The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread

[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.

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.

I think I already mentioned the Republicans refuse to nominate a sensible candidate.

[J. J.]

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.

You'll have to define freefall.

I'm saying, a double dip recession, with greater than 9% employment, and Rubio on the ticket, you are looking a a map like the one I posted.

The midwest is already a battleground.

[Tender Branson]

Woohoo. 400.000 page views.

Let's have a party ...

[Odysseus]

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.

You'll have to define freefall.

I'm saying, a double dip recession, with greater than 9% employment, and Rubio on the ticket, you are looking a a map like the one I posted.

The midwest is already a battleground.

For Perry to come close in New York or California, we would have to have around 15% unemployment nationwide, and both of those states would have to have 1/4 unemployment statewide. It would also help if the nation's economic outlook looked around the same as Greece's.

For Perry to win those states, Barack Obama would have to announce a White House address just before election night, have a good portion of the nation watching, and devour a litter of kittens on live television.

(assuming no third party runs)

[J. J.]

Editorial note: Gallup will not publish new Gallup Daily tracking results on Monday, Sept. 5. The next update will be Tuesday, Sept. 6.

In other words, Gallup screws up again.

[Lief]

Huh? Tracking polls pretty regularly don't poll on Labor Day weekend. Of course, Rasmussen does, but they're a sh!t polling company.

[J. J.]

Huh? Tracking polls pretty regularly don't poll on Labor Day weekend. Of course, Rasmussen does, but they're a sh!t polling company.

Actually Gallup does, and they did Saturday; they also polled on Labor Day in 2009 and 2010.  BTW, Rasmussen was more accurate than Gallup last time.

[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.

You'll have to define freefall.

I'm saying, a double dip recession, with greater than 9% employment, and Rubio on the ticket, you are looking a a map like the one I posted.

The midwest is already a battleground.

Freefall meaning credit markets seizing up, stock markets falling 500 points everyday and -500,000 payroll numbers. End of 2008 basically. You have to be a little more specific too. You really think Perry is going to win New York with 9.2% unemployment? That's absurd. Although when you start going above 10% unemployment, or at least payroll numbers as bad as I stated, then weird things can start happening. Still it would be a stretch for Perry to do well in the Northeast or the Pacific coast.

[J. J.]

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.

You'll have to define freefall.

I'm saying, a double dip recession, with greater than 9% employment, and Rubio on the ticket, you are looking a a map like the one I posted.

The midwest is already a battleground.

Freefall meaning credit markets seizing up, stock markets falling 500 points everyday and -500,000 payroll numbers. End of 2008 basically. You have to be a little more specific too. You really think Perry is going to win New York with 9.2% unemployment? That's absurd. Although when you start going above 10% unemployment, or at least payroll numbers as bad as I stated, then weird things can start happening. Still it would be a stretch for Perry to do well in the Northeast or the Pacific coast.

I think it we have two quarters of negative growth, including a higher unemployment rate, we're not showing improvement over the summer of 2012, and Rubio is on the ticket, it is possible.  I should point out map, however, was for Romney/Rubio (which accounts for MA).

[Skill and Chance]

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.

You'll have to define freefall.

I'm saying, a double dip recession, with greater than 9% employment, and Rubio on the ticket, you are looking a a map like the one I posted.

The midwest is already a battleground.

It would take an economic situation like Hoover 1932.  With >18% unemployment, Perry would be favored in CA and NY would basically be a tie.  I think Obama would only win HI, VT, MA, MD, and DC and a 50/50 chance in NY and IL.       

[J. J.]

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.

You'll have to define freefall.

I'm saying, a double dip recession, with greater than 9% employment, and Rubio on the ticket, you are looking a a map like the one I posted.

The midwest is already a battleground.

It would take an economic situation like Hoover 1932.  With >18% unemployment, Perry would be favored in CA and NY would basically be a tie.  I think Obama would only win HI, VT, MA, MD, and DC and a 50/50 chance in NY and IL.       

It would take much less than 1932 to do that.  The numbers are better than 1980.  Arguably, the economy isn't as bad as 1980, but unemployment is higher.

There has to be several things happening.  One of them is Rubio as VP; a second one that Rubio will attract at least Hispanics not of Mexican descent.  The third is the economy is worse, and in recession through the summer of 2012.

I think with Perry, a map might look more like this:



NB:  Those other conditions have to be present and there is no prediction that they will be.

[Skill and Chance]

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.

You'll have to define freefall.

I'm saying, a double dip recession, with greater than 9% employment, and Rubio on the ticket, you are looking a a map like the one I posted.

The midwest is already a battleground.

It would take an economic situation like Hoover 1932.  With >18% unemployment, Perry would be favored in CA and NY would basically be a tie.  I think Obama would only win HI, VT, MA, MD, and DC and a 50/50 chance in NY and IL.       

It would take much less than 1932 to do that.  The numbers are better than 1980.  Arguably, the economy isn't as bad as 1980, but unemployment is higher.

There has to be several things happening.  One of them is Rubio as VP; a second one that Rubio will attract at least Hispanics not of Mexican descent.  The third is the economy is worse, and in recession through the summer of 2012.

I think with Perry, a map might look more like this:



NB:  Those other conditions have to be present and there is no prediction that they will be.

You aren't giving Obama enough credit.  Even in 1932, Hoover won 6 states and narrowly lost another 2.  In say a 12% unemployment scenario, the election would surely be lost, but Obama would still win at least 10-15 states in a 2 way election.  The 60% Obama 2008 states aren't flipping barring 25% local unemployment. 

I think this is his realistic floor vs. Perry (Romney might get a bigger landslide):

*12.1% Unemployment on Election Day, job losses through the summer and fall*



Perry/Christie 376 EV/ 56.2% PV
Obama/Biden 162 EV/ 43.1% PV

[The Vorlon]

This map seems oddly familiar.....

[Skill and Chance]

A realistic Obama Morning in America 2.0 ceiling:

*7.1% Unemployment on Election Day, >3.0 million new jobs created July-September 2012*



Obama/Biden 453 EV/ 58.8% PV
Perry/Christie  85 EV/ 40.6% PV

[Mr.Phips]

A realistic Obama Morning in America 2.0 ceiling:

*6.9% Unemployment on Election Day, >3.0 million new jobs created July-September 2012*



Obama/Biden 453 EV/ 58.8% PV
Perry/Christie  85 EV/ 40.6% PV

6.9% unemployment in October 2012 is not realistic.  You would need about 450,000 jobs created per month over the next year and GDP growth near 10% every quarter through the third of 2012.

[Skill and Chance]

A realistic Obama Morning in America 2.0 ceiling:

*6.9% Unemployment on Election Day, >3.0 million new jobs created July-September 2012*



Obama/Biden 453 EV/ 58.8% PV
Perry/Christie  85 EV/ 40.6% PV

6.9% unemployment in October 2012 is not realistic.  You would need about 450,000 jobs created per month over the next year and GDP growth near 10% every quarter through the third of 2012.

I should have said 7.1%.  I'm looking for the outer positive edge of realistic, just like 12.1% would be the outer negative edge of realistic.  In 1983-84 there were several months of ~700K job growth and the labor force is about 1/3rd larger today than it was then.  Several months of 7 figure job growth should be possible in a 1935 or 1984 paced recovery with today's population.   

[Skill and Chance]

Here's what I think is the most likely outcome as of now:

"A burst of 350k job growth during spring-summer 2012 and not having to run against Romney saved my presidency."



Obama/Biden 300 EV/ 50.4% PV
Perry/Christie  238 EV/ 48.7% PV

Election Day Unemployment: 8.5%

[Yelnoc]

Here's what I think is the most likely outcome as of now:

"A burst of 350k job growth during spring-summer 2012 and not having to run against Romney saved my presidency."



Obama/Biden 300 EV/ 50.4% PV
Perry/Christie  238 EV/ 48.7% PV

Election Day Unemployment: 8.5%

Do you really think that Ohio will flip before North Carolina?  And there is no way Christie will run as Perry's Veep.  He wants two terms as Governor of New Jersey so that he can run in 2016.

[Skill and Chance]

Here's what I think is the most likely outcome as of now:

"A burst of 350k job growth during spring-summer 2012 and not having to run against Romney saved my presidency."



Obama/Biden 300 EV/ 50.4% PV
Perry/Christie  238 EV/ 48.7% PV

Election Day Unemployment: 8.5%

Do you really think that Ohio will flip before North Carolina?  And there is no way Christie will run as Perry's Veep.  He wants two terms as Governor of New Jersey so that he can run in 2016.

I think FL and NC are the easiest Obama holds beyond the VA-CO-NV election deciding tier, so yes.  OH demographically is rapidly moving right and NC is moving exponentially left while FL is a quite stable tilt R.  Charlotte and RDU get large enough to outvote the rest of the state by 2020, and when that happens, NC turns into MD south. Unless the election somehow becomes a referendum on labor unions, I can't see OH voting left of NC and FL.  Also, don't forget about the D convention in Charlotte.

[Tender Branson]

Politico/Battleground poll:

45% Approve
50% Disapprove

49% Favorable
46% Unfavorable

Whether you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as President, what is your impression of Barack Obama as a person? Do you approve or disapprove of him?

74% Approve
18% Disapprove

The POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll of 1,000 likely voters was conducted between Aug. 28 and Sept. 1 by The Tarrance Group and Lake Research Partners. The nationwide telephone survey had margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM170_090611_battlegroundpoll_results.html

[Tender Branson]

Washington Post poll:

43% Approve
53% Disapprove

This Washington Post-ABC News poll was conducted by telephone August 29-September 1 2011, among a random national sample of 1,001 adults, including users of both conventional and cellular phones. The results from the full survey have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by Abt-SRBI of New York.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postabcpoll_090111.html

[Tender Branson]

NBC News/Wall Street Journal Survey:

44% Approve
51% Disapprove

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/Correct_NBCWSJ_poll.pdf

[J. J.]

This map seems oddly familiar.....

Bloody close. 

A few things have to happen first.

[J. J.]

Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 43, -1.

Disapprove 55%, u.

"Strongly Approve" is at 22%, +2.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 43%, -1.

We'll see if the strongly approve numbers are actual movement or a bad sample.

[J. J.]

You aren't giving Obama enough credit.  Even in 1932, Hoover won 6 states and narrowly lost another 2.  In say a 12% unemployment scenario, the election would surely be lost, but Obama would still win at least 10-15 states in a 2 way election.  The 60% Obama 2008 states aren't flipping barring 25% local unemployment. 

Well, I'm giving Obama 7 states, plus DC and more EV than either Hoover or Carter. 

I certainly didn't expect Carter to lose NY in 1980, nor MA.  I would not have predicted either in 1979 and I still listed him as carrying both in the fall of 1980.