Community | October 11, 2009 | 101 comments

4 Recent Polls Show Obama Going Strong

Image
neocongo
The media is lagging in reporting it, but Obama's approval ratings are heading back up where they belong. 4 recent polls supporting this and each at 56% are here:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_health_care_100909.pdf
scroll down for that 2nd one

http://media.mcclatchydc.com/smedia/2009/10/06/17/s151-Rankin-IPSOSpoll.source.p...

and finally
http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK/AP-GfK%20Poll%20political%20only%20topline%201006...

These are approval ratings and some of these sites list a lot of different polls so look for APPROVAL. Thank you dasheight, @ Daily Kos for doing the legwork.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/11/792228/-Obamas-Poll-Numbers-Going-Up-Ev...(and-MSM-Ignores-It)
  1. groups:
    Community,   Current Tonight,   US Politics,   Tuff E Nuff,   3 more
  2. tags:
    News Obama Polls And 2 more
  3. recommended by:
    current89,
    eldamon
  4.     
    |

101 comments // 4 Recent Polls Show Obama Going Strong

  • telcod
    • 0
      telcod  
    • to eldamon: Thanks for the walk down poll lane and the brief, but "cogent" insights. Now lets take a look at real popularity; there was Hitler and Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan. Maybe we should, as my sainted mother used to say, "Consider the source." Not the pollsters, but the people being polled. These are same people that went along with the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and the notion that we always have good intentions and tell the truth. These are the people who gave us Reagan and Clinton and Schwarzenegger and W Bush and now Obama. Who cares what the poles indicate? All Obama has done so far is be a catalyst for bring good old American racism out of the closet. When you poll lazy and ignorant people, who cares what the results are? God weeps at His creations. If you are a "real" Christian, "You gonna have some explaining, Lucy." (Ricky Ricardo) Then, again, we are the greatest nation on earth. We like our health care providers. We have the highest standard of living in the world. We live in a democracy. We are better than anyone else. Women are almost equal to men. Happiness is a warm gun. Communism didn't work, so that means capitalism is great. We all have the opportunity to become rich beyond our wildest expectation, except for the lazy. You are puppets and dullards. The dictionary describes the belief in things which are not true as delusional. Once again on a daily basis it is down the rabbit hole, Alice.

    • 2 years ago
  • Ragan
    • 0
      Ragan  
    • The proof that Americans know just what is happening to the country and just what Obama really is and what and who does he represent. There is a hundred books and videos that tell the story of the Banks, The Money, The debt, and the bank profits and where do they come from. What is the story of the central banks and the circuit tom Obama and Geitner and Summers. Robert Rubin of Goldman Sachs is the boss of Summers and Geitner and there is this loop to The Oval office to Geitner and Summers and to Goldman Sachs and on to JP Morgan Chase etc. These are the true leaders of the USA.

    • 2 years ago
  • kennymotown
  • telcod
    • 0
      telcod  
    • Forget the Republicans and forget the Democrats. Time to move on before they kill us all or our children have to move to Mexico to find a decent job. Haven't seen things so dark since the time we actually considered using weapons to "solve" our disputes.

    • 2 years ago
  • JohnA
  • RFIDemocracy
  • Ihatethemall
  • hunzedog
  • RFIDemocracy
  • Varex_Sythe
    • 0
      Varex_Sythe  
    • hunzedog:

      Possibly, but Bush had 9/11 behind him. Such an event is extremely unifying, especially when you make a color coded terror level chart and bump it up to the high levels whenever you feel that your numbers are slipping.

    • 2 years ago
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  
    • Haven't taken a statistics class yet? The sampling size is too small to generalize the results. Also in some of the polls, the interviewees are weighted.

    • 2 years ago
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  
    • These polls are highly statistically valid based on common, modern polling methods, although Gallup normally leans right. 4 polls finding precisely the same figure is HIGHLY significant. I am afraid you are left simply to deal with it.

    • 2 years ago
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  
    • None of these polls is statistically applicable to the US or even registered voters. The results are applicable to the small groups of people interviewed only.

    • 2 years ago
  • RFIDemocracy
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  
    • samthesixth:

      Most polls are too narrow for the results to be generalizable to the public at large. I admit I did not know that until I took a Stats course in grad school. Design flaw is the number one problem with polls. Just because you can run regression on a number, does not make it a valid number.

    • 2 years ago
  • clayjj05
  • RFIDemocracy
    • 0
      RFIDemocracy  
    • clayjj05:

      That's all the republicans they could find, representative of the national demographic. You are the minority in every way. The nation's moving forward. Catch the wave. The 50s are over.

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • RFIDemocracy
  • J_Jammer
  • RFIDemocracy
  • J_Jammer
  • RFIDemocracy
  • Ihatethemall
  • RFIDemocracy
  • Chique
    • 0
      Chique  
    • Thanks neocongo - good way to start the week. I think the more we call MSM out for bending perception the better chance we have of changing it.

    • 2 years ago
  • neocongo
  • unimatrix0
  • RFIDemocracy
  • Darevalo
  • J_Jammer
  • Ihatethemall
  • lu7cky
    • 0
      lu7cky  
    • More proof that the MAJORITY of the people not only approve of the job he is doing, but support the agenda he has worked so hard to promote. I'm sure there will be some whining from the right, that has become standard operating procedure for every instance that anyone shows some support for Obama.

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • lu7cky
    • 0
      lu7cky  
    • lu7cky:

      the typical stance taken by the empty headed conservatives, cry some more. We won, you lost, get used to it, because you have about 7 more years of liberal policies.
      BTW I only called you a racist when you posted links to a Nazi website

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • RFIDemocracy
  • J_Jammer
  • RFIDemocracy
  • J_Jammer
  • Hou_Kairs
    • 0
      Hou_Kairs  
    • You like that........
      Just wait and see what happens after he passes health care reform with the public option.

      His ratings will soar!

      Just give the base some Luv, Obama, and we'll be hear waiting for the change you said to believe in!

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • cztheday
    • 0
      cztheday  
    • As much as I am glad that his polling numbers are so high because it makes his pursuit of his agenda easier, the only measure of any true importance is, of course, whether he is effectively advancing the interests of the American people. He is doing so with far greater success than any President in more than a decade.

      When fully a third of Americans are either so poorly educated or so apathetic that they make no effort to stay informed (or both), that group's "opinion" of President Obama's job performance is simply of no value. Heck, even 29% of Americans still thought BUSH was doing a good job at the end of his second term. The collected intellectual power of that group couldn't blow out a candle...

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • Chique
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  
    • cztheday:

      There was a recent study showing conservatives are unable to adjust their ideological beliefs even when presented with overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Welcome to that club jjammer.

      cztheday -
      You are wrong. Polls are God's way of telling us the Truth. I know this is true because I believe it is true. ;)

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • cztheday:

      Liberals are no different that they could alter theirs...as you very well prove.

      I mean that's fact especially when I stated several times I am not a conservative and yet you still state it. Change is hard. Ask Obama.

    • 2 years ago
  • Chique
  • Chique
  • J_Jammer
  • RFIDemocracy
  • J_Jammer
  • RFIDemocracy
  • ocanada
  • mrpibb19
  • larrysnotes
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • Where they belong?

      What the hell does that mean?

      haha.. I can't take this serious with that kind of comment.

      If the president isn't in the high 80's...he's failing. if he's so into education then his approval rating is going to be done by the books.

    • 2 years ago
  • neocongo
  • RFIDemocracy
  • J_Jammer
  • RFIDemocracy
  • J_Jammer
  • eldamon
    • 0
      eldamon  
    • J_Jammer:

      Now now, let's not gang up on one and other here. Everyone is entitled to an opinion - if you can back it up with something other than rhetoric and conjecture. The proof of Pres. Obama's success rating is tangible, is your opposing point of view?

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • Nettle
  • J_Jammer
  • eldamon
    • 0
      eldamon  
    • Image
    • J_Jammer:

      Presidential polling must be taken in context to events at the time of the polling itself. Spikes are usually caused by catastrophic events such as military action or natural disaster.

      Looking at it historically you can easily see President Obama is second only to Pres. Kennedy in maintaining an approval rating above on or above 50 percent. Moreover Pres. Obama maintains the highest rating of 76 percent not directly attributable to war, scandal or assassination. Any questions, let me rephrase, any intelligent, cogent questions?

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • eldamon
    • 0
      eldamon  
    • J_Jammer:

      Wait, your retort to cold hard facts is based on "comedians", wow you must be very limber cause that's quite the stretch. You could improve your standing by simply conceding the point in the face of the data and move on OR (much more likely) continue to ramble on with nothing but incoherent opinion, personal attack and or conjecture.

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • eldamon
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • J_Jammer:

      You shouldn't be positivity enlightened when you're not stating anything differently either.

      A poll at 56% might tickle your undercarriage but it's disappointing.

      I expect better.

      And as for what I said before his ratings before were based on his words...just like his nomination for that fake Nobel Prize award. It's not like people base much on what he actually does, because that would be reality instead of Obamality.

    • 2 years ago
  • eldamon
    • 0
      eldamon  
    • J_Jammer:

      You're not so good with stats and weighted averages huh? If you take all the Presidents that have been assessed by approval ratings as a class where do suppose President Obama would be ranked within his class taking all data into consideration. There is an actual mathematical solution to this question so base your guess on the fact we can go back, do the math and know for sure.

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • eldamon
    • 0
      eldamon  
    • J_Jammer:

      That's the whole point, if you could do math or open your mind a tad you'd see what you're waiting for is already here. It is entirely possible Mr Obama may be our best President to date, statistically speaking that's the case as we speak, though it's yet to be proven empirically.

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • eldamon
    • 0
      eldamon  
    • J_Jammer:

      So you're waiting for George Washington - military, slave owning person that didn't actually want to be president. Excellent, that's classic and the perfect example of where you're coming from. That's too hilarious to be sad but justly pathetic. Thanks for the entertaining crescendo.

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • J_Jammer:

      The President that is almost aways in every single historians top five Presidents, yes that one.

      History will show that Obama had dealings with people the democrats shove under the carpet and ignore. Don't think history will ignore it.

      You're little negative description of Washington to denounce his popularity (which you didn't denounce at all...for you have not factual bases to do so) will be one that Obama will have for himself. His pristine coat you're trying to keep won't stay that way. The comedians are already making snide remarks about his lack of doing and it's not even the first year yet.

      I am looking for a President that gets more than 50%, more than 60% and more than 80% approval rating. Being pleased with less is sad.

    • 2 years ago
  • Chique
  • RFIDemocracy
  • monijr01
  • darinK
    • 0
      darinK  
    • And RFnI the only help we got from Obama was to spend 1 trillion on banks that eventually failed anyway and another 1/2 trillion to auto dealers to hold them up until they to went to bk and sold. With that money we could pay the unemployment caused, solve homelessness, and insure all uninsured for years. You better forget what you thought about Bush and pay attention to what this pres does.

    • 2 years ago
  • thecoyote23
  • SamuraiDave
    • 0
      SamuraiDave  
    • darinK:

      "With that money we could pay the unemployment caused, solve homelessness, and insure all uninsured for years. "

      Exactly how would we have paid that money to solve all that especially considering before we spent it those problems were already existing? You're one of those people who are mad at the expenditure but have no real viable solution on what else to do or how to spend the money. You just offer some vague naive belief that somehow magically we could solve all our problems by spending the money somehow differently or better yet not at all.

    • 2 years ago
  • RFIDemocracy
  • tommic
    • 0
      tommic  
    • darinK:

      Darink, Bush and Company gave the 700 million in tarp funds to banks and financial institutions. May I add with no strings attached. Your just another moron here on current who does not get their facts straight.

    • 2 years ago
  • RFIDemocracy
  • Ihatethemall
    • 0
      Ihatethemall  
    • darinK:

      Slarabee: Outta curiousity, how old are you?

      The point you made about.........As for the banks well how soon you forget that the initial bailouts were started by Bush..............is about as convincing as a six year old saying......but mommy he did it first so that means I can too.
      Why do some many defend obama with that same thought process. I see it here time and time again. Bush was a shithead for doing it and obama is a bigger shithead because he could see the results from the first shithead doing it.

    • 2 years ago
  • RFIDemocracy
  • RFIDemocracy
    • 0
      RFIDemocracy  
    • Image
    • RFIDemocracy:

      darinK
      "If you think Bush created this mess ur mentally ill."

      Is that fact?

      Study: Bush administration blocked efforts to prevent housing crisis

      By Daniel Tencer
      Tuesday, October 6th, 2009 -- 10:42 am
      Share on Facebook Stumble This!

      Federal regulators in the Bush administration blocked attempts by state governments to prevent predatory lending practices that resulted in the financial crisis now stalking the American economy, a new study from the University of North Carolina says.

      In 2004, the Office of the Currency Comptroller, an obscure regulatory agency tasked with ensuring the fiscal soundness of America's banks, invoked an 1863 law to give itself the power to override state laws against predatory lending. The OCC told states they could not enforce predatory-lending laws, and all banks would be subject only to less-strict federal laws.

      Now, a research paper (PDF) from UNC-Chapel Hill's Center for Community Capital shows that those anti-predatory lending laws had actually worked. States that had stricter regulations on issuing mortgages were found to have fewer foreclosures.

      "We believe that these findings are remarkable, since they suggest an important and yet unexplored link between [anti-predatory lending laws] and foreclosures," the study's authors state.

      The study may be the first scientific evidence to back up claims made by many critics that the Bush administration and earlier administrations allowed last year's financial crisis to happen by not enforcing common-sense regulations on lenders.
      http://rawstory.com/2009/10/study-bush-blocked-efforts/

      Looks like the FBI's own 2007 Mortgage Fraud Report doesn't support your claim neither. How's that working out?

    • 2 years ago
  • darinK
    • 0
      darinK  
    • Obama's popularity has risen but mainly with evil ruthless dictators, terrorists,capitalist hating socialists, communists, and just about anyone else in the world who wants to see the U.S. fail in whatever it does.

    • 2 years ago
  • neocongo
  • RFIDemocracy
    • 0
      RFIDemocracy  
    • darinK:

      darinK

      Are you mentally ill? I can't name a single leader or country in the world that "wants to see the U.S. fail in whatever it does." Not one. Why would they want that?
      The US economy just failed, special thanks to the unprecedented ineptitude of the supremely unqualified George W. Bush, and every country in Europe, as well as Canada, had to pay out tens of billions to stimulate their own respective economies and extend employment insurance benefits as a result.
      Are you ignorant enough to actually believe your own delusional claims?

      On the other hand, RWAs desperately want America to fail so that they can prove their point which is that they are willing to bite off their own nose in order to spite their face.

    • 2 years ago
  • darinK
    • 0
      darinK  
    • darinK:

      If you think Bush created this mess ur mentally ill. The greed over wanting bigger houses and nicer shit continued into a overinflated housing market that rose for like 9yrs straight at unprecedented levels. Add that to greedy banks who couldn't lose (they always knew they'd be bailed out) and you have yourself a recession sooner or later. But you go ahead and blame it on Bush to let everyone around you know how stupid you really are.

    • 2 years ago
  • Westnewport
    • 0
      Westnewport  
    • darinK:

      His popularity has always been high among those against ruthless capitalist dictators... oh, that would be Corporate America... and yes, we do hope they fail at what they have been trying to do!

    • 2 years ago
  • thecoyote23
    • 0
      thecoyote23  
    • darinK:

      I think its funny that everyone thinks the housing market is the sole cause of the recession. The financial sector collapsed AFTER everyone started having trouble paying their mortgages. People were paying them without a problem, but then gas prices shot through the roof and drove up the cost of food, heat, and well, pretty much everything. What did Bush do even though everything was costing more? He said "Go shopping!". Maybe people should have been paying attention to their bills? I think I also have to mention Bush's support of SUV culture (remember those SUV tax breaks?), which means all those people with the new homes also had two SUVS parked out front. Also, anyone with a head on their shoulders ought to find it awfully fishy that a man with such solid ties with Big Oil was president when oil prices skyrocketed.

    • 2 years ago
  • Chique
    • 0
      Chique  
    • darinK:

      Not entirely 23 . . . in Florida, for instance my property taxes and homeowners insurance caused my mortgage to go up just under $500 a month. Although the increases were based on over inflated property values at that point, here are many retirees on fixed incomes that could no longer afford their homes. Although I agree there were many factors that caused this, housing was a huge factor.

    • 2 years ago
  • SamuraiDave
  • monijr01
    • 0
      monijr01  
    • darinK:

      Cause of Paranoia

      1) Homosexual fixation: According to Freud, the patient suffering from the disease has repressed his tendency to homosexual love to such an extent that he develops a fixation concerning it. Freud's view has been found correct in many cases, but it does not explain each and every case of the disease.

      2) Feelings of inferiority: Here the psychologists have found that the main cause of paranoia is a sense of inferiority that may be caused by a variety of condition such as failure, disgust, sense of guilt.

      3) Emotional complex: Certain psychologist points out emotional complexes, and also believe that they are seen to be present in other mental diseases as also in normal individuals.

      4) Personality type: Cameron believes a certain type to be more susceptible to this disease, a personality that has sentimentally, jealousy, suspicion, ambition, selfishness and shyness etc. Patients of paranoia do exhibit these peculiarities of personality but on this basis they cannot be said to belong to definite personality.

      5) Heredity: In the opinion of Fisher the main responsibility of paranoia lies fairly and squarely upon heredity, although he does not deny the importance of repression and emotional complexes. The causes of paranoia are not physical because no patient exhibits any signs of physical deformity and among the causes there are many important" ones, such as defects of personality, sense of inferiority, repression etc.

      http://www.depression-guide.com/paranoia.htm

    • 2 years ago
  • RFIDemocracy
1 - 100 of 109
more from Community:

top videos