Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 07, 2019, 05:01:37 pm
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (Primary) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 402 403 404 405 406 [407] 408 409 410 Print
Author Topic: The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread  (Read 1022529 times)
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,501
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10150 on: October 04, 2012, 09:35:15 pm »

I highly doubt just this debate will cause Romney to lead. But if this becomes a pattern, and the people think Obama has nothing new to offer them while Romney keeps playing to the middle, watch out.

The most effective thing Mittens said in my mind, with the voters who will decide the election, is that he worked for bipartisan consensus with Romneycare, and Obama didn't with Obamacare, and that approach can bear poison fruit. All major pieces of social legislation in the past have had important bipartisan support - all of them. And yes, Mittens is playing the middle hard now. It must be a relief for him that the primaries are over. That period was absolutely horrible.

Of course Obama's response should be that no Republican wanted to play ball with him, but he wasn't able to make that argument at all during the debate. He has an even better case with the debt debacle of a couple years back (when Nancy was not calling the shots), and he failed there as well. Truman won by running against an obstructionist congress, Obama must do the same.

Well actually Obama didn't play much ball with the Pubs on Obamacare at all, walked out on Boehner because he could not even suck up using the chained CPI for SS payment adjustments, ignored Simpson Bowles, that had a bipartisan majority in support of something, and indeed does not talk much to anybody. Dems in Congress bitch all the time what a loner and unapproachable Obama is.  I suspect he holds most of the political class in contempt. That is my honest opinion.

Obama has his talents. Being a consensus builder, and finding the middle, is not one of them however. It is just not within him. Mittens should play this card hard from now until the election. His base will have to suck it up.

Alright... i'm asking a serious question, since i respect you and unlike JJ you've haven't turned into a hack.

do you genuinely believe that this congress, especially with McConnell and the TP caucus.... that anything even close to a compromise could have been reached?

Every reasonable GOPer was terrified of being primaried...
Logged
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38,044
Samoa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10151 on: October 04, 2012, 09:36:05 pm »

I highly doubt just this debate will cause Romney to lead. But if this becomes a pattern, and the people think Obama has nothing new to offer them while Romney keeps playing to the middle, watch out.

The most effective thing Mittens said in my mind, with the voters who will decide the election, is that he worked for bipartisan consensus with Romneycare, and Obama didn't with Obamacare, and that approach can bear poison fruit. All major pieces of social legislation in the past have had important bipartisan support - all of them. And yes, Mittens is playing the middle hard now. It must be a relief for him that the primaries are over. That period was absolutely horrible.


I thought that entire discussion was awful... It's difficult to be bipartisan when the other side refuses to do anything other than what they want.

Kind of the same as in MA, Romney's point about working with democrats was silly, because he didn't have a choice. they could have overrun his veto, and this this was before the gop went into the psychiatric ward, and being seen as a 'concilliator' was going to be a plus. but in reality, he was bent over a barrell.

I'm startled he didn't attack congress, not even a little...

Well Obama chose to do nothing, rather than work out compromises with the Pub House when he "had no choice but to do so if he wanted to do anything at all." He never had serious negotiations with them about anything really. So the Pubs were unanimous against him, including all the moderates and centrists - all of them.  One simply could not do business with him. JMO.  
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,501
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10152 on: October 04, 2012, 09:37:21 pm »

That's not how I remembered things going... but eh...
Logged
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38,044
Samoa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10153 on: October 04, 2012, 09:39:08 pm »

I highly doubt just this debate will cause Romney to lead. But if this becomes a pattern, and the people think Obama has nothing new to offer them while Romney keeps playing to the middle, watch out.

The most effective thing Mittens said in my mind, with the voters who will decide the election, is that he worked for bipartisan consensus with Romneycare, and Obama didn't with Obamacare, and that approach can bear poison fruit. All major pieces of social legislation in the past have had important bipartisan support - all of them. And yes, Mittens is playing the middle hard now. It must be a relief for him that the primaries are over. That period was absolutely horrible.

Of course Obama's response should be that no Republican wanted to play ball with him, but he wasn't able to make that argument at all during the debate. He has an even better case with the debt debacle of a couple years back (when Nancy was not calling the shots), and he failed there as well. Truman won by running against an obstructionist congress, Obama must do the same.

Well actually Obama didn't play much ball with the Pubs on Obamacare at all, walked out on Boehner because he could not even suck up using the chained CPI for SS payment adjustments, ignored Simpson Bowles, that had a bipartisan majority in support of something, and indeed does not talk much to anybody. Dems in Congress bitch all the time what a loner and unapproachable Obama is.  I suspect he holds most of the political class in contempt. That is my honest opinion.

Obama has his talents. Being a consensus builder, and finding the middle, is not one of them however. It is just not within him. Mittens should play this card hard from now until the election. His base will have to suck it up.

Alright... i'm asking a serious question, since i respect you and unlike JJ you've haven't turned into a hack.

do you genuinely believe that this congress, especially with McConnell and the TP caucus.... that anything even close to a compromise could have been reached?

Every reasonable GOPer was terrified of being primaried...

I don't know if a deal could be cut, but yes, Obama could have made more of an effort, and I am quite confident he could have peeled off some Pubs with something that ended up effectively insuring everyone somehow for example to some degree - which obviously has to be done, along with moving Medicare more towards an HMO system. Heck, he could have peeled off me if I had been in Congress.
Logged
Beet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,907


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10154 on: October 04, 2012, 09:44:27 pm »

What about in the lame duck session? Obama got significant bipartisan bills through on the treaty with Russia, repealing DADT, and extending the Bush era tax cuts another two years. And although it's not a comprehensive debt deal, the sequester was a deal with a Congress infused with tea party freshmen. And he's avoided a government shutdown, which Bill Clinton didn't when he last had an opposing Congress. The idea that Obama doesn't engage with Democrats in Congress doesn't square with the fact that he basically let them write the piece of legislation with his name on it, Obamacare. He learned from the Clintons' secretive, top-down approach that froze out Congress and adapted accordingly. He also shifted his position on the mandate once it became clear that his original approach wasn't working. He's shown himself to be flexible and pragmatic.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,477


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10155 on: October 04, 2012, 09:46:43 pm »
« Edited: October 04, 2012, 09:55:38 pm by Senator Sbane »

I highly doubt just this debate will cause Romney to lead. But if this becomes a pattern, and the people think Obama has nothing new to offer them while Romney keeps playing to the middle, watch out.

The most effective thing Mittens said in my mind, with the voters who will decide the election, is that he worked for bipartisan consensus with Romneycare, and Obama didn't with Obamacare, and that approach can bear poison fruit. All major pieces of social legislation in the past have had important bipartisan support - all of them. And yes, Mittens is playing the middle hard now. It must be a relief for him that the primaries are over. That period was absolutely horrible.

Of course Obama's response should be that no Republican wanted to play ball with him, but he wasn't able to make that argument at all during the debate. He has an even better case with the debt debacle of a couple years back (when Nancy was not calling the shots), and he failed there as well. Truman won by running against an obstructionist congress, Obama must do the same.

Well actually Obama didn't play much ball with the Pubs on Obamacare at all, walked out on Boehner because he could not even suck up using the chained CPI for SS payment adjustments, ignored Simpson Bowles, that had a bipartisan majority in support of something, and indeed does not talk much to anybody. Dems in Congress bitch all the time what a loner and unapproachable Obama is.  I suspect he holds most of the political class in contempt. That is my honest opinion.

Obama has his talents. Being a consensus builder, and finding the middle, is not one of them however. It is just not within him. Mittens should play this card hard from now until the election. His base will have to suck it up.

Regarding Obamacare, it is just so similar to Republican plans that I don't understand why more Republicans didn't sign on to it. I don't think there was much reasoning to the opposition to it, which is why you saw the raving nonsense about "kill the bill" and all that. Of course I think the Wyden-Bennett bill would have been better, although much more politically difficult to get through, but you cannot criticize Obamacare as being too liberal or leftist. It just doesn't make sense. I guess the Democrats were more concerned about pleasing their own moderates than reaching out to the Republicans? It's all drama really, I don't see what Republicans would have wanted in reality that they didn't get with the bill, except credit of course. And that is worth way more than passing good bills in today's media driven political world.

Logged
Beet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,907


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10156 on: October 04, 2012, 09:48:47 pm »

Torie, you would never survive in an actual GOP primary in one of those conservative or swing districts. It's not that no Republicans could have been convinced to vote for health care... they were literally dragged kicking and screaming by their own base against the bill. Remember Arlen Specter and Kathleen Sebelius trying to hold a town hall and that woman saying "you have awakened the sleeping giant"? The vitriol was astonishing. No Republican would have voted for it, no matter what they personally thought of the bill, for that reason alone. Political suicide.

The kind of tranquil, moderate, consensus-building governance-- actually, I think, Obama actually prefers that. He would have been a much more popular President in times of prosperity where that kind of governance is possible. The primary emotions of 2009 were rage and fear. And it wasn't so much health care per se but everything-- the collapse of the economy the previous year playing out.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,501
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10157 on: October 04, 2012, 09:52:42 pm »

So it would have been better for Obama to waste this whole term trying to schmooze Pubbies who wouldn't have supported it anyway... or try to get something to done to address the problem.

Can you name one GOP who would have been confident enough to support ANYTHING Obama did? This is the party that thinks Dick Lugar and Bob Bennett (and tried hard against Orin Hatch and John McCain) aren't conservative enough....

You can make the argument Obama didn't try hard enough... but I disagree strongly that the outcome would have been anything different than him having to go alone..
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10158 on: October 04, 2012, 10:08:16 pm »



Can you name one GOP who would have been confident enough to support ANYTHING Obama did? This is the party that thinks Dick Lugar and Bob Bennett (and tried hard against Orin Hatch and John McCain) aren't conservative enough....


They didn't think that until 2009-10.  The GOP turned to the right, but that was a reaction, at least to an extent, of Obama's actions.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38,044
Samoa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10159 on: October 04, 2012, 11:26:09 pm »

I highly doubt just this debate will cause Romney to lead. But if this becomes a pattern, and the people think Obama has nothing new to offer them while Romney keeps playing to the middle, watch out.

The most effective thing Mittens said in my mind, with the voters who will decide the election, is that he worked for bipartisan consensus with Romneycare, and Obama didn't with Obamacare, and that approach can bear poison fruit. All major pieces of social legislation in the past have had important bipartisan support - all of them. And yes, Mittens is playing the middle hard now. It must be a relief for him that the primaries are over. That period was absolutely horrible.

Of course Obama's response should be that no Republican wanted to play ball with him, but he wasn't able to make that argument at all during the debate. He has an even better case with the debt debacle of a couple years back (when Nancy was not calling the shots), and he failed there as well. Truman won by running against an obstructionist congress, Obama must do the same.

Well actually Obama didn't play much ball with the Pubs on Obamacare at all, walked out on Boehner because he could not even suck up using the chained CPI for SS payment adjustments, ignored Simpson Bowles, that had a bipartisan majority in support of something, and indeed does not talk much to anybody. Dems in Congress bitch all the time what a loner and unapproachable Obama is.  I suspect he holds most of the political class in contempt. That is my honest opinion.

Obama has his talents. Being a consensus builder, and finding the middle, is not one of them however. It is just not within him. Mittens should play this card hard from now until the election. His base will have to suck it up.

Regarding Obamacare, it is just so similar to Republican plans that I don't understand why more Republicans didn't sign on to it. I don't think there was much reasoning to the opposition to it, which is why you saw the raving nonsense about "kill the bill" and all that. Of course I think the Wyden-Bennett bill would have been better, although much more politically difficult to get through, but you cannot criticize Obamacare as being too liberal or leftist. It just doesn't make sense. I guess the Democrats were more concerned about pleasing their own moderates than reaching out to the Republicans? It's all drama really, I don't see what Republicans would have wanted in reality that they didn't get with the bill, except credit of course. And that is worth way more than passing good bills in today's media driven political world.



I thought I had explained at length and in detail why Obamacare is a disaster, and will collapse of its own weight. It cannot stand even if the Dems hold every seat in Congress. I would give up sex before voting for Obamacare. I mean that. And I am a Pub who believes in universal insurance. So no, it was not only politics in my opinion, it was substance.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,477


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10160 on: October 05, 2012, 02:54:23 am »

The very low penalty for not carrying insurance? Requiring most businesses to offer insurance is a bad move as well since we should move away from employer provided healthcare, though I would make them pay into the system with higher payroll taxes. It evens the playing field between big and small businesses
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10161 on: October 05, 2012, 08:44:19 am »


Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 50%,
+1.

Disapprove 48%, -1.

"Strongly Approve" is at 29%, -1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at  40%, -1.

Head to head is at 49/47 Obama (u).

 

[/quote]
Logged
Edu
Ufokart
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,278
Argentina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10162 on: October 05, 2012, 08:48:30 am »

Is there a post-debate sample in there?
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10163 on: October 05, 2012, 09:20:28 am »

Is there a post-debate sample in there?

Partial.  1/3 was after the debate, but some of those didn't have full exposure.  Sunday and Monday's numbers will show the post debate in full.
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,559
Dominica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10164 on: October 05, 2012, 11:21:13 am »

lol, nice debate bounce Mittens.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10165 on: October 05, 2012, 11:45:41 am »

lol, nice debate bounce Mittens.

It is too early for a debate bounce, even on Rasmussen.  2/3 of the poll was conducted prior to the debate.
Logged
Northeast Rep Snowball
hiboby1998
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,098
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10166 on: October 05, 2012, 11:50:38 am »

How high do people expect the debate bounce to be?
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10167 on: October 05, 2012, 11:55:27 am »

How high do people expect the debate bounce to be?

Nate Silver gave it 2.2 points for Romney.
Logged
Yank2133
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,176


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10168 on: October 05, 2012, 12:02:02 pm »

Gallup

Approval-52(-2)
Disapproval-43(+1)
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10169 on: October 05, 2012, 12:06:27 pm »

Gallup

Approval-52(-2)
Disapproval-43(+1)

Head to head:

Obama:  50, +1

Romney:  45, u

I think there is obviously some bad numbers in there someplace.
Logged
ucscgaldamez
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 373


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10170 on: October 05, 2012, 12:22:56 pm »

If Romney doesn't show at least a 3point bounce out of the debate then I feel this election is well over with. I mean come on. More than 67 million americans watch the debate and you destroyed Obama at the debate and the best you can do is less than 3 points? I may be too premature here. But after what I saw, I was ready to see huge jumps. Why isn't it happening? What is going on here? On CNN poll of undecided colorado voters, they overwhelmingly gave the win to Romney. Yet when asked who had made up their minds, 8 went for Romney and 8 went for Obama. This is crazy. Now the expectations are set that Romney will win the next debate, if Obama comes swinging, we will be back where we were at, a lead for Obama by 2%.

This electorate is so polarized. If by next week, Obama still leading, the pundits at Fox will be having a major fit.
Logged
King
intermoderate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,410
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10171 on: October 05, 2012, 01:02:55 pm »

If Romney doesn't show at least a 3point bounce out of the debate then I feel this election is well over with. I mean come on. More than 67 million americans watch the debate and you destroyed Obama at the debate and the best you can do is less than 3 points? I may be too premature here. But after what I saw, I was ready to see huge jumps. Why isn't it happening? What is going on here? On CNN poll of undecided colorado voters, they overwhelmingly gave the win to Romney. Yet when asked who had made up their minds, 8 went for Romney and 8 went for Obama. This is crazy. Now the expectations are set that Romney will win the next debate, if Obama comes swinging, we will be back where we were at, a lead for Obama by 2%.

This electorate is so polarized. If by next week, Obama still leading, the pundits at Fox will be having a major fit.

Well if the CNN focus group is any indicator, perhaps Romney didn't win the debate.  He did win it among men easily, but I think Obama won again with women.   That could keep the numbers stagnant.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10172 on: October 05, 2012, 01:09:08 pm »

If Romney doesn't show at least a 3point bounce out of the debate then I feel this election is well over with. I mean come on. More than 67 million americans watch the debate and you destroyed Obama at the debate and the best you can do is less than 3 points? I may be too premature here. But after what I saw, I was ready to see huge jumps. Why isn't it happening? What is going on here? On CNN poll of undecided colorado voters, they overwhelmingly gave the win to Romney. Yet when asked who had made up their minds, 8 went for Romney and 8 went for Obama. This is crazy. Now the expectations are set that Romney will win the next debate, if Obama comes swinging, we will be back where we were at, a lead for Obama by 2%.

This electorate is so polarized. If by next week, Obama still leading, the pundits at Fox will be having a major fit.

Well if the CNN focus group is any indicator, perhaps Romney didn't win the debate.  He did win it among men easily, but I think Obama won again with women.   That could keep the numbers stagnant.

They did a focus group with "Walmart Moms."  Romney won the debate unanimously, according to them:  http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/walmart-moms-romney-won-debate-but-many-still-undecided-20121004
Logged
Eastern Kentucky Demosaur fighting the long defeat
Nathan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,985


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10173 on: October 05, 2012, 01:55:41 pm »

If Romney doesn't show at least a 3point bounce out of the debate then I feel this election is well over with. I mean come on. More than 67 million americans watch the debate and you destroyed Obama at the debate and the best you can do is less than 3 points? I may be too premature here. But after what I saw, I was ready to see huge jumps. Why isn't it happening? What is going on here? On CNN poll of undecided colorado voters, they overwhelmingly gave the win to Romney. Yet when asked who had made up their minds, 8 went for Romney and 8 went for Obama. This is crazy. Now the expectations are set that Romney will win the next debate, if Obama comes swinging, we will be back where we were at, a lead for Obama by 2%.

This electorate is so polarized. If by next week, Obama still leading, the pundits at Fox will be having a major fit.

Well if the CNN focus group is any indicator, perhaps Romney didn't win the debate.  He did win it among men easily, but I think Obama won again with women.   That could keep the numbers stagnant.

They did a focus group with "Walmart Moms."  Romney won the debate unanimously, according to them:  http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/walmart-moms-romney-won-debate-but-many-still-undecided-20121004

All right. There are, unfortunately for the Romney campaign, undecided voters who are women other than 'Walmart Moms'.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10174 on: October 05, 2012, 02:08:16 pm »

If Romney doesn't show at least a 3point bounce out of the debate then I feel this election is well over with. I mean come on. More than 67 million americans watch the debate and you destroyed Obama at the debate and the best you can do is less than 3 points? I may be too premature here. But after what I saw, I was ready to see huge jumps. Why isn't it happening? What is going on here? On CNN poll of undecided colorado voters, they overwhelmingly gave the win to Romney. Yet when asked who had made up their minds, 8 went for Romney and 8 went for Obama. This is crazy. Now the expectations are set that Romney will win the next debate, if Obama comes swinging, we will be back where we were at, a lead for Obama by 2%.

This electorate is so polarized. If by next week, Obama still leading, the pundits at Fox will be having a major fit.

Well if the CNN focus group is any indicator, perhaps Romney didn't win the debate.  He did win it among men easily, but I think Obama won again with women.   That could keep the numbers stagnant.

They did a focus group with "Walmart Moms."  Romney won the debate unanimously, according to them:  http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/walmart-moms-romney-won-debate-but-many-still-undecided-20121004

All right. There are, unfortunately for the Romney campaign, undecided voters who are women other than 'Walmart Moms'.

Yes, but the Walmart Moms account for 14% of the electorate and about 20% (2.8% of the electorate) are Hispanic.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 402 403 404 405 406 [407] 408 409 410 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC