Home » New presidential polls

Comments

New presidential polls — 25 Comments

  1. what were the actual questions…
    and when and who did they poll…

    ie… Pravda was good at making history too

  2. Artfldgr: I’ve included a link to the poll. It’s in the sentence that starts, “Aside from the presidential…”

    The strange thing, at least to me, is that this poll shows a more conservative slant than usual with polls, at least if you read all the results (the linked Yahoo article, of course, doesn’t really go into the more pro-conservative findings, but the poll itself does). And this was a poll (as I write towards the end of my post) that is fairly heavily skewed in favor of Obama voters.

  3. “”(I wonder why such a high percentage of non-voters were included””

    I’d guess because 95% of non voters are politically illiterate. Which makes them the same thing as a democrat without a ride to the polls.

  4. What do you go with: reason or experience.

    Reasonably, I agree with the sense that Palin will split the vote and allow Romney to win. And, it seems, reasonably, that Romney has the best shot at winning if one thinks polls are the best predictor and if one trusts polls.

    But experience shows that moderate Republicans don’t win: Elder Bush and McCain versus younger Bush and Reagan. The former two did not generate any passion and, indeed, pandered so far to the middle that it appeared there was no fight in them at all.

    I’d rather take the non-intuitive chance, but in a way, even the horrific outcome of losing the Presidency has a possible good outlook: four more years of Obama may be what is needed to teach this country what it needs to learn.

  5. Politico wrote about the new POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll today.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/62667.html

    The paragraph summarizing the poll results that I found most interesting was this one:

    “Putting aside how they feel about his job performance, 74 percent of voters said they either strongly or somewhat approve of Obama as a person, his highest rating in the past year.”

    So lots of people, 74% of those polled, still like Obama.

    Considering his approval rating is substantially lower than 74% – some reputable polls have him in the high 30s% approval — doesn’t this put to rest once and for all that people who oppose his policies are not all, or even mostly, racists?

    Or am I misinterpreting or reading more into it than I should?

  6. Scott: I just read that part you mentioned about 74% still liking Obama. Odd thing is, when I went to the poll itself and other links provided, I could not find where they had asked that question. Do you know where it was?

  7. My concern is that the economy will get so bad and the future will look so scary that many voters will see themselves as dependent on the government and they will vote Democrat to avoid the pain of budget cuts that Republicans could bring.

  8. It’s relatively easy to like someone when all your friends like them as well. But it is not so easy when the whole world is bad mouthing that person and nothing good is said about him. Then will you still like him?

    That’s the true test, as was the same for love.

  9. Scott: I see it now.

    It’s an odd question–“approve of him as a person”? If they asked me that, I’m not even sure I’d answer it the negative. It sounds as though it means not as a political figure, but as a father or husband or something like that.

  10. Seems to me that the Republicans already ran a “generic / geriatric ” candidate in 2008.

  11. neo-neocon: I’d answer the question that I don’t like him as a person.

    I find Obama’s arrogance, narcissism, blame shifting and refusal to accept responsibility very off putting. The other character flaw I’d ding him for is the long list of easily to prove lies he’s told. Finally, I don’t like that he sat in a church listening to an America hating race-baiter preacher for twenty years.

    But, those qualities don’t seem to bother 74% of those polled. They like him. Which is disturbing.

  12. neo –

    I wouldn’t answer in the negative to question #17 either. I would say “somewhat approve” – after all, I think Obama is profoundly mistaken in his worldview and politics, but I don’t think he’s willfully evil. I see no reason to give an answer that sounds like I actually hate the man.

    What bothers me, as always, is what I consider to be his astronomically high (44%) job approval rating. This is an indication of deep delusion and/or ignorance on behalf of nearly half of the American people, and a further indication that if we finally decide to see the enemy, the mark of accurate discernment will be the recognition that he is us. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and so forth, are mere manifestations, external symptoms, of a deep collective madness.

    Even more depressing is this nonsense about a “generic Republican.” What’s terrifying about that, to me anyway, is that one interpretation of the datum could be that a majority of the people hold Republicans to an impossibly high standard, while making every allowance for Democratic malfeasance. What I see whenever I deal with polling data is that an absolute majority of adults in this country WANT to vote Democrat. When a voting majority (on a national level) emerges for a Republican, it is by default.

    Hence the preference for the generic Republican (and Romney, who is that void personified) – “Generic Republican” means, to too many people, “utterly harmless and inoffensive alternative to extreme leftism.” The people love the liberal status quo, i.e., the entitlement-and-welfare state (I call it the “promissory state”). On the other hand, they don’t like its fiscal and moral correlates. They do not understand that the status quo and the correlates are peas in a pod.

    That is not a revelation. What I’m saying is that, from my dour perch, it seems that the people don’t understand because they don’t WANT to understand – an obvious sign of cognitive dissonance.

    Curtis is right, much as the possibility he mentions pains me. I hope we can win enough default votes to get an acceptable conservative in office in 2013, who will then take the necessary steps to avert catastrophe. The moves will be terribly unpopular at first, but if the economy gets going again, a positive association between conservative policies and sound economics might be created in the minds of voters – enough to crack through the dissonance and tilt resolution toward broadly conservative ideas instead of liberal ones.

    That’s the dream. But Curtis mentions the nightmare – only catastrophe can shake us enough to wake us up. These polls do not alleviate my fear that the nightmare is coming.

  13. Scott: but that was not the question.

    I don’t especially like him as a person. But the question was: do you approve of him as a person? That’s a very different, and much stranger, question. I don’t even really know what it means.

  14. kolnai: actually, I think many people who hold Republican presidential candidates to an impossibly high standard are Republicans.

    One candidate is too much of a RINO. Another has the wrong stance on abortion. A third once said something nice about illegal immigrants. And on and on and on. No one is ideologically pure enough for some.

  15. How do you like somebody who you say emphatically is taking your country in the wrong direction? WTF? Do these same people have a chance of liking the guy who steals their wallet or runs a key down the side of their car?

  16. SteveH: once again, the question wasn’t whether people liked Obama. It’s whether they approved of him as a person. I may be nitpicking here on semantics, but I think that’s a very odd question, difficult for people to understand and to answer.

  17. Obama is a charming narcissist. I once knew a man much like him. He would knife people in the back while smiling nicely to their face. He did it to me once and I realized he was a nasty piece of work. In spite of that, his charm was such that I had to constantly remind myself of what lay behind the charm. He was just so likable on a surface level. That is Obama. Hard not to like him, especiallly when you have not seen what lies behind the charm. Obama is an expert at glad handing, diverting blame, and generally always placing himself in the light of goodness. Most of us here are not deceived, but so many are. That is why these polls come out like this. People find it hard to dislike someone so seemingly charming.

  18. I heartily concur J.J. Just a couple phrases come to mind: “throw under the bus” and “Alice Palmer.”

    On the general subject of the public’s view of Obama: I’ve got to think there is some sort of warpage going on, some kind of right brain not talking to left brain or discontinuity or hypnosis, magical loving, emotionalism, I don’t whatism, but something is not right. The polls or wrong and I don’t know why they are wrong except for that they are not going to be how the people vote!

    A clue might be given by the race for Weiner’s seat. Who would believe that Turner had a chance? But, there’s been hard work and education going on, and the result is that the race is even. This is what happened in Wisconsin as well.

    I’m thinking of Sergey’s quote that our nation is in a schizophrenic mode. One way here, another way there. Talk to me on the phone about Obama and I like him, but when I go into the booth on my own, it will be a different story.

  19. Curtis, it’s the race issue and all the eggshell walking political correctness has instilled in people. They don’t know how to be critical of a black man who is terrible at his job. Which is rather racist or something close to it when you dissect how they came to viewing him so differently simply because of the color of his skin.

  20. That is a very good point, SteveH. Just the other day I was talking to a Jamaican and after I said the phrase “black history” I felt very uncomfortable because I used the adjective “black” more like the phrase “demonic.” I believe my face actually flushed red. The Jamaican took no offense.

  21. 1. The Press liked McCain until he won the primary, then turned on him. They’d like to be able to do the same with Romney.

    2. When a President is popular, polls pretty much always have a higher percentage of respondents claiming they voted for him than was the case. When unpopular, the reverse is true. The same goes for political self-identification in reference to which party controls congress and whether it’s doing well or badly in the polls.

    3. Given the perceived failure of measures aimed at helping the economy and the failure to even produce any serious attempt to reduce the deficit (which would help the economy in its own right), I’m startled it’s only 56/38.

  22. Yanno, I think the question about approving of Obama as a person is a thinly veiled way of saying” If you don’t approve of Teleprompter Jesus as a person, you’re a hateful bigot ”

    Okay, I don’t approve of Obama at all, he’s a weak, narcissistic, dishonest, cowardly, vicious , untrustworthy, race baiting miserable excuse for a human being. And that’s his good qualities

  23. neo-

    1) Yes, many conservatives have litmus tests. But ask yourself: if McCain was president right now, what would his approval rating be? I can’t believe it would be as high as 44%. Not because of conservative purists, but because more people are more willing to “give up on” a Republican than on a tender-hearted Democrat. The crucial difference is not made up of disillusioned purist conservatives. Rather, it’s made up of those who self-identify as “conservative” but are actually liberals or Democrats, of whom there are very many indeed –

    e.g., Pennsylvania, which is fully 38% “conservative” and all of 19% liberal, but 40% Republican and 46% Democratic;

    or California which splits 33%/24% conservative/liberal, but 33%/47% Republican/Democrat;

    or Illinois, which breaks down, respectively, 36%/22% to 35%/48%…

    All told, there is not a single state where self-identified liberals outnumber conservatives while Republicans outnumber Democrats, but there are 29 states where the reverse holds. In fact, there is only one domain in the entire U.S. where self-identified liberals outnumber conservatives – Washington D.C.

    There are two ways to interpret this oddness. First, it pleases most (actual) conservatives to see it as revealing a silent majority of people with conservative values. Second, it could mean that most people are DUGROs (Democrats Until Given Reason Otherwise). I think the latter view is more correct today, or rather, I think that regardless of whether a majority claim to have personal values that lean conservative, a majority also brings an a priori “lean Democrat” presumption to the voting booth.

    I emphasize the DUGRO interpretation when I write because it’s the one that matters – the one, that is, that sets the height of the mountain every national conservative candidate has to scale in order to win.

    2) Side note: Tim Groseclose’s new book on media bias lends my view some support. He argues that the media is directly responsible for 8-10 percentage points of the national Democratic vote; in other words, no media bias, no Obama presidency, and given an Obama presidency, around a 35% approval rating right now, which is where my gut tells me it should be. DUGRO-ism is directly attributable to media effects.

    3) Contrast Obama’s situation with Bush’s. According to some polls, Bush was getting down to the present Obama-range before 9/11, and the economy was pretty good at the time (e.g., a Zogby poll in August 2001 had him around 47%; a Harris poll in March 2001 had him around 48%).

    Granted, the low-ballers were outliers, but no poll had him higher than 60% roughly between July and September 11, 2001. The point being that nothing really happened until 9/11 except passing NCLB and tax cuts.

    As soon as actual bad stuff began to happen, his approval ratings plummeted about 20 percentage points in a single year, STARTING from 50% approval in mid-2006. My argument boils down to this: No Democratic president could go that low in approval rating without a catastrophe we can barely imagine.

    I’d wager that if unemployment is the same at this time next year, and even if we’re in a double-dip recession, Obama’s approval rating will at no time average 30% or lower, as Bush’s began to do in 2007. He will hover around 40% at worst, because the people, as it were, are biased about 10 percentage points in favor of indulging Democrats.

    Again, imagine if, absent 9/11, at this point in Bush’s first term our national credit rating was downgraded, or he had rammed through, say, a privatization of Social Security on a party-line vote. Always when considering counterfactuals like this we have to take into account the pure rate of disapproval PLUS the amount added by media bias, which I think Groseclose shows convincingly is a huge. Best guess: 45%-10 percentage points. That gives majority influence to DUGRO’s.

    4) Looping back to the litmus test issue, I’m not sure why you think ideological intransigence is a problem worth mentioning on the right. It’s not like we’ve been nominating conservatives for the past twenty years, and most purists wind up voting for the nominee. Even Romney, God help us, is doing rather well in GOP polls.

    So, while it is true that no one is pure enough for some people, that doesn’t explain the general indulgence for Democrats by comparison to Republicans. That, I maintain, is due to the DUGROs.

  24. Kolnai, the DUGRO exist because the media has successfully inserted the peer pressure dynamic of fashion into politics. Which sets up the political landscape to make Obama be viewed as the latest cool lip ring while a republican is a Members Only jacket.

    It all increasingly has nothing to do with success or failure of policies of the two sides. And has everything to do with tapping into people’s need to fit in with what is said to be fashionable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>