Obama 7 - now what?

[Kepler]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

There is a sort of equivalence between Fox and The Daily Show. The difference (other than the latter being pitched eight grade levels higher) is that one is comedians doing a comedy routine. On Fox, the comedy is unintentional and without self comprehension, and the audience doesn't get the joke. In a way, with Fox the audience is the joke.

[Rover]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Righties pleasuring themselves to Fox news doesn't seem to be helping their party much...

From the latest Washington Post poll: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...1902451_2.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall, 57 percent approve of the way Obama is handling his job as president and 40 percent disapprove. While those numbers have moved only marginally over the past few months, here, too, are fresh signs of restiveness among the party faithful: "Strong approval" among liberal Democrats is down 16 percentage points over the past month.

On the economy, 50 percent approve of Obama's efforts, while 48 percent disapprove.

The president receives better marks from all Americans for his handling of international affairs and his performance as commander in chief (57 percent approval on each). Slim majorities also approve of how he is dealing the situation with Iran and his winning of the Nobel Peace Prize. A majority disapprove of his work on the federal budget deficit.

Partisan divide


Despite those mixed reviews on domestic priorities, Obama continues to hold a big political advantage over Republicans.

Poll respondents are evenly divided when asked whether they have confidence in Obama to make the right decisions for the country's future, but just 19 percent express confidence in the Republicans in Congress to do so. Even among Republicans, only 40 percent express confidence in the GOP congressional leadership to make good choices.

Only 20 percent of adults identify themselves as Republicans, little changed in recent months, but still the lowest single number in Post-ABC polls since 1983. Political independents continue to make up the largest group, at 42 percent of respondents; 33 percent call themselves Democrats.

The wide gap in partisan leanings and the lack of confidence in the GOP carries into early assessments of the November 2010 midterm elections: Fifty-one percent say they would back the Democratic candidate in their congressional district if the elections were held now, while 39 percent would vote for the Republican. Independents split 45 percent for the Democrat, 41 percent for the Republican.

The poll was conducted by conventional and cellular telephone from Oct. 15 to 19 among a random sample of 1,004 adults. The margin of sampling error for the full poll is plus or minus three percentage points.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yikes! That idiot that tried to send his kid up on a hot air balloon has better poll numbers than Republicans. Really, who supports that party anymore? dropthatpuck, Patman, Red Cloud...anybody else? What the knuckledraggers don't seem to realize is that half of the anti-Obama sentiment is from Ron Paul types who aren't voting Republican next election. In short, you're screwed.

[Kepler]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

half of the anti-Obama sentiment is from Ron Paul types who aren't voting Republican next election. In short, you're screwed.

"Half" is an over-estimate, but it probably is something like 10-15%, and they are also the ones getting all the coverage (town halls, deathers, etc). The GOP has the same problem the Dems did in trying to fight off Reagan -- you cannot compete with a popular president with a positive message when all you say is "no," and "the sky is falling," and "you'll be sorry." Reagan got stronger with the center as he went along because the sky did not fall, so the opposition was unmasked as Chicken Little. It might have been different if there had been fresh ideas and idealism coming from the opposition, but all they had was gloom and dire warnings.

If consumer confidence is low it will be nip and tuck, with both sides mostly holding serve (the GOP has much less to protect and can concentrate on it). If consumer confidence is high, the GOP will get smoked again and have to clean house starting with the inept types like Steele, and that alone will set them back another cycle to regroup their fundraising and recruiting. If you were a young conservative with high aspirations for your political future, would you hitch your wagon to these morons while the anti-GOP waves are still cresting -- particularly when within another cycle or two you know there will be a natural anti-incumbent backlash and you can have gravity on your side?

[dropthatpuck]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Righties pleasuring themselves to Fox news doesn't seem to be helping their party much...

From the latest Washington Post poll: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...1902451_2.html

Thanks, but I'll take Rasmussen over a rag ....

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 28% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -12. The Approval Index rating has been lower only on two days since the current President took office (see trends).

The President’s plan for sending $250 to senior citizens gets mixed reviews from the public. Fifty percent (50%) like the idea, but support falls to 41% when the price tag is mentioned. Seniors are less enthusiastic about it than younger adults.

Forty-four percent (44%) have confidence in the stability of the U.S. banking system, 50% do not. Seventy-eight percent (78%) say that Wall Street has benefited more than taxpayers from the bank bailouts.

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates also available on Twitter and Facebook.

Overall, 47% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty percent (52%) disapprove.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

[dropthatpuck]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

...or we can look at a State in which he won handily:

Quarterly Survey – September 2009

The following results are based on 600 completed telephone interviews among a statewide random sample of adults in New Hampshire. Of the 600 interviews, 572 interviews were among registered voters (166 Republicans, 171 Democrats, and 235 undeclared voters). The interviews were conducted September 25 through 29, 2009.

The theoretical margin of error for the total sample of 600 is plus or minus 4 percentage points, 95% of the time, on questions where opinion is evenly split. The theoretical margin of error for the sample of 572 registered voters is plus or minus 4.1 percentage points, 95% of the time, on questions where opinion is evenly split.

Question wording and responses:

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barrack Obama is handling his job as president?

Approve / Disapprove / Undecided

Total sample 34% 57% 9%

Voters 35% 56% 9%

Republicans 4% 88% 8%
Democrats 78% 17% 4%
Undeclared 26% 60% 14%

Barack Obama:
6/09 51% 41% 8%
3/09 54% 32% 14%

He started with 54% approval (way better than the national average) in March and has fallent to 34% today. Discounting those fansy Dems, he's lost his GOP voting base entirely, and the vast majority of indies.

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/nhpoll/nhp04.html

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Are you advocating that we discard Rasmussen when they're contracted by Fox?

[Old Pio]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

There is a sort of equivalence between Fox and The Daily Show. The difference (other than the latter being pitched eight grade levels higher) is that one is comedians doing a comedy routine. On Fox, the comedy is unintentional and without self comprehension, and the audience doesn't get the joke. In a way, with Fox the audience is the joke.

Would you mind delaying this group grope for a while? My snarkometer just broke.

[Rover]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Thanks, but I'll take Rasmussen over a rag ....



http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

Ahhh...nothing wreaks of desperation like quoting Rasmussen. The very pollster I crushed in my brilliant analysis of how every swing state he polled going into the weekend of the 08 election he had a bias towards McCain in (9 states in total). All the way up to 8% in some cases, while no biases towards Obama. Yup, dat's wat we knuckledraggers call "im-pah-she-ality"

[DisplacedCornellian]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

There is a sort of equivalence between Fox and The Daily Show. The difference (other than the latter being pitched eight grade levels higher) is that one is comedians doing a comedy routine. On Fox, the comedy is unintentional and without self comprehension, and the audience doesn't get the joke. In a way, with Fox the audience is the joke.

It's funny because it's true.

Fox certainly seems to be geared more at entertaining a certain demographic than informing anybody.

[dropthatpuck]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Boo, hoo, hoo. Fox is picking on us and calling attention to our transgressions. Sniff, sniff, sniff. Big meanies.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on Tuesday pointed to two top-rated opinion shows on Fox News as the reason why the Obama administration has castigated the network as an illegitimate news organization.

Gibbs weighed in on the controversy after several top White House advisers have gone on other channels to criticize Fox News' coverage of the administration, dismiss the network as the mouthpiece of the Republican Party and urge other news organizations not to treat Fox News as a legitimate news station.

Gibbs said White House officials "render (that) opinion based on some their coverage and the fairness of that coverage."

But asked how Fox News was different from other news organizations, Gibbs mentioned the channel's 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. shows, in an explicit reference to "Beck" and "Hannity" -- even though those two shows represent opinion programming.

Informed that those hours are for opinion programming, Gibbs said: "That is our opinion."

Michael Clemente, senior vice president of news for Fox News, issued a statement Tuesday defending the company.

"Hundreds of journalists come to work each day at Fox News all deeply committed to their craft. It's disappointing that the White House would be so dismissive of their fine work and continue their vengeful war against a news organization," he said.

The White House also appeared to stand by its effort to urge other networks to isolate and alienate the channel. Gibbs said Tuesday that it's up to the White House Correspondents Association to decide whether Fox News should continue to be part of the White House pool which covers President Obama.

"I'm not going to delineate for the White House Correspondents Association how the pool is conducted. That's not my job," he said.

The pool, the rotation through which the networks share the costs and duties of White House coverage, represents the most significant interaction among the news channels. Despite the Obama administration's guidance to other channels to disregard Fox News, there are no indications so far from the other networks that the pool relationship will change.

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod on Sunday called on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox News is "not a news organization."

"Other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way," Axelrod counseled ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "We're not going to treat them that way."

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN on Sunday that Obama does not want "the CNNs and the others in the world (to) basically be led in following Fox."

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

I mentioned this before but they're somewhat right about Hannity who pretends to give the news. Even O'Reilly's Bernie Goldberg segment admitted as much.

Why they would spend any time on the psycho Beck is beyond me. It's all folly anyway, anyone who can't watch both sides and figure out that their both biased is in lockstep anyway and can't be persuaded no matter how sound the argument.

What makes me angry is that O'Reilly back in the day (even though slanted as hell, and often as psycho as Beck just hidden in an insidious way) used to have an entertaining show. Now he spends ALL his time whining about NBC and the New York Times and with the White House whining it has consumed his entire broadcast.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

What makes me angry is that O'Reilly back in the day (even though slanted as hell, and often as psycho as Beck just hidden in an insidious way) used to have an entertaining show. Now he spends ALL his time whining about NBC and the New York Times and with the White House whining it has consumed his entire broadcast.

As long as they're going to be in 3rd place in the ratings, it would be nice if CNN decided to re-commit themselves to something like news. People on the right and left know where to go if they want entertainment.

[Kepler]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

As long as they're going to be in 3rd place in the ratings, it would be nice if CNN decided to re-commit themselves to something like news. People on the right and left know where to go if they want entertainment.

Was CNN ever news? Its apotheosis was the white Bronco. It's never been anything but E! misspelled.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

They're capable of better, though. I don't remember CNN being as insipid as it is today back in the 80s and early 90s. Maybe that's just because I got old when I wasn't looking.

When I spent time in Berlin, CNN International seemed at least 63% less pointless than what we get here.

I'm being a starry-eyed optimist here, but I have to think there's at least some market for journalism on TV.

[unofan]

Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Was CNN ever news?

Sure, but it was back in the days when you not only didn't have cable, but didn't own a TV, and were proud of it...

But at its inception, it really was a news network. Just like MTV was a music station, and ESPN was a sports station. (god, remember when Sportscenter used to show 30 seconds of highlights and a full box score from every MLB game, including the Royals-Rays games?)