Obama's approval rating higher than Reagan or Clinton at same point

[PoliticalChic]

Obama's approval rating is higher than Reagan's or Clinton's at the same point in their first terms.

In a different thread, a very good poster, stated that Obama's approval rating is substantially lower than Reagan's or Clinton's at the beginning of his third year. That being the reason that he could not be expected to be successful in 2012. I'm not suggesting Obama will blowout his GOP challenger, similar to what Reagan did Mondale or Clinton did Dole, but the numbers are quite different than some people think.

From January 1982-January 1983 Reagan's average approval rating was 43%
From January 1983-January 1984 Reagan's average approval rating was 45%

This week in 1994, so November 28-29, Clinton's approval rating was 43%

Obama's is currently 47%...

Welcome to the board.

Interesting post....

just wondering, I wasn't reading the papers back then, but did Reagan get the slobbering love from the MSM that this President did?

If not, do you think that could be a factor?

Foxnews didn't exist back then, nor did rightwing talk radio to any extent. Obama is beating Reagan despite those propaganda machines working 24 - 7 against him.

You are such a clever devil...you don't realize that you supported my ...subtle...point.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Welcome to the board.

Interesting post....

just wondering, I wasn't reading the papers back then, but did Reagan get the slobbering love from the MSM that this President did?

If not, do you think that could be a factor?

Foxnews didn't exist back then, nor did rightwing talk radio to any extent. Obama is beating Reagan despite those propaganda machines working 24 - 7 against him.

You are such a clever devil...you don't realize that you supported my ...subtle...point.

You apparently don't know much about 80's media.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Obama doesn't need to win over the Conservatives that hate him and would vote against him under any circumstances. He needs to win Independents, swing voters in swing, potentially tipping point states. You haters are irrelevant in that equation. Obama won about 45% of the Caucasian vote in 2008 and about 40% of the male Caucasian vote, even lower among Male WASPs, so the fact that you don't like him isn't really relevant to whether he'll win or not.

Obama is unbeatable unless this really is the 2nd great depression.

 

[Revere]

Obama doesn't need to win over the Conservatives that hate him and would vote against him under any circumstances. He needs to win Independents, swing voters in swing, potentially tipping point states. You haters are irrelevant in that equation. Obama won about 45% of the Caucasian vote in 2008 and about 40% of the male Caucasian vote, even lower among Male WASPs, so the fact that you don't like him isn't really relevant to whether he'll win or not.

Obama is unbeatable unless this really is the 2nd great depression.

If this is the best he can do, he's finished. Even Democrats know that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

In a previous thread I was making the point that I think he wins re-election in 2012 and then a Republican wins in 2016. Various reasons, a main one being I think the GOP field for 2012 is dismal. The up and comers in the party almost certainly won't run this time.

The last two success stories in beating an incumbent were Reagan over Carter and Clinton over HW Bush. CLinton and Reagan were fantastic candidates and aided by third parties, in Clinton's case an actual third party in Perot. In Reagan's, Kennedy challenging Carter. On top of that, both had a bad last year in office. A lot has to go right for a challenger to beat an incumbent for President.

I just don't see Obama being that weak or any of the potential candidates on the Republican side being that strong.

Are you kidding me? Do you honestly think the American public is going to re-elect an idiot like Obama. ROFLMAO......

Not so fast, Doggy...there is a very good reason to see the election of '12 go to Obama...

assuming the Senate goes Republican, and the numbers indicate same:

The best way to put the brakes on spending is to split the Congress and White House.

1. The two periods of fiscal responsibility in six decades were the Eisenhower and the Clinton administrations, periods during which the presidency and Congress were controlled by different parties. William A. Niskanen, “A Case For Divided Government,” A Case for Divided Government | William A. Niskanen | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary

2. The worst spending periods were those with one party in charge

a. a. 1967 and 1968, LBJ and the Democrats, spending increased 11.6% a year. Historical Tables | The White House (table 1.1)

3. The largest average decrease came in 1955 and 1956, with spending decreasing an average 4.2% a year. Eisenhower was President, with Democrats in charge in Congress. Ibid.

4. If you don’t want to see expansion of government, gridlock is good. How does that make the Progressives, who opposed checks and balances, look?

5. In 1997, the most promising budget reform in American history died aborning! President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich secretly created a bipartisan plan to permanently rein in Social Security and Medicare.

It would provide Social Security personal accounts and convert Medicare into a market-based, premium support program. The idea was for Clinton to offer the plan during his Januar 1998 State of the Union address, and Gingrich to endorse it.

What happened? Six days before the Clinton speech the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke. Steve M. Gillon, “The Pact: Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, and the Rivalry that Defined a Generation.”

 

[Ozmar]

Obama doesn't need to win over the Conservatives that hate him and would vote against him under any circumstances. He needs to win Independents, swing voters in swing, potentially tipping point states. You haters are irrelevant in that equation. Obama won about 45% of the Caucasian vote in 2008 and about 40% of the male Caucasian vote, even lower among Male WASPs, so the fact that you don't like him isn't really relevant to whether he'll win or not.

Obama is unbeatable unless this really is the 2nd great depression.

If this is the best he can do, he's finished. Even Democrats know that.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpR3mFdpqsM[/ame]

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Re: PoliticalChic:

I can't believe I'm agreeing with someone who posts at the end of every post an Ann Coulter quote, but I am.

I agree with you, divided government is generally good. The GOP will likely retain the House, take over the Senate, and lose the Presidency in 2012.

I also think Obama's second term will be solid and surprise many as A) he's truly a centrist on most issues and B) though he's a pragmatist and has more strengths than most Presidents walking in, a lack of executive leadership was a weakness. He's smart though, and by 2013 will have learned on the job how to be a great President and how to work with the GOPers.

 

[Revere]

Re: PoliticalChic:

I can't believe I'm agreeing with someone who posts at the end of every post an Ann Coulter quote, but I am.

I agree with you, divided government is generally good. The GOP will likely retain the House, take over the Senate, and lose the Presidency in 2012.

I also think Obama's second term will be solid and surprise many as A) he's truly a centrist on most issues and B) though he's a pragmatist and has more strengths than most Presidents walking in, a lack of executive leadership was a weakness. He's smart though, and by 2013 will have learned on the job how to be a great President and how to work with the GOPers.

You mean he'll need to fuck up for two more years before be learns to be a "great President?"

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Umm, well let's see. If I was grading...

I'd give Obama a B- so far. I'd give his predecessor a D-.

 

[Revere]

Permanent 10% unemployment is worth a B-?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Permanent 10% unemployment is worth a B-?

HUMM Bush had 4.9% unemployment
obama had close to 10
and he gives bush a D-
and obama a B-?
WOW welcome to the world of rdean

 

[Revere]

Name three things that make Obama a "centrist."

 

[Ozmar]

Permanent 10% unemployment is worth a B-?

B- is three grades above your average.

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Do you realize how bad the house of cards economy imploded at the very end of Bush's tenure? It was a colossal mess with very little hope of improving in the short run. When you add the fact that for better or worse, Congress was almost wholly dysfunctional, more because of the Senate than Pelosi btw, blaming Obama for high unemployment is absurd. When FDR was President check out the unemployment rate. What's your recipe for having lower unemployment today starting in January, 2009. I'll give you hindsight even. Give me a prescription, now that you know what's transpired...

That's what I thought.

 

[Revere]

Do you realize how bad the house of cards economy imploded at the very end of Bush's tenure? It was a colossal mess with very little hope of improving in the short run. When you add the fact that for better or worse, Congress was almost wholly dysfunctional, more because of the Senate than Pelosi btw, blaming Obama for high unemployment is absurd. When FDR was President check out the unemployment rate. What's your recipe for having lower unemployment today starting in January, 2009. I'll give you hindsight even. Give me a prescription, now that you know what's transpired...

That's what I thought.

FDR never got the unemployment rate below the mid to low teens. The New Deal was a failure.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Do you realize how bad the house of cards economy imploded at the very end of Bush's tenure? It was a colossal mess with very little hope of improving in the short run. When you add the fact that for better or worse, Congress was almost wholly dysfunctional, more because of the Senate than Pelosi btw, blaming Obama for high unemployment is absurd. When FDR was President check out the unemployment rate. What's your recipe for having lower unemployment today starting in January, 2009. I'll give you hindsight even. Give me a prescription, now that you know what's transpired...

That's what I thought.

Why shouldn't obama and the democrats get most oif the blame? After all the failure in the economy started when the democrats pet projects begain faultering, and the democrats contgrolled congress in 2007 and obama was a senator during that time.

 

[Ozmar]

Do you realize how bad the house of cards economy imploded at the very end of Bush's tenure? It was a colossal mess with very little hope of improving in the short run. When you add the fact that for better or worse, Congress was almost wholly dysfunctional, more because of the Senate than Pelosi btw, blaming Obama for high unemployment is absurd. When FDR was President check out the unemployment rate. What's your recipe for having lower unemployment today starting in January, 2009. I'll give you hindsight even. Give me a prescription, now that you know what's transpired...

That's what I thought.

FDR never got the unemployment rate below the mid to low teens. The New Deal was a failure.

The Tea Party didn't pick up all the seat it intended. The Tea Party was a failure.

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Completely ridiculous.

The economy collapsed disastrously under Republican leadership twice, the Great Depression and in 2008. You want to blame FDR and Obama, okay.

I'm sure you'll point to Reagan, which is another absurd point as Reagan hadn't figured anything out as far as fixing the economy at this point in his Presidency and his policies implemented thereafter are a primary reason, we're in the mess we're in now.

 

[Ozmar]

Do you realize how bad the house of cards economy imploded at the very end of Bush's tenure? It was a colossal mess with very little hope of improving in the short run. When you add the fact that for better or worse, Congress was almost wholly dysfunctional, more because of the Senate than Pelosi btw, blaming Obama for high unemployment is absurd. When FDR was President check out the unemployment rate. What's your recipe for having lower unemployment today starting in January, 2009. I'll give you hindsight even. Give me a prescription, now that you know what's transpired...

That's what I thought.

Why shouldn't obama and the democrats get most oif the blame? After all the failure in the economy started when the democrats pet projects begain faultering, and the democrats contgrolled congress in 2007 and obama was a senator during that time.

Funny, I thought the economy started failing about a year into the second invasion...

 

[Revere]

Completely ridiculous.

The economy collapsed disastrously under Republican leadership twice, the Great Depression and in 2008. You want to blame FDR and Obama, okay.

I'm sure you'll point to Reagan, which is another absurd point as Reagan hadn't figured anything out as far as fixing the economy at this point in his Presidency and his policies implemented thereafter are a primary reason, we're in the mess we're in now.

In neither case did the Democrat President reverse the collapse.

Reagan stopped Carter.

Nuff said.