The “Comeback Kid” Heading Down – Obama’s Approval Rating Plummeting

Spread the love

Loading

Ah well….the second Obama honeymoon has ended, as we all knew it would:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that 23% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17 (see trends).

The president’s Approval Index ratings have fallen nine points since Monday as the crisis in Egypt unfolds. Most of the decline comes from a fall in the number who Strongly Approve of the president’s performance (30% on Monday, 23% now). However, for the first time since mid-December, the number who Strongly Disapprove has moved back over the 40% mark for five straight days. The Strongly Disapprove total had been above 40% for most of 2010 but fell to the high-30s after the president and Senate Republicans reached a deal to extend the Bush Administration tax cuts.

~~~

Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president’s performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) disapprove.

Gallup is showing the same trend. He got the boost, the Obama honeymoon, and then headed into a steep decline. 45/47 now.

But we know the cause. The rating peaked after the Tucson shooting and his speech to the nation it seemed but its been going down ever since. First his horrible, just horrible, State of the Union speech and then his amateurish reaction to the Egypt crisis. The man demanded an immediate transition and Mubarak flipped him the bird. World leaders must look at this man and be amazed at the stupidity of the American public for putting such a neophyte into office.

Anyways…you think the media will notice this fall after they dubbed him the “comeback kid?”

I’m thinking not.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
33 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

This confirms my suspicions that his bounce to 50% was due to his speech following the Tuscon shooting. He should have had another slight bounce after his SOTU address. Obviously that didn’t happen which means his SOTU address didn’t go over so well. Wait until gas prices hit $4 per gallon. If they start promoting the idea that an addition of 36,000 jobs reduced the unemployment rate from 9.4% to 9.0%, that will piss people off even more. At least those who are smart enough not to believe it.

Democrats are starting to tell Obama that he could improve his own chances for re-election IF ObamaCare is repealed.
Personally, I don’t care if it does help him.
Repeal it or starve it to death or overturn it in pieces.

I keep fluctuating between thinking Obama has some master plan and thinking that he is an arrogant, bumbling, inept fool.

I wonder anymore if he cares about his approval rating or if he serves another term. He seems to be committed to governing by executive agency fiat to promote an ideological goal. He doesn’t seem to care if the Dems loose the Senate in 2012. He is either delusional or the biggest villan since Benidect Arnold.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jan/26/obama-slept-through-the-election/

NUGENT: Obama slept through the election

Read the article. I do happen to feel that Ted went pretty light in his comments.

There is no argument that Mr. Obama is the most liberal president in the history of the nation. The hallmark of liberals is more control, more taxes and more spending. The future of America will not be bright with liberals in charge. Less government bureaucracy, less spending, less control and less borrowing is the way ahead. Get cracking, GOP.

The Current GOP Leadership is the “Loyal Opposition” and seems to be lacking the ability to “Get Cracking”…that’s why I am NOT Party Affiliated today. The Republic suffers still from the Ignorance and Arrogance of Incumbency…Sadly So…

“The man demanded an immediate transition and Mubarak flipped him the bird. ”

When I listened to Obama ‘telling’ Mubarak he needs to step down immediately… The ‘tone’ sounded very familiar to the ‘tone’ which he speaks to the ‘American’ People especially those in opposition to his agenda. As in ‘we know what’s best’ for the people of Egypt. or As in ‘we know what’s best’ for the American people.
Creepy isn’t it?

That’s a man, who pouts, or insult when he can’t get his way. Mubarek is right in flipping the bird!

I wonder just how many he has working with him would vote for him if he was primaried.

Remember a few months back “the insider” was feeding information about what was going on inside the West Wing to a blogger? Well, the insider is back, I don’t know whether past information panned out because I forgot what information he passed on.

Here’s excerpts of the new scuttle:

White House Insider: Obama is Clueless. Totally Clueless

White House was caught completely off guard on this one despite indications they were informed of just such a scenario a number of times over the past year or so. They ignored the warnings. When the protests started did you notice the confused messaging from the administration? Hillary says one thing. Biden says another thing. Obama says basically nothing. These are the situations where an American president can either rise to the occasion and show strength and wisdom or where they appear weak and uncertain.

Not only are they all not speaking to one message, the envoy Obama just sent over to speak with Mubarak, agrees with Mubarak not to step down. What a merry go round.

Obama is clueless. Totally clueless. I am not talking a little out of step here. I am talking the man has no idea what is going on around him. This is not coming from me. I am relaying it from some still around him on a regular basis. These people are getting increasingly concerned over just how “out of it”, that is the phrase repeated to me, Obama has become. His primary focus is now getting elected in ‘12. Everything else has been given over to Jarrett and her group. Everything. The president has no interest in policy. None. No interest in working legislation. None. No interest in forging a specific agenda. None. He is being told what he needs to say and that is it. That is the extent of his interest. “Just make it look good.” Exact words right there. President Obama is obsessed 24/7 with just “looking good”. If something goes well, he gets happy and outgoing. If something makes him look badly, he lashes out and pouts. The man is bouncing off both of those extremes even more now than he used to and it appears to be getting worse and worse. The word “manic” is being used more and more regarding his moods these days.

FYI there was a closed door meeting recently under the guise of discussions on Egypt. That meeting did not involve Egypt much if at all. This information is relayed second hand but I believe it to be completely reliable. Source told that meeting was run by Jarrett from start to end. Obama said very little. Asked no questions. The primary focus was how to protect Obamacare so it was not a “liability” in 2012 campaign. White House already spending significant time/resources preparing legal argument for the Supreme Court case that is coming. Second focus was apparently “birther” related. Jarrett expressed concern over possible newly passed eligibility requirements in states. If only one or two states clarify eligibility in order to run for office, White House will simply use those states as examples of “anti-Obama racism”. They would likely not win the electorals in those states regardless, but could use the scenario to gain sympathy and support over the challenge from other moderate states. This is the tactic Jarrett and crew have prepared. She is worried though that if more than one or two states challenge the president’s eligibility, the issue would turn against them.
~~~~
As stated before, Geithner is leaving. That was repeated to me again this past week.blockquote>

Read more: http://newsflavor.com/politics/world-politics/white-house-insider-obama-is-clueless-totally-clueless/#ixzz1DB8FsOgC

Funny, but you never report it when Obama’s approval ratings are high. I just read some figures quoted in another right-wing journal that Obama’s approval ratings are 10 points higher than Reagan’s at the same period in his Presidency.

Gee whiz! He’s even diving after the MSM did their absolute best to equate this Dodo with Ronald Reagan. Wonder why? Oops, easy to figure that one out. The American people aren’t as stupid as Liberals think we are.

As disgusted I am with the media in general, this is indeed an all time low for these elitist morons. To have the audacity to insult the memory of one of the greatest Americans is bad enough. To compare this Marxist/Socialist/Anti-American ideals President with a man who loved his country, her ideals and it’s people with all his heart is a crime. Words like blasphemy come to mind, but I’m not exactly sure what word truly describes what I’m feeling at this moment.

As, in my view this man is overtly doing his best to dismantle everything President Reagan stood for and deliver our country to his Marxist handlers, I am indeed baffled as to how anyone could make a more asinine comparison than this. Very sad!

The difference between President Reagan and President Obama?

Listen to A Time for Choosing which is posted on the” Reaganite Republican “ site. It doesn’t come any better than with this example as compared to the 62 minute B.S. session of a few nights ago.

Heartfelt truth and candor compared to lies, deceit, ineptness and basically Bull S…!

Yes, it launched his career, but who could have even remotely imagine the immense GREATNESS that enveloped this man? As I said in a post yesterday, comparing the (for want of better words) “current resident” of the White House to one of the greatest Presidents and Americans of our time is a crime!

@Missy:
Thanks for linking that ”the Insider” is back.
Gosh, he/she was an interesting font of information before disappearing for a bit.
Glad to see Insider stuff back on the web.
Here’s the direct link:
http://www.triond.com/users/Ulsterman

Everything Insider is there somewhere.

Curt Today’s RCP polls Approve vs. Disapprove
Rasm 48% – 51%
Gallup 46%-45%
Fox 47%-44%
CNN 55%-44%
Overall 49.7%-44%
Won’t even talk about how B. H.O. fares against Repub hopefulls. Can’t wait till Iowa.Great bloodletting.

The thing that bothers me about the fluctuating numbers is that it would seem that most of the respondents only remember the last event when evaluating this man. Do they not realize the long chain of horrible leadership? Does the last fairly good show wipe out all of the past mistakes?

@Liberal1 (objectivity):

The closest I ever came to Ronald Reagan was when I was a banquet waitress supervisor, candidate Ronald Reagan stayed in our hotel. I wasn’t even a waitress but was called in to serve him his breakfast, he was to eat in our breakfast room but plans changed so I had to deliver corn flakes, orange juice to his suite. A very cheerful, pleasant experience, didn’t get to meet him, but his aide that took the tray was very gracious.

I had voted for Carter but since he mucked everything up so bad I voted for Ronald Reagan, best vote I ever cast.

I just read some figures quoted in another right-wing journal that Obama’s approval ratings are 10 points higher than Reagan’s at the same period in his Presidency.

Heh, let’s see Obama take 49 states, you see, Ronald Reagan actually fixed our problems, gas lines, interest rates, inflation, just had to have lived through it to understand how bad it was.

So cling to that number if it is what you say you are seeing “in another right wing journal,” you didn’t offer any sources, doesn’t matter, it isn’t going to mean much in the long run, he’s no Ronald Reagan.

Watching Reagan’s 100th birthday celebration today confirmed in my mind, I have no doubt many others as well, realized what a small man we now have sitting in the Oval Office.

@Old Trooper 2: Ted was a little tamer than usual there. Sometimes I wish we could make some of these government knows best types run their own business or work as an independent contractor for a year in order to get a reality check. When you have to make it or break it yourself, you either get it together or fail. If a small business owner ran their company or an independent contractor managed themselves the way the politicians run the government, they’d be out of business in a heart beat.

@another vet: If I did My Personal Checking account the way Congress does the Budget, I’d be in trouble for passing bad checks!

Is it always, ”Do as I SAY not as I DO,” with Obama?
We should cut back on fats and salts, red meats and milk products…..but NOT OBAMA!

White House announces Super Bowl menu:
‘Bratwurst,
Kielbasa,
Cheeseburgers,
Deep Dish Pizza,
Buffalo Wings,
German Potato Salad,
Twice Baked Potatoes,
Potato Chips,
Pretzels,
Chips and Dips,
Salad, (!!!!)
Ice Cream,
Yuengling Lager,
Hinterland Pale Ale,
Amber Ale,
White House Honey Ale

Only the salad sounded like it MIGHT be good for you.
We had chicken breast meat, cut up, coated in breadcrumbs, sauteed then jalepno and mango BBQ sauce cooked in.
We also had Swedish rye crackers topped with twice-cooked brats in a blue-cheesed-mustard sauce.
And a big tray of celery and carrots, radishes and pepperocinis to dip into hummus.

I reckon even with his ”special” health care I will outlive (in years) Obama.
He has no self control.

@Old Trooper 2: No doubt you’d be in jail. To quote Rip Torn’s character in the movie “Extreme Prejudice”: “The only thing worse than a politician is a child molster”.

The new House majority is about to roll out their budget proposal, that includes a total of $35 billion in spending cuts.

I can’t help but notice that the $35 billion won’t even begin to cover the projected revenue losses that will result from the recent extension of Bush’s high-end tax cuts.

Ha! Keep clinging to that disproven argument Greg. While you clutch your binky we’ll be doing what the dems refused to do.

@Greg:

extension of Bush’s high-end tax cuts.

Get with the times Greg. Those “high-end tax cuts” now belong to Obama. Being as though no budget was presented for FY 2011 but Obama’s, $74 billion was cut.

http://budget.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=223391

But, the budget for the remaining months for FY 2011 hasn’t been presented yet, we shall see shortly how that will shake out. Rep. Ryan and team are combing through and finding some interesting stuff, for instance:

Table 1 details both defense and non-defense discretionary spending, excluding emergencies. The table breaks spending into base budget increases and stimulus spending on top. Democrats’ appropriation bills increased non-defense discretionary spending by nearly 25 percent – an 84 percent increase when you include the stimulus.

Table 2 details the massive increase in both the base budgets for major government agencies, as well as the added funding provided to each in the failed stimulus. Among the many egregious examples: The Environmental Protection Agency’s budget increased by 36 percent in just two years. When the $7 billion the agency received in stimulus funding is included, the EPA enjoyed a two-year increase of 131 percent.

Don’t miss Table 2.

http://budget.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=223474

Its all about the spin, the MSM and the Liberal Blogs will keep spouting the fake numbers all the way up till election day 2012.

@Greg: You said:

I can’t help but notice that the $35 billion won’t even begin to cover the projected revenue losses that will result from the recent extension of Bush’s high-end tax cuts.

How long are you intending to beat this dead horse? Since Obama did not cut taxes – since Obama only agreed to extend the present tax RATE – since Obama lied about cutting taxes for “95% of Americans” how can you sit there and say that by keeping the rates the same, there will be a revenue loss??

Unless you subscribe to the socialist theory that Larry/runswimm does and that is that ALL money made in the private sector belongs to the government and they graciously allow us mere citizens the right to keep a certain percentage of our private property (income).

The rates stay the same, but somehow they cause a revenue loss? Don’t know what you do for a living, Greg, but I sincerely hope it isn’t ANYWHERE remotely related to finance.

@Missy, #21: “Get with the times Greg. Those “high-end tax cuts” now belong to Obama. Being as though no budget was presented for FY 2011 but Obama’s, $74 billion was cut.”

Obama obviously didn’t want an extension of the high-end tax cuts. His position, and that of a majority of Congressional democrats, was consistent: that the Bush tax cuts should be extended only for those having taxable income below $250,000. That would have represented approximately 95% of taxpayers. The only way to achieve that before all tax cuts automatically expired was to acquiesce to republican demands that the high-end cuts also be extended. That was the bone that had to be tossed to the junkyard dog to keep him from tearing everything–including a still-fragile economic recovery–to bits. Fortunately the dog was so fixated on the protecting the interests of the wealthiest that he immediately forgot his resolve to end struggling families’ unemployment checks just before Christmas. We’ll see how the America people really feel about debt-and-deficit fueling high-end tax cuts in the run up to the 2012 elections.

The $74 billion savings displayed in Ryan’s HBC “Fact” Sheet is part of the republican dog-and-pony show. Ownership of the committee allows them to use it as a display stage. The $74 billion in savings represents the difference between the hypothetical figure proposed by the President and the hypothetical figure proposed by Congress. The actual amout of spending cuts would be the difference between what was spent in the prior year and what is legislated for the current year. The buget legislation republicans are actually rolling out produces a spending reduction of only $30 billion–a drop in the bucket and an amount far short of their promised $100 billion, which was itself only a drop in the bucket. There will be a great display of republican commitment to fiscal responsibility as their 2012 election hopefuls argue for deeper immediate cuts, but that’s just part of the show. They don’t really intend to do it, and they certainly don’t want to talk about the controvercial details of how that could be accomplished. God help them if they have to talk about the actual details before the elections.

I don’t know why the difference between republican rhetoric and what republicans actually do never seems to be examined with the same critical lens that’s used to examine Obama and the democrats. (Actually, that’s not an accurate statement. I know why perfectly well.)

@anticsrocks, #23: “The rates stay the same, but somehow they cause a revenue loss? Don’t know what you do for a living, Greg, but I sincerely hope it isn’t ANYWHERE remotely related to finance.”

If the high-end tax rate cuts caused revenue losses in the past, extending the same rates will likely result in an extension of revenue losses into the future.

At this point I expect an assertion that high-end tax cuts stimulate the economy and increase revenue. Unfortunately that doesn’t seem to have resulted in a balanced budget. The fact that there’s been a clear historical correspondence between high-end tax cuts and the rise of the national debt strikes me as more than coincidence. The correspondence between high-end tax cuts and the dramatic upward redistribution of wealth is also more than coincidence.

For over 200 years the national debt was relatively small and any upward spikes were paid back down. When did that change? And when were high-end tax rates dramatically lowered? Surely comparing the before with the after ought to tell us something, even if common sense doesn’t.

The fact that there’s been a clear historical correspondence between high-end tax cuts and the rise of the national debt strikes me as more than coincidence.

Greg, we’ve been over this and then some. Mata has shown why your belief is incorrect. Aye has done the same and IIRC, so has Word. Really, you need psychiatric help.

EDIT: Aw crap. Greg has gone and hijacked another thread in order to defend his messiah and I helped. Sorry everyone.

Now let’s get back to watching obama’s ratings fall like a stone due to his own incompetence.

By all means let’s get back to Obama’s plummeting approval ratings. I’m obviously totally out of touch with reality. I think I’ll refrain from making any further comments around here for a day or two.

I was just going to say that Obama had not yet bothered to phone the Green Bay Packers to congratulate them for winning the Super Bowl, but then I saw an update, timed 5:24 this afternoon, that Obama finally had made the call.
No wonder his ratings go down.
Look at how he treats people!
Even when he supposedly held out an olive branch to the Chamber of Commerce today it boiled down to a ”let’s work together…..to make MY agenda a success!”
How many people can Obama throw under the bus then expect to run to support him?
He thinks a lot of them will.
He forgets that this is America.
People do have other parties they can support.
I went to a tea party planning group and was surrounded by ”fiscally conservative” Democrats there.
They will not be voting for Obama.
Not again.

Really Greg, does it even occur to you why you do what you do? Obama’s ratings are sinking and unlikely to rise, so you come in with something completely unrelated to attack Republicans with.
Maybe you do know what you are doing. As I’ve said before, you are a moonbat who will defend the far left to the death.

As for obama, expect his rating so slip further as he continues doing what he has been.

@Greg: You said:

Ownership of the committee allows them to use it as a display stage.

So where were you when the Dems did the same thing?

Again, you really don’t understand finance very well at all. It isn’t tax cuts that cause debt to rise. It is spending.

If I make $5,000.00 a month and spend $4,000.00 a month, I make out okay. If I get a new job that only pays $3,500.00 a month, yet I still spend my $4,000.00 a month tell me, did my reduction in revenue (tax cut) cause me to have debt? Or was it my spending habits that caused it?

In a bid to up Obama’s popularity, Michelle Obama has come out and claimed that Obama has quit smoking tobacco.
The NYTimes:
President Obama has quit smoking and has not had a cigarette in almost a year, his wife, Michelle Obama, said Tuesday.

“I’m very proud of him,’’ the first lady said.

She said she did not know exactly when Mr. Obama had quit, however.

“He never smoked a lot to begin with; I never saw him smoke,’’ Mrs. Obama said, adding that as their daughters Malia and Sasha grow older, Mr. Obama wants to be able to look them in the eyes and say truthfully that he is not a smoker. “They want to know, ‘You don’t smoke, do you, Dad?’” she said….

Hehehehe….

March 2, 2010, last annual physical:

. . . the doctor expressed concern about problems that millions of Americans share, cigarette addiction and high cholesterol.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/obama-excellent-health-quit-smoking-control-cholesterol-doctors/story?id=9985538

Next annual physical in about a month: “Why, yes, Doctor, I quit smoking………”

I doubt Obama will fool a doctor quite as easily as he does his wife.