Oh my: Obama falls to 39% job approval in new Gallup poll; Update: Under 50% among Latinos too

I told you it was coming and now here it is.

His all-time low in Gallup is … 38 percent, which he reached twice in late summer and fall 2011 before rebounding. This is why I thought it was noteworthy last week when hisfavorable rating ended up negative for the first time in that WSJ/NBC poll. He’s had dips in job approval before but retained his personal popularity with voters. People liked him even when they thought he was doing a bad job, which I think provided a floor for his overall approval rating. I’m not sure that floor is there anymore. He’s had a horrendously bad month, from the shutdown to the Healthcare.gov nightmare to the new wrinkles about NSA spying to, of course, the fiasco of “if you like your plan” having been exposed as a grand lie. If you supported Obama before because you thought he’d be an omnicompetent best-and-brightest liberal technocrat, your image of him has been shattered by the Healthcare.gov rollout. If you supported Obama before because you thought he was a straight-shooting hopey-changey fighter for the middle class, your image of him now has to be reconciled with the fact that millions of middle-class people are being forced into more expensive coverage and that O lied, lied, lied his ass off about it for three years. I said it in the WSJ/NBC post and I’ll say it again: Given the amount of crap raining on him, he’s lucky to be as high as 39 percent. If the website can’t be fixed this month and he’s forced to do something drastic like delaying the law for six months, some liberals will abandon him too and he’ll end up in the low 30s. And yes, even a lame duck’s approval rating matters:

It’s -14 today, a full year removed from the midterms. Where will it be in October 2014, a month removed, when the new, almost certainly higher insurance rates for 2015 are released?

I have no new Obama video for this post so here’s Toronto Mayor Rob Ford admitting that he’s smoked crack in the past. Approval rating: 43 percent.

Update: Latinos are big supporters of ObamaCare under normal circumstances, but a month of Glitchpalooza and lies about people keeping their plans isn’t “normal circumstances.” He’s at 49 percent now, down nine points since the week before.

Via: Hot Air

Continue Reading.....

GALLUP: OBAMA APPROVAL NEARS HISTORIC LOWS

Gallup's latest Presidential tracking poll finds that only 41% of Americans approve of the job Obama is doing. A solid majority, 53%, disapprove of the job he is doing. Obama's poll numbers are approaching the lowest of his Presidency, reached in October 2011, in the aftermath of the last debt ceiling debate. Gallup's latest numbers also show a dramatic drop in Obama's approval since immediately before the partial government shutdown. 

Obama's lowest approval ratings in the Gallup survey were in October, 2011. Just 38% of Americans approved of his job performance, while 54% disapproved. The results reported Monday are well within the poll's margin of error of that low. 

At the end of September, on the eve of the government shutdown and launch of ObamaCare, 44% of Americans approved of Obama's job performance, while 48% disapproved. Gallup's latest poll finds an 8-point swing against Obama since the start of the partial government shutdown. 

The conventional wisdom in DC and across the media is that the current fiscal stand-off hurts Republicans exclusively. Unfortunately, many Republican lawmakers seem to believe this as well. This belief prompted them last week to offer major concessions to end the fiscal stalemate. 

Obama rejected those offers, preferring to leave the threat of possible default on the table to extract more concessions. The Gallup poll, however, shows that this strategy is risky for Obama. If the stand-off exclusively hurt Republicans, one would have expected Obama's numbers to rise in the wake of the partial government shutdown. 

That clearly isn't the case today. 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading....

Kick Them All Out! Distaste for DC Politicians at All-Time High

The public's displeasure with Washington politics reached a new high Friday with separate polls calling for all members of Congress to be fired and for a strong third party to challenge the 150-year-old dominance of Republicans and Democrats.

One survey also gave the lowest-ever favorability to the GOP, with more than twice as many people having a negative view as a positive.

The government shutdown and the continued failure of politicians to seek compromise was being blamed for the low opinion of the country's current leaders.

Urgent: Should GOP Stick to Its Guns on Obamacare? Vote Here. 

One poll, conducted for NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, showed that given the chance, 60 percent of Americans would vote out every single member of Congress — including their own representatives.

It is the highest-ever figure recorded since the pollsters asked the question. "We continue to use this number as a way to sort of understand how much revulsion there is. We now have a new high-water mark," said Peter Hart, one of those who conducted the poll.

A separate Gallup poll gave the same 60 percent number for those who believe the country needs a strong third party — again a record high. At the same time, a new low of 26 percent believe the two major parties adequately represent Americans.

"Given the inability of the Republican and Democratic parties to agree on the most basic of government functions — passing an annual budget to pay for federal programs — it is perhaps not surprising that the percentage of Americans who believe a third party is needed has never been higher," Gallup managing editor Jeffrey Jones said.

The belief was evenly split, with 52 percent of Republicans and 49 percent of Democrats saying a third party is needed, marking the first time a majority of either party's supporters have said this.

The results are consistent with Gallup's finding of more negative opinions of both parties since the shutdown began Oct. 1, including Americans' widespread dissatisfaction with the way the nation is being governed.

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading....

The Congressional Record of Unintended Consequences

With its sorry record, can Congress act prudently? 

Just because Congress may approve a military strike on Syria does not mean it is a wise public policy. A Congress with a 14% approval rating, based on an August Gallup poll, cannot be doing everything right. Look at its record — especially the unintended consequences of what it has authorized.

Congress has presided explicitly or implicitly over military decisions that have cost the country dearly in lives and capital for over a decade. And neither Congress nor the Administration have owned up to the unintended consequences. The toppling of Saddam Hussein meant removal of the last symbol of secular Arab nationalism, an offset to Islamist fundamentalism, and it emboldened Shiite Iran to eye alignment with the majority Shiite sect in Iraq and become more assertive against the West. Further, the dismissal of thousands of Iraqi Baathist Party members and security forces by the American authority in Baghdad meant pandemonium after the capital was secured. There were limited competent resources to run the finance, electricity, transport, and other ministries. No one bargained for the massive American operating support required — and where was Congressional oversight?

The invasion of Afghanistan also authorized by Congress resulted in an unintended U.S. presence of almost twelve years and still counting — long after Mullah Omar was sent into hiding. Moreover, the counterinsurgency model sold to the American people is yielding limited security benefits, with the specter of a resurgent al Qaeda and Afghan Taliban after the U.S. and NATO withdrawal in 2014 — when there will likely be some stability in a few population centers, with the interior still controlled by warring tribes hostile to the West. The competing and more limited counter-terrorism model, originally espoused by Vice President Joe Biden, will be the protocol after 2014 — it already is in Yemen, Somalia and other hot spots where insertion teams, precision strikes, drone attacks, and other “stand-off” methods are expected to do the job.

Via: American Spectator

Continue Reading.....

TRR: Romney Has Best Gallup Tracking Poll Numbers Since 1968

Mitt Romney continues to out-poll every winning presidential challenger since 1968.

The latest Gallup daily tracking poll of likely voters has Mr. Romney leading Barack Obama by seven points, 52% to 45%. Mr. Romney’s total is greater than Richard Nixon’s 44% at this point in the race in 1968, Jimmy Carter’s 49% in 1976, Ronald Reagan’s hard to believe 39% in 1980 (Carter was ahead with 45%), George H. W. Bush’s 50% in 1988, and Bill Clinton’s 40% in 1992. In 2000 and 2008 George W. Bush and Barack Obama both tracked at a within-error 51%.

The Gallup numbers have come under criticism from Obama supporters for their supposed inaccuracy, but the oldest established polling organization has done well in predicting the last three elections. In 2000, the final Gallup likely voter poll showed a neck and neck race, 47/45, which turned out to be a 50/50 outcome. In 2004 Gallup had the Bush/Kerry race at 49/47 and the result was 50/48. And in 2008 Gallup's final likely voter poll had Mr. Obama at 53% which was right on the money. Whether Mr. Romney's tracking numbers will hold over the next few weeks remains to be seen but right now he is on a better trajectory than any presidential challenger in the last 40+ years.
Maybe the Justice Department will want to investigate.

Via: Washington Times

Continue Reading...

Have Polls Always Underestimated The GOP Vote?

Knowing that exit polling has historically overestimated the Democratic vote and knowing how much the final regular polling in the 1980 race understated Ronald Reagan’s support compared to Jimmy Carter, it is worth looking at what the final poll results said in other presidential election years.

The facts show a similar trend in a pro-Democratic direction almost uniformly. Historically speaking, pollsters have underestimated how many people would vote for the Republican presidential candidate:

Writing at National Review, reporter Jim Geraghty quotes an anonymous pollster who provides a helpful review of past polling data:

In 1992, Gallup’s final poll had Clinton winning by 12 percentage points, he won by 5.6 percentage points. In late October 1992, Pew had Clinton up 10.

In 1996, some reputable pollsters had Clinton winning by 18 percentage points late, and Pew had Clinton up by 19 in November; on Election Day, he won by 8.5 percentage points… In 2004, pollsters were spread out, but most underestimated Bush’s margin. (2000 may have been a unique set of circumstances with the last-minute DUI revelation dropping Bush’s performance lower than his standing in the final polls; alternatively, some may argue that the Osama bin Laden tape the Friday before the election in 2004 altered the dynamic in those final days.) In 2008, Marist had Obama up 9, as did  CBS/New York Times and Washington Post/ABC News, while Reuters and Gallup both had Obama up 11.

Now, if this was just random chance of mistakes, you would see pollsters being wrong in both directions and by about the same margin in each direction at the same rate – sometimes overestimating how well the Democrats do some years, sometimes overestimating how well the Republicans do. But the problem seems pretty systemic – sometimes underestimating the GOP by a little, sometimes by a lot.

In 2004, the final telephone surveys mostly favored George W. Bush against John Kerry but the exit polls clearly did not. As usual, they overstated the Democrat vote (see our earlier report on reasons for this) which led many Democrats to expect that Kerry would win the popular vote and the presidency. When that did not happen, it triggered a widespread belief among hardcore Democrats that Republicans had somehow managed to “steal” the election in several different states, particularly in Ohio.

Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading...

Jewish Support For Obama In Florida Down 7 Points From 2008

Support for President Barack Obama among Jews in the state of Florida is down 7 percentage points on 2008, according to an American Jewish Committee (AJC) poll released Thursday.

A total of 69% of Florida Jews said they would vote for Obama in November’s presidential elections, down from an estimated 76% in 2008, the AJC noted.

A 7 percentage-point drop in the Jewish vote likely represents over 50,000 votes in a state that the Republicans won in 2000 by fewer than 600 votes.

The 69% figure closely matches the results of a Gallup poll among Jewish voters nationwide from last weekend, which put support for Obama among US Jews at 70%.

Only 25% of Florida Jews said they would vote for Mitt Romney, according to the AJC poll.

Republicans have invested unprecedented resources — including buying billboards, print advertisements and door-to-door canvassing — to target hundreds of thousands of Jews in swing states whom the Republican Jewish Coalition has suggested may be considering turning away from their traditional Democratic affiliation.

The AJC’s telephone poll was conducted among 254 registered Jewish voters between September 7-9. The AJC expects to publish, within the coming weeks, a poll of Jewish voters in Ohio — another key battleground state — and a nationwide poll.

“In a key state, to which both parties are devoting a great deal of time and attention, and where recent history is a reminder that the margin of victory can be razor-thin, the Jewish vote takes on added importance,” said AJC Executive Director David Harris.

According to Republican Jewish Coalition head Matt Brooks, the new poll “reinforces what we’ve been saying all along, and that various polls in the past have indicated, which is that Barack Obama continues to have trouble with Jewish voters, and we continue to see significant erosion of Jewish support for the president.”

Democrats, however, challenged the conclusion Thursday that the new poll showed Obama slipping among Florida Jewish voters.

“It’s comparing apples and oranges to compare a 2008 exit poll and an AJC study in September of 2012,” said National Jewish Democratic Council head David Harris.

“But having said that, when you take out the undecideds from the AJC poll, you have Barack Obama leading Mitt Romney 73 [percent] to 26,” he added. “This is one point away from where I see the final vote tally of the Jewish vote settled in 2008,” which the NJDC has argued came in at 74%.

Via: Times of Israel

Continue Reading...

Dick Morris: Obama Thugs Rough Up Gallup For Polls They Don’t Like

The Obama Administration’s Justice Department announced, on August 22nd, that it was joining a lawsuit by a former Gallup employee and whistleblower against the Gallup Corporation for allegedly overcharging the government on polling work.

The announcement comes on the heels of a confrontation between Gallup staffers and Obama strategist David Axelrod in which he accused the company of using out of date sampling methods which, he said, generated polling data negative to the president.

The whistleblower’s lawsuit has been kicking around since 2009, but the Justice Department joined the suit only after the run-in between Axelrod and Gallup in April of this year.

In a scene right out of a typical authoritarian regime, Fox News reports that “employees at the venerable Gallup polling firm suggested they felt threatened by Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod when he questioned the methodology of a mid-April poll showing Mitt Romney leading the president – according to internal emails published Thursday.”

That poll that sent Axelrod ballistic showed Romney leading Obama 48-43 percent.

The Daily Caller published e mails that started when Axelrod sent a tweet to Gallup saying the tracking poll was “saddled with some methodological problems” and directing followers to a National Journal story in which a professor suggested outdated sampling.

According to the email chain titled “Axelrod vs. Gallup,” the White House in addition asked that a Gallup staffer “come over and explain our methodology,” which was apparently perceived as a subtle threat.

Fox News reported that “a Gallup official said in an email he thought Axelrod’s pressure ‘sounds a little like a Godfather situation.’”

Gallup refused to change its methodology to suit the White House.

And the Justice Department intervention in the whistleblower suit came three months later. The whistleblower, Michael Lindley, claims that Gallup violated the False Claims Act by overcharging the federal government for its services to the U.S. Mint, the State Department and other federal agencies. The Justice Department plans to add Gallup’s work with FEMA to the list of alleged overcharges covered in the lawsuit.

Lindley charged that Gallup overestimated the number of hours of field work that the government surveys would require and that it billed the feds based on the inflated estimates.

According to the Washington Times, Lindley worked for the Obama campaign in 2008 as an Iowa field organizer based out of Council Bluffs, Iowa.

As the election progresses, this blatant effort to influence Gallup’s data and its poll numbers is an example of Chicago political thugs at their worst.

Via: Dick Morris

Continue Reading...