Another new low for Obama:
Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. That’s the lowest level of total approval yet measured for Obama. Fifty-three percent (53%) now disapprove. Eighty-one percent (81%) of Democrats approve while 83% of Republicans disapprove. As for those not affiliated with either major party, 66% disapprove.
This is including one day after the canonization of Kennedy….no push upward from that embarrassing spectacle.
A savvy friend thinks 2010 will be a repeat of 1994. It’s obviously too early to say that, but these numbers can’t be encouraging for the Administration.
He’s not alone in that feeling:
Experts see double-digit Dem losses
After an August recess marked by raucous town halls, troubling polling data and widespread anecdotal evidence of a volatile electorate, the small universe of political analysts who closely follow House races is predicting moderate to heavy Democratic losses in 2010.
Some of the most prominent and respected handicappers can now envision an election in which Democrats suffer double-digit losses in the House — not enough to provide the 40 seats necessary to return the GOP to power but enough to put them within striking distance.
Top political analyst Charlie Cook, in a special August 20 update to subscribers, wrote that “the situation this summer has slipped completely out of control for President Obama and congressional Democrats.”
“Many veteran congressional election watchers, including Democratic ones, report an eerie sense of déjà vu, with a consensus forming that the chances of Democratic losses going higher than 20 seats is just as good as the chances of Democratic losses going lower than 20 seats,” he wrote.
Great news to hear and feel common sense coming back to politics after a surreal 2008 in which a mortal man was made out to be the new messiah and everyone….including Republicans believed it. While it’s heartening to see this kind of news we SHOULD NOT let up. Don’t take this as a sign that we can just now sit on our hands and skate through the next year. No….we have to be vocal and strong against the Socialist ideals being pushed on this country.
See author page
There should be no rest until we get rid of every single incumbent Democrat…and a lot of the Republicans, too. Let’s get them all a vacation – for good – from public office.
By the way – how many vacations has obama had now in his short time in office?
Bu… Bu… But…. Thom… he’s worked sooooo hard!!!He’s exhausted from all that campaigning and photo ops. He must also have jet lag from racing all over the globe – placating our enemies and pi$$ing off our (former) allies! It’s really hard work screwing the People!
Right you are, FedUp – I must apologize – he has been working hard indeed! 😉
A pox on him AND his party!!!
White House Reveals Obama Is Bipolar, Has Entered Depressive Phase
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/white_house_reveals_obama_is?utm_source=b-section
MUST SEE VIDEO
At least SOME of the American people still know a thug when they see one.
When Obama gets down to the Bush “lower than a snakes belly” poll rating of 32% then we Liberals will star worrying. Compare Apples to Apples and the country still approves of Obama nearly twice as much as they did Bush, who went from 92% approval down to 32% , an unprecedented drop and a foolish pushing of the country to where most folks didn’t want it to go, and reviled and shunned by his own party when McCain/Palin were running trying to copy the “change” mantra. The reason Obama got elected was because of anti Bush sentiments across the board, plain and simple, and the Republican party couldn’t put enough distance between itself and Bush, even though, lord knows they tried. Bush is gone now, and we are a better country for it, thus sayeth the polls, like the ones you cite here.
ThomNJ:
It would be hard to beat the amount of days Bush spent on vacation his first year in office:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/august01/2001-08-03-bush-vacation.htm
30 days of vacation fun for Bush in August of 2001, and 11 days after he decided to come back to work, almost 3000 Americans were killed in the 911 attack because Bush and Cheney were asleep at the switch, not doing their jobs and on vacation. The warnings were sent to Bush and he ignored them.
But, in Bush’s defense, Bush and Cheney did start doing a better job after that incident and the last 7 years in office they kept us safe…..even though Bush said after that that capturing Bin Laden wasn’t something he was thinking about that much:
And a classis freudian slip that shows that Osama was not top priority to Bush after he took responsibility for killing almost 3000 Amercans:
Obama or almost anybody is a damn improvement after what Bush has presided over.
I, personally, don’t have a problem with Presidential “vacations”…. for in fact, they are never on vacation. They are on duty 24/7 and their work and Oval Office travel with them…. save, perhaps, on the golf course. At that point, they are like a doctor “on call”, because there is never a point in time where they cannot be reached.
Therefore I find no need to defend Bush’s time at Camp David or his Crawford Ranch, nor chastise Obama’s vacations now. I might, however, find it offensive to move the earth, security details, Air Force One and Oval Office merely to fly to NYC to take the wife to a play and dinner in these economic times.
We can only hope obama takes more and longer vacations as his one term presidency comes to an end. The less he does to ruin our country the less cleaning up will need to be done when we through this unqualified idiot out of the Whitehouse. What is sad is that our MSM failed to be fair and inform us of who this guy really was and how little qualifications he had to be President. From many Americans perspective, these ratings represent the best news we have seen sense this idiot took office.
Mooseburger: Am I not correct in assuming that the 9/11 attack was more Clintons fault than Bushs? Didn’t the CIA offer Bin Laden to Clinton and Clinton passed on it? Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t blame Bush for something he had nothing to do with. He made mistakes. I will not defend some that he made, but count on this: CLINTON AND THE DEMOCRATS WERE MORE RESPONSIBLE FOR 9/11 THAN BUSH OR A REPUBLICAN!
Madalyn
Ah yes, moosebrain demonstrates classic leftist amnesia. Well it’s pathological denial to be more accurate.
He would like us to believe that Clinton wasn’t in office for 8 years dismantling our military and castrating our intelligence agencies. He did next to nothing about terrorism and gave up a golden opportunity to grab OBL. Instead he wants to blame Bush who had less than a year on the job and was delayed getting into office thanks to the dems.
You leftists are seriously mentally ill.
@Madalyn:
Well, sort of.
The CIA had OBL in their sights multiple times and Clinton declined to allow them to take the shot.
Prior to that, OBL was offered up to Clinton by Sudan (and others?) but Clinton declined to accept.
Clinton had multiple opportunities to sequester/eliminate OBL but didn’t follow through.
The Left repeatedly opts to ignore the inconvenient facts about what was happening in the years leading up to 9/11, choosing instead to focus on the eight short months that Bush was in office.
Exit question for whoever wants it: When Sandy Burger stole/destroyed the documents from the Nat’l Archives did anyone ever tell us definitively what information those papers contained?
Aye – Instead of going into detail I kind of lumped it all into one sentence. I didn’t have all the facts, just knew OBL was offered to Clinton and Clinton declined. Of course, a democrat couldn’t be blamed for 9/11. That would cast aspertions on their credibility. I had been a registered Democrat since the early 60’s, and prior to this election, I switched to Republican. Only because I could not in good conscience support a party that tried to intimidate innocent children and harbor criminals as candidates. That was the final straw.
Keep up the good work. You guys are setting the record straight on so many fronts.
Madalyn
Back on FA after day filled with those annoying tasks like making a living…. some later thoughts on this.
You have an odd standard, moose. And certainly not a salt lick of logic based on history for your train of thought.
Bush the elder had a 56% end of term approval rating after one term, and lost to Clinton.
Gerald Ford had a 53% end of term rating after a partial term, and still lost to Carter…. who ended his term with a 34% rating and handily lost to Reagan in a *genuine* (not Obama math) landslide.
So if you’re thinking that anything above “32%” is safe, rest cozy in your fantasy cocoon. To quote one of your own who has it right…”It’s the economy, stupid”.
And we won’t even go into the absurdity that a terrorist attack like 911, years in planning, was solely the responsibility of a POTUS in office seven and a half months. There is ample blame to go around… and I assure you, the Dems in Congress, Jamie Gorelick, Clinton and others are busy washing their political hands via the media.
Come on, oh FA founding father. You can’t be posting stuff that’s above Canuck FA spamster, weeweemaryann’s intellect. You must remember that she has credited *me* for Charlie Cook’s predictions, with a promise to return and grovel after the midterms. Dang.. mistaken for Charlie Cook. Thought I was operating at a higher pay grade…. :0)