters of Mexican ancestry, but does well with Hispanics not of Mexican ancestry. 

[Disarray]

Who would be the Republican candidate under this scenario? It's going to take someone of some caliber to win California, though I do agree it's not impossible. Republicans refuse to do that though. It goes against their values or something. I don't understand them.

Not impossible? What planet do you live on? The Republican platform in 2012 will be running on the most poisonous economic platform ever campaigned on by either party in the history of our country.

Reforming (gutting) entitlement programs
and
Tax cuts for the wealthy/corporations

Which in it by themselves are unpopular, together they're toxic.

Obama maybe end up being the weakest incumbent since Carter, but the GOP will be running Goldwater.

What happens when you do 1980 D vs 1964 R ? Certainly not a landslide in either direction.

Also keep in mind the electorate will be only 68 to 72% white in 2012, but I guess you figure Hispanics (who are overwhelmingly economic liberals ) will vote for tea party economics if you just put Rubio on the ticket.

[Senator Sbane]

Calm down buddy. I think I made it quite clear what I thought about the Republican's chances in California, considering who they are about to nominate. JJ thinks Romney or Perry could almost win in California, or New York, but as usual he is wrong. But you put in a candidate who talks clearly and says we need to raise taxes but at the same reform entitlements, and add in a worsening economy and you have that sort of a victory. And yes I do think the economy needs to do much worse than just create 0 jobs for this scenario to occur.

And don't for a moment think a victory like this would be some great endorsement of the GOP. They could just as easily get thrown out in the next election. That's just how things are these days with the electorate.

[J. J.]

Calm down buddy. I think I made it quite clear what I thought about the Republican's chances in California, considering who they are about to nominate. JJ thinks Romney or Perry could almost win in California, or New York, but as usual he is wrong. But you put in a candidate who talks clearly and says we need to raise taxes but at the same reform entitlements, and add in a worsening economy and you have that sort of a victory. And yes I do think the economy needs to do much worse than just create 0 jobs for this scenario to occur.

And don't for a moment think a victory like this would be some great endorsement of the GOP. They could just as easily get thrown out in the next election. That's just how things are these days with the electorate.

Well, I'm not quite saying almost.  I think that, with the right VP nominee, in the right conditions, either Perry or Romney would carry one or both.

A few things have to happen:

1.  The double dip, with unemployment higher than 9.0%.

2.  The right VP candidate, one that appeals to at least some Hispanics, like Rubio.


Just think about that possible combination in NY.

1.  The people that voted for hope and change see neither, and some of them stay home.  These are the core of Democratic support.

2.  Hispanics (mainly Puerto Ricans) more weakly support Obama; even if the turnout is less, a greater percentage vote for ____ and Rubio.

[Senator Sbane]

For Perry to win New York or California, the economy would have to be in complete freefall. With Romney, maybe he could pull it out since people do see him as some economic master or whatever. Even with Romney we would have to see unemployment pushing close to 10% though. If unemployment is still at 9.1-9.3%, we are looking at a close Obama loss at best for the Republicans. The battleground would still be the Midwest, four corners states and the Mid-Atlantic.

[Disarray]

Calm down buddy. I think I made it quite clear what I thought about the Republican's chances in California, considering who they are about to nominate. JJ thinks Romney or Perry could almost win in California, or New York, but as usual he is wrong. But you put in a candidate who talks clearly and says we need to raise taxes but at the same reform entitlements, and add in a worsening economy and you have that sort of a victory. And yes I do think the economy needs to do much worse than just create 0 jobs for this scenario to occur.

And don't for a moment think a victory like this would be some great endorsement of the GOP. They could just as easily get thrown out in the next election. That's just how things are these days with the electorate.

Every single Republican candidate including the so called moderate Huntsman ruled out even a 10 to 1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases.

The Paul Ryan plan which 95%+ of the GOP Congress voted for cuts taxes for the wealthy substantially.

I'm not saying the eventual GOP candidate isn't going to move somewhat to the right from the far right after the primaries, but to suggest that the GOP candidate may campaign on tax increases on the wealthy is just crazy.

There is a 0.0% chance of that happening, how do you not know that by now?

Now they may propose tax increases on the poor like Paul Ryan's plan does, but that would be a just another negative on their election odds.