The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread

[pbrower2a]

Kos/R2K Weekly poll

Name            Favourable    Unfavourable   Net Gain
PRESIDENT OBAMA   56 (52)   39 (43)   +8
         
PELOSI:   33 (32)   59 (59)   +1
REID:   30 (31)   59 (58)   -2
McCONNELL:   18 (19)   64 (63)   -2
BOEHNER:   14 (15)   62 (63)   0
         
CONGRESSIONAL DEMS:   38 (39)   57 (56)   -2
CONGRESSIONAL GOPS:   17 (18)   70 (69)   -2
         
DEMOCRATIC PARTY:   40 (39)   51 (52)   +2
REPUBLICAN PARTY:   22 (23)   68 (69)   0

What does 57-39 look like?  It depends, surprisingly, on how the undistributed 4% go. Should that undecided vote split about 3-1 Republican, it's something like this:

An Eisenhower '56 victory for Obama should Texas flip.

With a southern racist of the Strom Thurmond/George Wallace heritage splitting the conservative vote, it looks something like this:

LBJ '64 again.

I do not claim that either will happen.

[pbrower2a]

It was nice to see your 2001 prediction of 2004, pbrower.  It was a fantastic reminder of how bad of an idea it is to predict elections so far in advance.  Why did you delete it?

Accident. I had repeated a post and deleted the wrong one.

Here it is again, hopefully improved, based upon reasonable assumptions a few days after 9/11 of the Presidential election of 2004:

Dubya (R) 488 EV
Levin   (D)   50 EV


Dubya wins 85% of the vote in Oklahoma and 92% in NE-02!  People are already asking whether Rick Santorum or George Allen will win in a landslide in the 2008 Presidential election, and whether the Democratic Party has any long-term viability. One would have to make an allowance that the Democratic candidate of 2004, probably someone with long and respected service to his country (let's say Senator Carl Levin, D-MI) might get the nomination and flip a state or two -- in his case Michigan and perhaps New York and/or New Jersey, but don't count on it).

It would look really bad had the Democratic nominee not been from so large a state in electoral votes.

Oh -- Carl Levin loses his Senate seat in 2006 as "Michigan's McGovern" in the second-to-last last wave of conservative sweeps of liberals from office in 2006.

[pbrower2a]

All political life is flux. We must never forget that. Some things are of course impossible, or at least so unlikely that one has to go through incredible contortions to make them seem possible, as in "a Republican could win DC if the Democrat appears as a particiapant in a KKK rally" or "the Democrat will win Utah if his opponent calls Mormonism a 'demonic cult'".

Many people over-estimated Dubya's political abilities after 9/11 and his likelihood of getting genuine bipartisanship in meeting real dangers to America. I was one of them for a time.

[pbrower2a]

All political life is flux. We must never forget that. Some things are of course impossible, or at least so unlikely that one has to go through incredible contortions to make them seem possible, as in "a Republican could win DC if the Democrat appears as a particiapant in a KKK rally" or "the Democrat will win Utah if his opponent calls Mormonism a 'demonic cult'".

Many people over-estimated Dubya's political abilities after 9/11 and his likelihood of getting genuine bipartisanship in meeting real dangers to America. I was one of them for a time.

And you are currently way overestimating Obama.


Your a hack admit it.

History will show whether I am right or wrong about Obama. I just see too many political strengths -- superb orator, good political strategist, ability to appeal to voters that the other Party takes for granted, shrewd use of media... all he has to do is to have some legislative successes and avoid scandals, and he could easily win the popular vote 54-45 in 2012.

Demographic change alone suggests that Obama will do slightly better in 2012 than in 2008. That's without the GOP shooting itself in the foot with "death panels" and without tea-bag "parties" going stale.

[pbrower2a]

Subtle, and in one state of little area -- less area than greater Los Angeles.

(Connecticut cut down one category for Obama).

[pbrower2a]

Is it really 2 months now that we had an OH (!) poll ?

PS: pbrower2a, plz colour IN and NE-02 in orange, because the polls are really old and IN was part of an Evan Bayh-sponsored poll.

Have patience. More polls will be out soon. I can't predict which ones, let alone which way they will go. Connecticut appeared tonight. Many agencies will have good cause to show new polls.

For the state of California you will see the number "79" where you expect to see electoral votes. A code for months will be "7"+ X, with X representing the numerical value of the month from January to September or "80" for October, "81" for November, or "82" for December as the opportunities arise.

I am going to give asterisks for the states smallest in territory instead of a code for the month -- states that will all go to the GOP nominee in 2012 only in an Obama loss.   

[pbrower2a]

Well, here's the "kryptonite" of the Obama Administration being rendered almost innocuous. This Rasmussen poll suggests that Americans are beginning to recognize some merits in major health-care reforms not directed by the insurance cartel and Big Pharma:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[pbrower2a]

Um, he is still under 50% on the question, that's not good.

... on his weak spot. He has left responsibility for the legislation to Congress.  Congress did badly. Surely Obama will be judged on other things as well -- like the economy in general.

[pbrower2a]

Obama will probably end up getting his public option anyway.

And even then it would only be an insurance provider of the 'last resort' - that is an option for those who have no other alternative. That's the sense I got from the President's address to Congress

There would be lots of hardship cases -- people with pre-existing conditions, people over 50 with low incomes... Such are the people that the health insurance industry doesn't want as customers or only at at terms that price them into hunger or homelessness.  It could be an expansion of Medicare to such people.

One must say this of the civil service by which Medicare is run; it doesn't pay as lavishly those at the top of the scale as does private enterprise, and private enterprise pays people well to treat others badly.

Would you treat people badly if the pay weren't so great? At the preposterous extreme, a Mafia hit isn't cheap -- even if i comes from sociopathic persons so predisposed.

[pbrower2a]

Is it really 2 months now that we had an OH (!) poll ?

Yes, it really is two months since we had an Ohio poll.

Maybe letters will work better for the "territorially-challenged" states. Until I sort them out or get new polls I will continue to use asterisks for them.

A is for January, B is for February, C is for March... H is for August, I is for September, J will be for October... and Z for unpolled. Then:

For the state of California you will see the number "79" where you expect to see electoral votes. A code for months will be "7"+ X, with X representing the numerical value of the month from January to September or "80" for October, "81" for November, or "82" for December as the opportunities arise.

I am going to give asterisks for the states smallest in territory instead of a code for the month -- states that will all go to the GOP nominee in 2012 only in an Obama loss.   

Cool, but I would just drop the "7" code, and just have the month by itself, leaving out all electoral vote #s.  For states with no month #, just leave them blank.  The 2008 electoral votes aren't going to be used in the 2012 election anyway.

[pbrower2a]

Arkansas(KOS)

Favorable 41%
Unfavorable 55%

http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/9/10/AR/371

Update of slight value:

Arkansas went about 58-38 for McCain in 2008. This poll portends well for improvements elsewhere.

[pbrower2a]

Not that I have any delusion to the contrary; Mike Huckabee would trounce Barack Obama in Arkansas.

[pbrower2a]

New York (Marist College)

57% Excellent/Good
43% Fair/Poor

This survey of 805 New York State registered voters was conducted on September 8th through September 10th, 2009. Registered voters were interviewed by telephone in proportion to the voter registration in each county in New York and adjusted for turnout in statewide elections. Telephone numbers were selected based upon a list of telephone exchanges from throughout the state. The exchanges were selected to ensure that each region was represented in proportion to its population. To increase coverage, this land-line sample was supplemented by respondents reached through random dialing of cell phone numbers. The two samples were then combined.  Results are statistically significant at ±3.5%. The error margin increases for cross-tabulations.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/914-obamas-approval-rating-dips-in-nys

Update of slight value:

The "H" becomes an "I" upon New York state.

[pbrower2a]

Nevada (Rasmussen)

46% Approve
53% Disapprove

This statewide telephone survey of 500 Likely Voters in Nevada was conducted by Rasmussen Reports September 14, 2009. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/nevada/election_2010_nevada_senate_race

Nothing about the President in Nevada, in case anyone is confused.

How old are the Utah and Tennessee polls? February and January, respectively.

[pbrower2a]

Nevada should be yellow.

That's about the health care legislation. Nothing is said of President Obama except that he supports it.

[pbrower2a]

Nevada should be yellow.

That's about the health care legislation. Nothing is said of President Obama except that he supports it.

No.

1* How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as President… do you strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove, or strongly disapprove of the job he’s been doing?

37% Strongly approve
9% Somewhat approve
8% Somewhat disapprove
45% Strongly disapprove
1% Not sure

That was not in the poll that I saw. That looks like an old one.

[pbrower2a]

Do I have to hold your hand?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/nevada/toplines/toplines_2010_nevada_senate_september_14_2009

No. Getting the right link is necessary and adequate.

[pbrower2a]

CO, NH, NM, OH, VA updates

The New Jersey poll relates to a gubernatorial race in 2010.  NH is a 50-50 tie; a lesser tie (let us say 49-49) would be white.

The positive ratings in Ohio and Virginia suggest that Obama would win. The GOP absolutely can't afford to lose either state again in the 2012 election.

[pbrower2a]

You're an idiot. The CO, NH, and VA numbers were all included in election polls too. Be honest, you are not including NJ because you don't like what it shows.

I don't cover gubernatorial or senatorial races in this thread. "Corzine is behind" is not my concern here.

[pbrower2a]

Quote:

Barack Obama’s approval rating among likely voters for this fall’s
Gubernatorial election has dropped to just 45%, with 48% disapproving of him.
Those numbers are down a good bit from PPP’s last survey of the state in July, which
found his approval at 53/39. While Obama is steady with Democrats he has dropped a
good deal with both Republicans and independents. Among GOP voters his approval has
dropped from 20% to 12%. With unaffiliated ones it’s an even steeper decline from 48%
to 36%.

Note the correction:

"Likely voters in a midterm election (2010) an odd-year election" means something very different from likely voters in a Presidential contest. That is why I cannot accept this polling result.

Because I had a bug in Adobe Reader I was unable to read the PDF until a few minutes ago.

MidtermOdd-year elections are very different from Presidential and even midterm elections; they have far lesser participation, and such elections tend to be more Republican than those in Presidential years.

No question: Corzine is in big trouble politically.

[pbrower2a]

Massachusetts update (no surprise there):

The New Jersey poll relates to voters in a gubernatorial race in 2009; I consider it void as a measure of the approval for Obama . 


Explanation of the letters:

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

Z -- no poll since the election

Letters show the age of the most reliable and credible poll. Age of the poll is relevant.

* -- small states in territory, or districts that have their own electoral vote for which I can't find the most recent poll.

Colors:

Green -- positive approval rating. The lightest is for a positive difference with the approval under 50%. Darker shades of green are for higher levels of approval.

Aqua -- exact 50-50 tie, which I have just seen today.

White -- exact tie with an approval under 50%.

Orange -- old positive approvals that I no longer consider relevant and reliable. These are  as a rule in states that Obama lost.

Yellow -- any  state or district in which  disapproval is higher than approval for Obama; darker shades indicate stronger disapproval.

Gray -- unpolled. Those are Alaska, DC, Maryland, Mississippi, North Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming.

I colored Utah yellow because it is Utah. I colored NE-01 and NE-03 yellow because they voted for McCain. I colored ME-01 and ME-02 because the voted very close to the pattern for Maine itself, which voted decisively for Obama.

Trouble spots are Indiana and NE-02 because they voted for Obama and have been polled --if with aging polls -- positively for Obama. That is very different from the cases with South Carolina, South Dakota, and Tennessee. I am not going to color those yellow or orange until they are polled again. If I am not making a quick change of color for Iowa or Wisconsin to green until I see a poll for either state, than I will not do so for Indiana or NE-02.





 

 
 

[pbrower2a]

NC update:

... I promise: unless Indiana or NE-02 is polled by September 31, it goes "orange". Six months is clearly outdated.

[pbrower2a]

Here's why that poll does not count:

9* Generally speaking, do you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and the congressional Democrats?

34% Strongly favor

12% Somewhat favor

6% Somewhat oppose

45% Strongly oppose

3% Not sure

The question is excessively specific on one issue and to broad in  responsibility (it includes Congress). It does not ask either for general approval or general favorability of the President.

 As such it is disqualified for my map.

Most recent poll,

[pbrower2a]

... I promise: unless Indiana or NE-02 is polled by September 31, it goes "orange". Six months is clearly outdated.

[pbrower2a]

Harry Reid is in deep political trouble; he is an ideologue in a moderate state. It could simply that he has passed the "sell-by" date.

Of course, he's not in as bad shape as the Republican Senator from Nevada, reasons having nothing to do with ideology.

Strange things can happen.