SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (332299)11/5/2009 8:19:05 AM
From: FJB  Respond to of 794001
 
She might have got it from the Huffington Post...



To: Brumar89 who wrote (332299)11/5/2009 9:33:51 AM
From: FJB  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 794001
 
In U.S., Majority Now Say Obama’s Policies "Mostly Liberal"
Fewer than half believe he has kept his election promises

by Lydia SaadPage
November 4, 2009
gallup.com

PRINCETON, NJ -- A majority of Americans now see President Barack Obama as governing from the left. Specifically, 54% say his policies as president have been mostly liberal while 34% call them mostly moderate. This contrasts with public expectations right after Obama's election a year ago, when as many expected him to be moderate as to be liberal.



"While most Americans say it is important to them that President Obama keep the promises he made during the campaign (82%), far fewer, 48%, currently believe he has done so."This finding comes from a USA Today/Gallup survey, conducted Oct. 16-19, which offers several indications that Obama's public image has changed since his election last November. Much of that change is inauspicious for Obama.

Perhaps related to the re-evaluation of Obama's ideological orientation, fewer Americans today than in April say Obama is keeping the promises he made during the campaign.

While most Americans say it is important to them that President Obama keep the promises he made during the campaign (82%), far fewer, 48%, currently believe he has done so. This represents a slide in support for the president on this measure since April, when nearly two-thirds of Americans (65%) said he was keeping his promises.



The decline in the percentage saying Obama has kept his promises is seen among all three major parties, dropping from 92% to 77% among Democrats, from 54% to 41% among independents, and from 45% to 22% among Republicans. To some degree, of course, the longer a president serves, the more opportunities there are for people to see him as breaking promises, which may account for some of this shift since the early months of Obama's presidency.

A majority of Americans (56%) say it is very important to them that Obama keep his promises and another 26% call this somewhat important. A much smaller 16% say that keeping his word is either not that important to them or not important at all.

Dampened Favorable Rating a Key Indicator

Obama's favorable rating, now 55%, is a more fundamental indicator of the post-election change in his image. Immediately after the election, 68% of Americans viewed Obama favorably. The figure rose to 78% around the time of his inauguration and registered in the mid- to high 60s from March through July. However, an early October Gallup survey showed the figure dropping to 56%, similar to the latest finding.



A comparison of the July and October ratings shows that Obama's image has fallen the most among Republicans and independents. While Gallup sees less change among Democrats, the finding that fewer than 90% now view Obama favorably (and 11% view him unfavorably) is noteworthy.

Among Democrats by ideology, Obama's favorability rating has fallen mostly among moderate Democrats, from 97% to 84%, with a smaller dip among conservative Democrats, 78% to 72%. It has held steady at 97% among liberal Democrats.

This erosion of support for Obama among moderate Democrats (as well as among Republicans and independents) may correspond with the increasing percentage of Americans perceiving that Obama is governing from the left.

Bottom Line

President Obama is not enjoying the same broad appeal and centrist image that he did in the afterglow of his election last November. Although a majority of Americans continue to view him favorably, this percentage has declined. The common perception that he would govern as a moderate has given way to a heightened belief that Obama's policies are mostly liberal. (Interpreted in the light of Americans' generally conservative leanings, this could be a problem for Obama politically.) And whereas in April most Americans believed he was sticking to the promises he made during the campaign, fewer than half now say that's the case.

These findings are reinforced by Obama's subdued job approval rating, which has been consistently tracking in the low 50s over the last several months. They also conform with Gallup findings reported earlier this week indicating that, compared to a year ago, Americans have generally lost hope that Obama can heal political divisions in the country or control federal spending, and are less optimistic about his ability to accomplish a number of other important goals.

As long as Obama's overall job approval rating remains above 50%, these setbacks would seem to be tolerable in a political sense -- perhaps indicating nothing more than the cost of bold leadership at a difficult time for the country. But should he fall well below that important threshold in public support over a sustained period, the findings may point to weaknesses Obama may need to address.

Sign up for Gallup e-mail alerts or RSS feeds

Get Gallup news on Facebook and Twitter

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,521 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Oct. 16-19, 2009, including an oversample of 408 blacks, consisting of 102 interviews done as part of the random national sample and 306 interviews with blacks who had previously participated in national Gallup polls and agreed to be re-interviewed at a later date. The data from the national sample and re-interviews are combined and weighted to be demographically representative of the national adult population in the United States and to reflect the proper proportion of blacks in the overall population. For results based on this sample of national adults, the maximum margin of error is ±3 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (332299)11/5/2009 9:39:38 AM
From: FJB  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 794001
 
Political Climate for 2010 Not as Favorable to Democrats

Maintain edge in party strength measures, but public dissatisfied with nation’s course

November 4, 2009
gallup.com

by Jeffrey M. JonesPRINCETON, NJ -- The 2010 election cycle begins in a political climate that is shaping up to be not as favorable to the Democratic Party as the 2006 and 2008 elections were. Having capitalized on broad public discontent with the course of the nation in general and the Republican Party in particular to win control of the White House and both houses of Congress, the party faces the 2010 midterm elections trying to preserve its recent gains.

Gallup's generic congressional ballot provides a summary measure of current voting intentions for Congress. This currently suggests the 2010 midterm elections could be highly competitive, and possibly a strong Republican year if usual turnout patterns prevail.

"First-term presidents who had sub-50% approval ratings at the midterms -- including Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton -- saw their parties suffer large congressional seat losses."Gallup regularly tracks several measures that give an indication of the political climate and can provide insight into the reasons for Americans' current congressional voting intentions. Although Democrats retain a significant advantage in party affiliation, that advantage has dwindled over the course of this year. Also, there are ominous signs for the majority party in terms of near-record-low congressional job approval and continuing low national satisfaction ratings.

Presidential Job Approval. It is well-documented that the president's party is usually vulnerable to losing congressional seats in midterm elections, though there have been exceptions such as in the 1998 and 2002 elections. Unpopular presidents tend to suffer greater losses, and popular presidents are able to minimize these or even help achieve gains. George W. Bush experienced both outcomes, with Republican gains in 2002 when he was popular and heavy Republican losses in 2006 when he was not.

The Democrats will contest the 2010 elections with their fellow partisan, Barack Obama, in the White House. Right now, Obama's approval ratings are middling, in the low 50s, suggesting he would not be able to minimize Democratic losses to a great degree if the elections were held today. Further erosion of Obama's popularity between now and next November could prove damaging to the Democratic Party. First-term presidents who had sub-50% approval ratings at the midterms -- including Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton -- saw their parties suffer large congressional seat losses. In contrast, a recovery in Obama's approval rating -- particularly to above 60% -- could limit Democratic losses.



Outlook: After a strong start, Obama's approval ratings have slumped, though they remain at or above 50%. Other recent presidents who took office during difficult economic times -- Carter, Reagan, and Clinton -- were below 50% at the time of the midterms, and saw their parties perform poorly in the elections. Obama hopes to avoid a similar fate.

Satisfaction With the Way Things Are Going in the Country/Ratings of the Economy. These ratings are less overtly political than presidential job approval, but have a similar relationship to election outcomes. Lower satisfaction levels and poorer ratings of the economy are associated with poorer performances for the president's party in midterm elections. Gallup has a slightly longer history of asking about satisfaction than about the economy in election years.



At times, presidential approval ratings and satisfaction or economic ratings have been out of step. For example, in 1990 and 2002, the Republican Party was able to overcome either a low satisfaction rating (1990) or downbeat economic perceptions (2002) to achieve a relatively strong election showing, likely due to the popularity of the presidents at those times. Thus, presidential approval is probably the most consequential of the three measures.

In Gallup's most recent update, 26% of Americans said they were satisfied with the way things are going in the country. And recent Gallup Daily economic tracking has found only about 11% of Americans rating the economy as either excellent or good. Both measures are down significantly from what Gallup measured just before the 2006 elections and, with Democrats now in power, neither measure appears promising for the party looking ahead to 2010.

Outlook: Unless the economy turns around dramatically over the next year, the Democrats are likely to face an electorate that is very unhappy with the course of the nation and the state of the economy. But they may be able to overcome these factors to some degree if Obama can maintain or increase his popularity.

Congressional Job Approval. Often in recent decades, one party has occupied the White House and the other has controlled Congress, somewhat blurring the degree to which either party can be held accountable for the state of the nation in midterm elections. Generally, it appears the president's party is more important to voters, with that party losing seats in seven of the last nine midterm elections. By contrast, the majority party in Congress has lost seats in four of the last nine midterms.

But Congress' performance is hardly irrelevant to voters. Low congressional approval ratings have been associated with greater congressional seat turnover in midterm elections and higher approval ratings with less change, regardless of which party controls the legislative branch. The magic number appears to be a 40% approval rating for Congress, with seat losses minimized when approval exceeds that level and seat losses generally large when approval is below that figure.



Congressional approval is currently well below that mark, at 21%, and is near the 23% approval found during the 1994 elections, which saw Democrats lose their legislative majority.

Outlook: Americans' ratings of Congress hit new lows last year. After rebounding in the early part of 2009, they are back down to 21% -- just seven points above the all-time low, which would usually suggest higher seat turnover. With Democrats in control of both the presidency and Congress, they are clearly vulnerable in this respect. If there is added sentiment to "throw the bums out" -- which Gallup will measure next year by asking whether members of Congress deserve re-election -- that would only make the situation worse.

Party ID. Shifts in national party support, as measured by the proportion of Americans who identify with or lean to either of the major political parties, can portend a better or a worse year for a party in midterm election years. It obviously is better for a party to go into an election with more supporters than the opposing party. That is certainly not a guarantee of victory, but if both parties' supporters turn out at the same rate, the party with more supporters will win.

Gallup has regularly measured leaned party identification since 1993. Since then, Democrats have gained seats in the two midterm election years when they had a substantial advantage in party support over Republicans in the third quarter (1998 and 2006), and lost seats in the two years (1994 and 2002) when that advantage was not significant. This suggests Democrats need a fairly large cushion in party support to counteract the Republicans' usual advantage in voter turnout.

Currently, Democrats enjoy a significant advantage in support over Republicans, with 48% of Americans in the third quarter of 2009 identifying as or leaning Democratic and 42% identifying as or leaning Republican. However, the Democrats' advantage has shrunk over the course of this year.

It is not unusual for the party advantage in affiliation to change in the year leading up to the midterm elections, so it is far from certain that Democrats will maintain the six-point advantage they averaged in the third quarter of this year. In fact, the Democratic advantage in party affiliation shrank in the year leading up to the midterm elections in 1994, 1998, and 2002. In 2006, the opposite was the case, as the Democratic advantage grew.

Outlook: Democratic supporters continue to outnumber Republican supporters -- clearly a benefit to the Democratic Party. A key will be whether that advantage continues to shrink, or whether Democrats can hold, if not increase, their current edge.

Turnout. Party support as measured by party affiliation, and voter preferences as measured by the generic ballot are only part of the equation in determining an election's outcome. The other component is voter turnout. If Republicans are more successful in getting their voters out to the polls -- as is typical -- they can overcome a Democratic advantage in support.

Gallup assesses turnout using its "likely voter" model, but does not usually do this until the fall of the election year.

For example, in the final 2002 pre-election poll, the Democrats led the Republicans by five points on the generic ballot among all registered voters, but trailed the Republicans by six points among likely voters. The Republicans won the national party vote for the House by five points that year.

Since 1970, Gallup has seen shifts to the Republicans in each midterm election year (after taking into account probable turnout when applying its likely voter model), with the change in the Democratic-Republican gap as little as 1 point (1978) to as many as 11 points (2002). In nine midterm elections since 1970 (Gallup did not make a final estimate in 1986), the average shift in the gap in the Republicans' favor has been about 5 points.

Bottom Line

Since 2006, not much has changed for the better in terms of Americans' satisfaction with the way things are going in the country, perceptions of the economy, or approval of the job Congress is doing. What has changed is that Democrats are now in control of both houses of Congress and the presidency after voter dissatisfaction led to steep Republican losses in 2006 and 2008. If national conditions do not improve considerably between now and next November, Democrats appear vulnerable to suffering heavy seat losses of their own. Two factors that are likely to be crucial in determining voter preferences for Congress in 2010 will be President Obama's job approval rating, and whether Democrats' advantage in party support continues to shrink.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (332299)11/5/2009 9:45:47 AM
From: miraje4 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 794001
 
I knew that Pelosio said it, I didn't realize she was the liar who made it up originally.

Got the following in an email. It's claimed to be true, though I can't vouch for that. It sounds reasonable enough..

Dumb as a box of Rocks

A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE OF THE KIND OF REPRESENTATION WE HAVE IN CONGRESS, TRUE STORY:

A noted psychiatrist was a guest speaker at an academic function where Nancy Pelosi happened to appear. Ms Pelosi took the opportunity to schmooze the good doctor a bit and asked him a question with which he was most at ease.

'Would you mind telling me, Doctor,' she asked, 'how you detect a mental deficiency in somebody who appears completely normal?'

'Nothing is easier,' he replied. 'You ask a simple question which anyone should answer with no trouble. If the person hesitates, that puts you on the track..'

'What sort of question?' asked Pelosi.

Well, you might ask, 'Captain Cook made three trips around the world and died during one of them. Which one?''

Pelosi thought a moment, and then said with a nervous laugh, 'You wouldn't happen to have another example would you? I must confess I don't know much about history.'



To: Brumar89 who wrote (332299)11/5/2009 10:19:25 AM
From: Alan Smithee1 Recommendation  Respond to of 794001
 
Our wondrous MSM, punked by a hare-brain

Dennis Miller remarked last night about her "sub-reptilian intelligence."

He also said Obama's coattails were shorter than a naked midget's.