Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 19, 2020, 06:39:42 pm
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 267 268 269 270 271 [272] 273 274 275 276 277 ... 410 Print
Author Topic: The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread  (Read 1028361 times)
Hash
Hashemite
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,882
Cuba


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6775 on: November 18, 2010, 07:18:27 pm »


Okay, we get it, you don't like Obama. This doesn't mean you have to go cherrypicking polls that have the lowest approval ratings for him.

He probably gets stimulated by them.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,912
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6776 on: November 19, 2010, 10:25:32 am »




Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 47%, +2.

Disapprove 52%, -2.

"Strongly Approve" is at 26%, +1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 39%, -3.

Either an anti Obama dropped out or a pro Obama sample came in.  The only thing interesting is that the Strongly Approve sample is still relatively low.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,834
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6777 on: November 19, 2010, 03:49:33 pm »

Poll from the Los Angeles Times/USC 54-41 approval:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-poll-20101119,0,1562210.story



Key:


<40% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Orange (50% if 60%-69% or higher disapproval); 90% red if >70%
40-43% with Disapproval Higher: 50% Yellow  
44% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Yellow  
45-49% with Disapproval Higher: 30% Yellow  
<50% with Approval Equal: 10% Yellow (really white)

<50%  Approval greater: 30% Green
50-55%: 40% Green
56-59%: 60% Green
60%+: 80% Green
DC, what else could you expect?


Months (All polls are from 2010):

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

MY CURRENT PREDICTION OF THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

(before any campaigning begins in earnest)Sad

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



District of Columbia, assumed to be about a 90% win for Obama, 3                  
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater  
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin  
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5%
white                        too close to call  
pale blue                  Republican  under 5%  
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin
deep blue                 Republican over 10%  




44% approval is roughly the break-even  point (50/50) for an incumbent's win.  I add 6% for approval between 40% and 46%, 5% at 46%, 4% between 47% 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.
Logged
Penelope
Scifiguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,525
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6778 on: November 19, 2010, 03:54:07 pm »


As I said earlier, shouldn't Virginia be 30% green? It was 50-45-5.  
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 52,019
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6779 on: November 19, 2010, 03:56:35 pm »

As I said earlier, shouldn't Virginia be 30% green? It was 50-45-5.  

pbrowers definition has it 40%.

30% is only for approval with 49% or less, and disapproval must be lower than that.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,912
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6780 on: November 20, 2010, 10:05:40 am »


Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 47%, u.

Disapprove 52%, -1.

"Strongly Approve" is at 26%, u.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 39%, u.

Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,834
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6781 on: November 20, 2010, 10:52:45 am »
« Edited: November 20, 2010, 01:59:55 pm by pbrower2a »

As I said earlier, shouldn't Virginia be 30% green? It was 50-45-5.  

pbrowers definition has it 40%.

30% is only for approval with 49% or less, and disapproval must be lower than that.

Probable typo. Corrected:

(My) definition has it 50%.

30% is only for approval with 49% or less, and disapproval must be lower than that.



Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,834
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6782 on: November 20, 2010, 02:08:53 pm »




Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 47%, +2.

Disapprove 52%, -2.

"Strongly Approve" is at 26%, +1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 39%, -3.

Either an anti Obama dropped out or a pro Obama sample came in.  The only thing interesting is that the Strongly Approve sample is still relatively low.

The "Strongly Disapprove" figure may have fallen off as the advertising goes from political campaigns to Christmas shopping. There might be some buyers' remorse about the GOP majority in the House, especially if it goes on political inquisitions while the economy flounders.

The electorate will be significantly different in 2012 than it was in 2010. The next two years are "put up-or-shut up" time for the Republicans, especially in the House. If they are the same thing that they were between 2000 and 2006 they will be trounced anew. There just won't be any speculative boom to create easy profits for people who get away with bad business.

 
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,912
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6783 on: November 21, 2010, 09:43:14 am »



Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 47%, u.

Disapprove 52%, u.

"Strongly Approve" is at 27%, +1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 40%, +1.


[/quote]
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,834
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6784 on: November 21, 2010, 04:35:52 pm »

An econometrist at Yale has a model for predicting the results of the Presidency and the House. Not surprisingly, President Obama would have to fail or face an political calamity (scandal, economic collapse, or diplomatic/military debacle) to lose in 2012. Paradoxically, even if he loses the battle to allow the rescission of the Dubya-era tax cuts for the wealthy, he benefits politically from a better economic reality for himself than otherwise (unless he has to impose taxes to undo the budgetary effects of the tax cut).

http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu/vote2012/index2.htm

Here's  Ray Fair's model based on recent quantitative easing -- a very expansionary model:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


President Obama wins an Eisenhower-style landslide in the popular vote, and the electoral vote probably hinges on Texas with 400-435 electoral votes.  Republicans barely hold onto the House.

Tampering with the numbers a bit, I could suggest what happens if America experiences three more months of economic growth larger than average but stagnation in 2012:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

President Obama wins an Eisenhower-style landslide in the popular vote, and the electoral vote probably hinges on Texas with 400-435 electoral votes. Democrats barely win back the House.

..............

It's the more months of above-average growth that overpowers the later stagnation and even gives the Democrats a big chance to win back the House of Representatives.  In any event, I predict that America will not have a speculative boom (the capital just isn't there and the spirit needed for one died around 2005). What remains is the safest way to create prosperity, which is long-term, hands-on, can't-run-from investments in small businesses or government investment in infrastructure that don't lead to speculative booms and busts.  I see no strong, charismatic candidate from the GOP to counteract a President who so far shows most of the political skills of... Ronald Reagan.

I'm not going to draw any maps based on this projection; I could never predict whether the results of a 56-44 split of the nationwide popular vote would be that President Obama would win 70% of the popular vote in California and 45% of the popular vote in Texas or 62% of the popular vote in California and 51% of the popular vote in Texas.

Why Texas? Because it has no obvious analogue in any other state in ethnic mix, because it is politically unique, and because it would probably follow such states as Missouri, Georgia, Montana, South Carolina, and maybe Arizona before the Clinton-but-not-Obama states that have voted in a bloc since 1992 and will likely do so in 2012. 
Logged
Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6785 on: November 21, 2010, 09:44:06 pm »
« Edited: November 21, 2010, 10:13:14 pm by Mr.Phips »

An econometrist at Yale has a model for predicting the results of the Presidency and the House. Not surprisingly, President Obama would have to fail or face an political calamity (scandal, economic collapse, or diplomatic/military debacle) to lose in 2012. Paradoxically, even if he loses the battle to allow the rescission of the Dubya-era tax cuts for the wealthy, he benefits politically from a better economic reality for himself than otherwise (unless he has to impose taxes to undo the budgetary effects of the tax cut).

http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu/vote2012/index2.htm

Here's  Ray Fair's model based on recent quantitative easing -- a very expansionary model:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


President Obama wins an Eisenhower-style landslide in the popular vote, and the electoral vote probably hinges on Texas with 400-435 electoral votes.  Republicans barely hold onto the House.

Tampering with the numbers a bit, I could suggest what happens if America experiences three more months of economic growth larger than average but stagnation in 2012:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

President Obama wins an Eisenhower-style landslide in the popular vote, and the electoral vote probably hinges on Texas with 400-435 electoral votes. Democrats barely win back the House.

..............

It's the more months of above-average growth that overpowers the later stagnation and even gives the Democrats a big chance to win back the House of Representatives.  In any event, I predict that America will not have a speculative boom (the capital just isn't there and the spirit needed for one died around 2005). What remains is the safest way to create prosperity, which is long-term, hands-on, can't-run-from investments in small businesses or government investment in infrastructure that don't lead to speculative booms and busts.  I see no strong, charismatic candidate from the GOP to counteract a President who so far shows most of the political skills of... Ronald Reagan.

I'm not going to draw any maps based on this projection; I could never predict whether the results of a 56-44 split of the nationwide popular vote would be that President Obama would win 70% of the popular vote in California and 45% of the popular vote in Texas or 62% of the popular vote in California and 51% of the popular vote in Texas.

Why Texas? Because it has no obvious analogue in any other state in ethnic mix, because it is politically unique, and because it would probably follow such states as Missouri, Georgia, Montana, South Carolina, and maybe Arizona before the Clinton-but-not-Obama states that have voted in a bloc since 1992 and will likely do so in 2012.  

Fair's model projected that George HW Bush would get 56% of the vote in 1992.  He doesnt seem to take lagging indicators like the unemployment rate into account.  He also doesnt take approval ratings into account, which is why he overstated the Republican share of the vote in 2008 by 2%.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,834
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6786 on: November 22, 2010, 07:54:35 am »

Of course, Fair's model did not take Ross Perot into account, as it could never predict a third-party candidacy. Add the votes for GHWB and Perot and you get roughly 56%. Did Perot hurt Bush more than Clinton? It can't take into account cultural shifts within Parties, as in the simultaneous disappearance of the liberal Republicans from the GOP with the movement of low-income white people from the Democratic party to the Republican Party.

Above all it can't predict the significance of a Presidential personality in winning or losing an election, let alone personal scandals, military and diplomatic debacles, or natural disasters. Should President Obama be caught in a bribery scandal that implodes before November 2012 he is done. Even more, he could never get away with a tryst involving a woman who looks like Monica Lewinsky as Bill Clinton could. But who here predicts either?

As for the House of Representatives, personalities matter far less on the whole because the law of large numbers applies more rigidly to 435 Representatives than to one President. The model probably assumes that both parties are equally vulnerable to scandals and could not predict the effect of decisions of the majority except on economic matters.  It can't account for freakish behavior of a majority that operates in lockstep.

It got 2010 right. Economic reality allowed the GOP to sell the idea that improving the business climate was the solution to economic distress. If the economy is good, people overlook 'cultural' matters and wedge issues. 
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,912
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6787 on: November 22, 2010, 10:39:53 am »



Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 46%, -1.

Disapprove 52%, +1.  (Tat 52% was an error, sorry)

"Strongly Approve" is at 27%, u.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 41%, +1.
Logged
Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6788 on: November 22, 2010, 11:44:05 am »

Of course, Fair's model did not take Ross Perot into account, as it could never predict a third-party candidacy. Add the votes for GHWB and Perot and you get roughly 56%. Did Perot hurt Bush more than Clinton? It can't take into account cultural shifts within Parties, as in the simultaneous disappearance of the liberal Republicans from the GOP with the movement of low-income white people from the Democratic party to the Republican Party.


Perot didnt hurt Bush very much.  Exit polling said Perot voters were split between Clinton and Bush.
Logged
Ben Romney
Hillary2012
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 395
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6789 on: November 22, 2010, 07:51:44 pm »

Zogby
Obama at 39/60 approval
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 #6790 on: November 22, 2010, 07:52:40 pm »


Next...
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,119
Liechtenstein


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6791 on: November 22, 2010, 07:53:42 pm »


Lolzogby

(Although the YouGov approvals have been pretty low for him too).
Logged
Poundingtherock
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 917
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6792 on: November 22, 2010, 08:02:53 pm »

USA Today/Gallup has him at 42% approval.  His disapproval is likely around 55-56% in the poll.
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 #6793 on: November 22, 2010, 08:14:28 pm »

It's a Zogby interactive poll...
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,912
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6794 on: November 22, 2010, 08:24:44 pm »

Now you why I keep saying, "It's Zogby."  Smiley
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,834
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6795 on: November 22, 2010, 11:46:45 pm »


Precisely. Interactive polls are easily manipulated. 
Logged
Poundingtherock
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 917
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6796 on: November 23, 2010, 01:30:59 am »

did our Democrat friends object to "interactive" polls when Mark Penn released a poll showing Obama up 8-19 points on all potential Republican challengers.

I don't think the "interactive" part is the problem here.  Zogby is the problem.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,912
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6797 on: November 23, 2010, 11:03:22 am »


Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 47%, +1.

Disapprove 52%, u. 

"Strongly Approve" is at 28%, +1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 42%, +1.


Probably just noise, but if not strange.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,834
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6798 on: November 24, 2010, 10:32:50 am »
« Edited: November 25, 2010, 12:11:00 am by pbrower2a »

PPP, NC

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_NC_1123.pdf

One of the closest states in 2008, and as things look, it will be very close in 2012. I am now assigning only a 5% likely gain for 45% Obama can win without North Carolina, but can't lose with it. He would lose to some candidates, tie with some, and win against some others in the Tarheel State.



Key:


<40% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Orange (50% if 60%-69% or higher 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: 30% Green
50-55%: 40% Green
56-59%: 60% Green
60%+: 80% Green
DC, what else could you expect?


Months (All polls are from 2010):

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

MY CURRENT PREDICTION OF THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

(before any campaigning begins in earnest)Sad

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



District of Columbia, assumed to be about a 90% win for Obama,                  
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin  
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5%
white                        too close to call (margin 1% or less)
pale blue                  Republican  under 5%  
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin
deep blue                 Republican over 10%  




44% approval is roughly the break-even  point (50/50) for an incumbent's win.  I add 6% for approval between 40% and 46%, 5% at 46%, 4% between 47% 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.

*Note that I have expanded the "too close to call" to include those states  in which the incumbent President's approval rating is 43% to 45%.

Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,912
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6799 on: November 24, 2010, 10:59:17 am »


Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 48%, +1.

Disapprove 51%, -1. 

"Strongly Approve" is at 28%, u.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 42%, u.

We probably won't get any more real numbers until after the holiday.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 267 268 269 270 271 [272] 273 274 275 276 277 ... 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