44% want Bush back over Obama...

[posty]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/120...es_the_gap.html

 

Perhaps the greatest measure of Obama's declining support is that just 50% of voters now say they prefer having him as President to George W. Bush, with 44% saying they'd rather have his predecessor. Given the horrendous approval ratings Bush showed during his final term that's somewhat of a surprise and an indication that voters are increasingly placing the blame on Obama for the country's difficulties instead of giving him space because of the tough situation he inherited. The closeness in the Obama/Bush numbers also has implications for the 2010 elections. Using the Bush card may not be particularly effective for Democrats anymore, which is good news generally for Republicans and especially ones like Rob Portman who are running for office and have close ties to the former President.

Edited December 10, 2009 by posty

[evil_gop_liars]

The best part.

 

 

Finally 20% of voters, including 35% of Republicans, support impeaching Obama for his actions so far. I'm not clear exactly what 'high crimes and misdemeanors' they are using to justify that position but there may be a certain segment of voters on both the right and the left these days that simply think the President doing things they don't agree with is grounds for removal from office

 

[wiegie]

I question the representativeness of the poll. They asked the people who they voted for for president and 47% said Obama, 45% said McCain and 8% said someone else/don't remember. But in the actual election last year, 53% of people voted for Obama and 46% voted for McCain.

Edited December 10, 2009 by wiegie

[detlef]

Since the blog didn't cite any info about the poll itself (how many, who they polled, etc), I decided to google "obama vs bush" figuring perhaps some other news source had a story on this poll. I stopped looking after page 3

[dmarc117]

I question the representativeness of the poll. They asked the people who they voted for for president and 47% said Obama, 45% said McCain and 8% said someone else/don't remember. But in the actual election last year, 53% of people voted for Obama and 46% voted for McCain.

 

 

some are embarrassed to say that they voted for obama?

[Ursa Majoris]

Perhaps the greatest measure of Obama's declining support is that just 50% of voters now say they prefer having him as President to George W. Bush, with 44% saying they'd rather have his predecessor.

I'd say this is more a reflection on the mental ability of nearly half the American public, who have the memory of a rock and the critical faculties of a demented gibbon.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

I'd say this is more a reflection on the mental ability of nearly half the American public, who have the memory of a rock and the critical faculties of a demented gibbon.

 

elitist

[Redfish]

I'd say this is more a reflection on the mental ability of nearly half the American public, who have the memory of a rock and the critical faculties of a demented gibbon.

 

"I want to know what you've got against the gibbons!"

 

"Yes, they're very pretty............."

[The Mucca]

Since the blog didn't cite any info about the poll itself (how many, who they polled, etc), I decided to google "obama vs bush" figuring perhaps some other news source had a story on this poll. I stopped looking after page 3

 

Try Obama/Bush poll

[wiegie]

some are embarrassed to say that they voted for obama?

I figured it was more likely they were high when they voted and really have no recollection of what they were doing.

[yo mama]

some are embarrassed to say that they voted for obama?

I'm not embarrassed I voted for him, just disappointed that he:

- made reforming health care his main goal; and

- is trying to deficit spend his way out of a recession that was largely the result of terrible debt management in the first place.

 

I'm either happy with, or can live with, pretty much everything else.

[Savage Beatings]

I would vote for any alternative to Obama, but I certainly wouldn't want to put Bush back in office either... I choose door number 3.

[TimC]

President Palin has a nice ring to it, doesn't it Savage? At least if she is a horrible President (like every other President since Reagan), she isn't sore on the eyes.

[yo mama]

President Palin has a nice ring to it, doesn't it Savage? At least if she is a horrible President (like every other President since Reagan), she isn't sore on the eyes.

Her presidency would add at least another 10,000 jobs to the comedy industry alone.

[wiegie]

- is trying to deficit spend his way out of a recession that was largely the result of terrible debt management in the first place.

The government's fiscal situation has nothing to do with financial situation that led to the recession. They are pretty much completely unrelated. It would be like saying "I am against taking tylenol because my friend OD'd on heroin."

[detlef]

Try Obama/Bush poll

Much better. Guess I've got to bone up on my google skills. None the less, most of the links are just other blogs referencing the same one linked by the OP.

 

Regardless, should we be remotely surprised by this? In November, Obama beat McCain by 7%. About 1 minute into his presidency, the entire GOP basically pledged to dig it's heels in and fight tooth and nail against anything and everything Obama. The same poll shows that only 30% of the GOP approves of Obama ramping up in Afghanistan. Do you think McCain would have pulled a higher rating among them if he pushed harder there? I sure as hell do.

 

Now, shocker of shockers, that same GOP, when polled has narrowed the gap all the way to 6%.

[bpwallace49]

Much better. Guess I've got to bone up on my google skills. None the less, most of the links are just other blogs referencing the same one linked by the OP.

 

Regardless, should we be remotely surprised by this? In November, Obama beat McCain by 7%. About 1 minute into his presidency, the entire GOP basically pledged to dig it's heels in and fight tooth and nail against anything and everything Obama. The same poll shows that only 30% of the GOP approves of Obama ramping up in Afghanistan. Do you think McCain would have pulled a higher rating among them if he pushed harder there? I sure as hell do.

 

Now, shocker of shockers, that same GOP, when polled has narrowed the gap all the way to 6%.

 

Exactly correct.

 

Partisan politics at its worst . . . you rarely see the Dems have such detailed polls the other way because they cant agree on ANYTHING .

 

At least the right can march in lockstep to anything their party blindly tells them to do . . something the left has never been able to do . . .

[yo mama]

The government's fiscal situation has nothing to do with financial situation that led to the recession. They are pretty much completely unrelated. It would be like saying "I am against taking tylenol because my friend OD'd on heroin."

I didn't mean to limit my comment to only poor federal debt management. One of the primary drivers of our recession is reduction in consumer spending, which is being driven by: (1) poor consumer debt managment; and (2) more restricted access to financing for the bulk of America. My "poor debt management" comment was intended to broadly include individuals, corporate America, and state/local governments, all of whom drive our economy with their consumption.

 

And even if poor National debt management did not lead to this recession (though I'm not willing to concede the two are as unrelated as you hyperbolicly suggest), poor National debt management is affecting our ability to respond and recover as efficiently and nimbly as we might have been able to if the country was, for example, effectively debt-free.

 

Borrowing from Bob LeClair, there was a recent Policy Forum sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia entitled, "Policy Lessons from the Economic and Financial Crisis." One of the presentations was "This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly." The authors looked back at a long string of crises involving banking, currency, sovereign defaults, inflation, and the stock market.

 

Some of the conclusions are at least tangentially applicable to what you and I are talking about here:

1. Financial crises are protracted affairs – they generally last much longer than expected and recovery takes place more slowly. People are generally wrong in thinking that: (1) the downturn will be short-lived, or (2) they could do something that would bring the crisis to a quick end. Neither seems to be the case as the average length of the crisis-recovery cycle seems to be almost six years.

 

2. Efforts to stimulate the economy are not always successful, but almost always result in a considerable increase in government debt.

 

3. Periods of significantly increasing government debt are usually followed by periods of slow economic growth. While the rationale of increasing government spending taking the place of consumer spending goes back to Lord Keynes and the Great Depression, the increased spending doesn't seem to usher in a period of renewed growth.

 

4. Periods of increasing government debt are not always followed by periods of high inflation.

 

So I stand by my initial proposition that poor debt management (governmental, corporate, and individual) were causes to, and hinder recovery from, our current recession.

[Hugh 0ne]

The government's fiscal situation has nothing to do with financial situation that led to the recession. They are pretty much completely unrelated. It would be like saying "I am against taking tylenol because my friend OD'd on heroin."

 

Oh. Snap.

[The Irish Doggy]

The government's fiscal situation has nothing to do with financial situation that led to the recession. They are pretty much completely unrelated. It would be like saying "I am against taking tylenol because my friend OD'd on heroin."

 

I'm sorry to hear about your friend... and your headache.

[Square]

I didn't mean to limit my comment to only poor federal debt management. One of the primary drivers of our recession is reduction in consumer spending, which is being driven by: (1) poor consumer debt managment; and (2) more restricted access to financing for the bulk of America. My "poor debt management" comment was intended to broadly include individuals, corporate America, and state/local governments, all of whom drive our economy with their consumption.

 

And even if poor National debt management did not lead to this recession (though I'm not willing to concede the two are as unrelated as you hyperbolicly suggest), poor National debt management is affecting our ability to respond and recover as efficiently and nimbly as we might have been able to if the country was, for example, effectively debt-free.

 

Borrowing from Bob LeClair, there was a recent Policy Forum sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia entitled, "Policy Lessons from the Economic and Financial Crisis." One of the presentations was "This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly." The authors looked back at a long string of crises involving banking, currency, sovereign defaults, inflation, and the stock market.

 

Some of the conclusions are at least tangentially applicable to what you and I are talking about here:

1. Financial crises are protracted affairs – they generally last much longer than expected and recovery takes place more slowly. People are generally wrong in thinking that: (1) the downturn will be short-lived, or (2) they could do something that would bring the crisis to a quick end. Neither seems to be the case as the average length of the crisis-recovery cycle seems to be almost six years.

 

2. Efforts to stimulate the economy are not always successful, but almost always result in a considerable increase in government debt.

 

3. Periods of significantly increasing government debt are usually followed by periods of slow economic growth. While the rationale of increasing government spending taking the place of consumer spending goes back to Lord Keynes and the Great Depression, the increased spending doesn't seem to usher in a period of renewed growth.

 

4. Periods of increasing government debt are not always followed by periods of high inflation.

 

So I stand by my initial proposition that poor debt management (governmental, corporate, and individual) were causes to, and hinder recovery from, our current recession.

Well said. When you are broke (or in debt) it limits your options and stability (whether it's governmental or personal). I'd vote for any President that actually wanted to be fiscally responsible and had solid plans to stop throwing money into the fire. Mccain wasn't perfect but I was happy that even if he won (which would have been it's own sh!t storm) he at least was solid on not blowing money on pork projects that named streets after himself.

 

Anyway, back to the topic. I think there are reasonable reasons to be unhappy with the President but wanting GW back is coocoo for coco puffs

[WaterMan]

Much better. Guess I've got to bone up on my google skills. None the less, most of the links are just other blogs referencing the same one linked by the OP.

 

Regardless, should we be remotely surprised by this? In November, Obama beat McCain by 7%. About 1 minute into his presidency, the entire GOP basically pledged to dig it's heels in and fight tooth and nail against anything and everything Obama. The same poll shows that only 30% of the GOP approves of Obama ramping up in Afghanistan. Do you think McCain would have pulled a higher rating among them if he pushed harder there? I sure as hell do.

 

Now, shocker of shockers, that same GOP, when polled has narrowed the gap all the way to 6%.

 

I'm sorry that detlef dismantled your title of this thread posty.

[bpwallace49]

There is a GREAT article in newsweek about the "Decline of Empires" and how the US has been on that track for almost a decade . . .

[The Mucca]

There is a GREAT article in newsweek about the "Decline of Empires" and how the US has been on that track for almost a decade . . .

 

 

Time to bone up on my Chinese

[Yukon Cornelius]

There is a GREAT article in newsweek about the "Decline of Empires" and how the US has been on that track for almost a decade . . .

history repeats itself many times over.