Pollster: Obama slide no fluke
posted at 12:17 pm on August 28, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
A new national poll shows Barack Obama under 50% on overall job-approval rating among registered voters, and it’s not Rasmussen this time. Clarus conducted a survey of 1,000 voters last week and found Obama at 49%, and sliding badly among independents (via Jim Geraghty). On health care, Obama has almost a majority disapproving, 49%-38%, which has driven his overall numbers downward. On health care, the age of voters doesn’t matter at all; 48% of those under 45 disapprove, and 49% over 45 disapprove.
Independents have a decidedly mixed view of Obama:
- 86% think Obama is “very intelligent”
- 77% think he will raise taxes as a result of his spending
- 69% think he’s trying to do too much, too fast
- 64% think Obama wants too much government involvement
- 61% think Obama spends too much money
- only 34% believe he will keep all of his promises
Overall, Obama gets a 43% job-approval rating from independents. Forty-five percent disapprove of his performance on the economy, a lower number than Rasmussen has found of late, but higher than the 41% who approve. They also believe he is doing worse than they expected by a small plurality, 24% to 13% who say better, with the rest unsure or saying that he meets their expectations.
However, Obama still bests all of the predicted Republican challengers for 2012. Mitt Romney does best, keeping Obama at 47% to his 38%. Mike Huckabee almost duplicates the spread, 48%-38% for Obama, and does slightly better with minority voters. Obama wins clear majorities when paired with Sarah Palin (53%-34%) and Newt Gingrich (53%-34%). Only Huckabee wins independents, though, by a single point.
Clarus presents this analysis of Obama’s performance:
President Obama’s sliding job rating is real and not just a temporary blip. His numbers have gradually eroded since May. In this survey, he’s dipped slightly below 50% on overall approval and slightly below 40% on handling health care, which is dragging him down. …
Troubling for Obama is his standing among independents. His overall approval number among this critical swing constituency is 43%. In 2008, he beat John McCain among independents 52-44%. Independents think Obama is intelligent, honest and truthful, and many still see him as a strong leader, but large majorities think he’s trying to do too much too fast, spending too much, growing government too much, and likely to raise taxes.
Clarus believes the next 90 days will be critical for Obama, but this year may be a wash. Obama will have to plan his legislative agenda more carefully in 2010 with an eye on the midterms. He may do best by letting both ObamaCare and cap-and-tax wither, and focus his energy on immigration reform, which holds more promise for a split among Republicans rather than Democrats. Even so, he will have to contend with Blue Dogs, who represent districts opposed to amnesty programs.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
No sh!t independents. I swear, the Indies are the dumbest fence sitters ever. 39% of indies think Obama doesn’t spend enough money?
portlandon on August 28, 2009 at 12:59 PM
How could I have forgotten! :-0
highhopes on August 28, 2009 at 1:01 PM
I was thinking more of a permanent majority – sidelining the independents in future elections.
OldEnglish on August 28, 2009 at 1:01 PM
Maybe this is him?
right2bright on August 28, 2009 at 1:02 PM
A 47 year old who has the wisdom of a 20 year old is not very intelligent.
Basilsbest on August 28, 2009 at 1:02 PM
Awesome.
hillbillyjim on August 28, 2009 at 1:03 PM
Barack and Hard Place, has anyone ever read what the Progressive wing of the Democrat Party expects out of the Democrat Party and the leadership? They have talked about having their own Progressive Party…well I think they are too late, their is already a Socialist Party. When you read this website below, you will see they think anyone in the Democrat Party that doesn’t tow the Progressive Agenda that includes Nancy Pelosi. Lots of insight into the intolerant far left.
I think these people do need to get out of the Democrat Party, the sooner they are marginalized the better. This is why Obama’s numbers are dropping he is trying to hold onto this far left faction of the Democrat party. They do not represent the majority of Center Right VOTING Americans.
They say these are the folks advising the President to Jump when it comes to the health insurance reform bill NOT to include Republicans in the shaping the bill. These are not bipartisan folks at all!
http://www.irregulartimes.com/2008democratreform.html
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:03 PM
I’m happy to be an independent (leaning to conservative), definitely not a 34%er. Used to be a YAFer in my early college years, even shook Barry’s hand in New Hampshire. WFBuckley by idol. Left the GOP side because RINOs ran amok in New England. The ‘compassionate conservative’ drivel of the Bushes left me cold – Democrate lite nonsense. You can almost count on one hand the number of true conservatives left in the GOP. Glum, but hopeful, the Tea Party movement can change the dynamic before year’s end.
Bob in VA on August 28, 2009 at 1:03 PM
Darn you, page break.
faraway on August 28, 2009 at 1:03 PM
Isn’t that really more like libertarian?
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:05 PM
Required repair effected.
mr.blacksheep on August 28, 2009 at 1:05 PM
It should be. You look at the approval rating graphs for Presidents since Truman (linked above) and it’s correct to say: only two have dropped so fast so early in their term — Clinton and Ford. And to be honest, only Ford started with similar approval numbers (~70+%). So Obama’s in a small group of two, if you ask me.
Ford had the “corrupt bargain” (Nixon pardon) that really sank him quick. So I ask seriously what has Obama done that equates to a Nixon pardon which could sour people right off the bat? A date night, parties? I seriously doubt this is it. We knew he would be fiscally irresponsible when we elected him. We knew he would govern as a Liberal, we knew the policies he would try to enact with Congress’s help. We shouldn’t be surprised at how he’s governing — today’s numbers support how unsurprised we are (only 37% of independents say he’s doing better or worse than we thought). We pegged him essentially. But we’re disappointed to the extreme, maybe only second behind our disappointment in Ford’s pardon of Nixon. It’s this disparity that intrigues/troubles me most — he’s doing what we thought he’d do but we’re disapproving; ergo, what does that say about us as voters?
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 1:07 PM
highhopes on August 28, 2009 at 1:01 PM
It was a classic case of Democrat inner-city mayor clown act incompetence, how his own people sheparded people towards the Superdome, when his own emergency plan excluded the Superdome from housing displaced citizens.
Katrina should have been used to expose the incompetence and idiocy of inner city Democrat mayors, instead the Democrats have successfully used it as a club with which to bash Republican Presidents. Unbelievable.
NoDonkey on August 28, 2009 at 1:08 PM
You can’t make up your mind if you don’t have one.
Immolate on August 28, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Obama’s entire campaign was based on wishful thinking. No matter WHAT your agenda, you could assume he was like you. He was never specific, and when he tried, he got into hot water fast.
So his drop in approval ratings makes total sense. Reality meets voter immaturity.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Yeah, the probably didn’t like the way he handled “The Office of The President-Elect”. What a joke this tool is.
venividivici on August 28, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Why is it that these polls never ask whether or not you think Obama is abusing his newly usurped powers?
larvcom on August 28, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Along this line I’d also like to see…do you think his policies unconstitutional? Do you beleive in the the costitution? Do you think the constitution is outdated, needs to be scrapped and have team Obama write a new one?
With the breakdown according to party affiliation and self ID; liberal, concervative, moderate.
Archimedes on August 28, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Good article today on just that on RCP.
Apparently, he’s racking up quite a similar profile to Carter in terms of how he’s actually running his administration.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:10 PM
If the eerily silent GOP would break out the Constitution and use it to beat these Progressives about the head and shoulders we may have a chance.
I don’t care what their agenda is. If it’s unconstitutional then we should fight them on that alone. Forget the particulars of their Utopian dreams, none of it is allowed by our Constitution.
These people will pass anything they can the Constitution be damned if we allow them.
DerKrieger on August 28, 2009 at 1:10 PM
Check out number 9 doesn’t this sound like what MSNBC is peddling every day on air?
http://www.irregulartimes.com/2008democratreform.html
Barack Obama between a Barack and a Hard place…These progressives are hateful if you think they hate Conservatives you should read how they feel about moderate and conservative Democrats. 21% of Americans identify themselves as Liberals of that 21% a small faction identify as progressive so why is this Administration trying to hold onto such a far left fringe faction…it’s obvious hurting the President’s poll numbers we are not a far left fringe country…..the only thing trying to shove an extreme agenda on Americans will cause is losses in 2010. Unless that is what the Obama Administration wants in which case CARRY ON.
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:13 PM
I never for a moment thought that.
Not to mention he ran the most classless campaign in history. He contintually slammed, slandered and lied about President Bush and John McCain.
Effective leaders at the top of successful organizations do not waster their time or muddy themselves with sliming other people. Effective leaders strive to be as positive as possible in public, so as to move their goals forward.
If you really get down to it, Obama’s entire message of change was always about the terrible situation that we’re in that only he can save us from. Doomed to fail.
NoDonkey on August 28, 2009 at 1:14 PM
Isn’t it similar to here? I voted for McCain/Palin and get bashed regularly.
I concluded long ago that there’s just a lot of political “ragers” out there in the world. Sort of like road rage.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:15 PM
I am an Independent and I voted for Sarah Palin and Cindy McCain’s husband. I don’t know who the other Independent’s were voting for? I have asked before: Did they think they were voting for Denzel Washington?
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Just my own opinion, but the Bush “hate” stuff will actually work in the long run for his own legacy.
It’ll be juicy for historians to vindicate him.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:16 PM
I’m used to it :) I am not going to support a brand, I am going to support the Best People.
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Some people doodle on paper, you doodle in your head and then vomit whatever comes out of your windtunnel onto these pages….
HornetSting on August 28, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:18 PM
My rule of thumb is that the best people would never stoop to be associated with the Democrat Party.
NoDonkey on August 28, 2009 at 1:19 PM
Good one, I had forgotten that one. But I was also thinking, if the slide started on day one and, for the most part, he couldn’t enact any policies before inauguration, the slide was probably already happening before he was elected — I’m sure it’s in the numbers somewhere and it could be teased out by someone better at regression analysis.
I’m fairly convinced at this point, we elected him knowing full well we would be disappointed in him later. But we (and I’m using this “we” to mean “the nation”) did it anyway to accomplish several things:
1) end the Bush era
2) elect a minority candidate
3) send a message to the GOP
4) probably others, add your own
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Like Zell Miller?
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:20 PM
You have liberals. You have conservatives. Then you have independents who really should be called morons. They don’t know much about anything but don’t want to admit it. So they say “I’m independent” or “I’m centrist”. And then they vote for the party that offers them the most bribes.
angryed on August 28, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM
I resemble that remark.
ornery_independent on August 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM
OldEnglish:
I meant that Obama can also use the immigration issue to further demonize and isolate conservatives and win back support from libertarians and independents.
modifiedcontent on August 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM
The Libertarian candidate, perhaps?
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM
They bashed Palin for her “lack of executive experience”, despite her having been a successful Governor, while lauding Odingleballs, for what, exactly, we’re not sure. The guy’s never had a job with any accountability in his life, and so has never had the opportunity to build any executive skill.
There was a lot I didn’t care for about GWB, but there’s no denying both his competence as an executive, and his wince-inducing speaking skills.
The voters wanted an anti-Bush, and got him, in every respect, except that most of the policies the Bush-bashers hated most are being continued by the BO08 in chief.
mr.blacksheep on August 28, 2009 at 1:23 PM
I don’t know whether to be happy or depressed by that poll. It’s good to see independents disapprove of his handling of various issues, but a majority thinking he’s intelligent, honest, and truthful is inexplicable.
And to see him wiping the floor with all GOP challengers makes no sense either. Granted, there’s no way those numbers can accurately reflect what will transpire in 3 years(there’s no way Obama wins by 9+%), but it’s still a little disconcerting.
Doughboy on August 28, 2009 at 1:23 PM
Your honors, the prosecution rests its case.
angryed on August 28, 2009 at 1:24 PM
I didn’t like McCain’s position on Shamnesty or his voting for the First TARP. I wasn’t alone. But like his mother stated “You will hold your nose and vote for my son”
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:25 PM
O/T: Reagan says no to Obama Care – Modern Audio Version
VibrioCocci on August 28, 2009 at 1:26 PM
I lean Libertarian, there was way too much at stake. I understood who we would get in Obama, he is no centrist. Given what we all are experiencing right now, I should add Duh!
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:27 PM
Zell Miller is no longer in Congress. He definitely doesn’t fit the mold of today’s Democratic party. I don’t think you’ll hear Nancy Pelosi or any other Democrat singing the praises of Mr. Miller, like they are of Ted Kennedy. Name a few other currently serving Democrats.
CBP on August 28, 2009 at 1:29 PM
I do seem to remember that buyer’s remorse set in right after the election.
OldEnglish on August 28, 2009 at 1:29 PM
The far right and the far left are about equal in percentages.
Schadenfreude on August 28, 2009 at 1:30 PM
Ok, that’s not good.
OldEnglish on August 28, 2009 at 1:31 PM
We’ve also had this argument on here ad nauseam. Yes, you should have been able to deduce how far left on economic issues Obama would be (civil liberties were more of the shock). But, I still can’t hold it against Libertarians who voted for their own candidate rather than McCain (just so Obama wouldn’t win). It’s their party, if they field a candidate, they should be able to vote for who they want and it’s up to the GOP to “encourage” them to join forces. Clearly the GOP and McCain did a poor job influencing Libertarians to help out.
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 1:31 PM
I think he’s just looking for a rapid way to lame duck status as an excuse to takes some more vacashun.
What’s a lame duck to do?
I betcha Michelle O is ridin’ his ass to have some privacy. Could you imagine the hounding that woman would dish out at home? AND, her mother’s around to boot! If I were president, I’d probably choose lame duck status over a week in the house with those two.
ted c on August 28, 2009 at 1:31 PM
Independents voted for a Marxist. How smart is that?
faraway on August 28, 2009 at 1:31 PM
Independent= proxy for “too stupid to take a principled stance.”
ted c on August 28, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Calibrate against this number, for anyone who thinks that any politician will keep all of his promises — and especially anyone who believes the premise for this particular politician seven months after his oath-taking — has bought a bridge somewhere.
unclesmrgol on August 28, 2009 at 1:33 PM
No they won’t, and Zell was also a Marine, country first not party first. God Bless Him.
Follow the Money the Progressives get their funding from Soros he owns the Democrat Party. I do hope we are witnessing the crest of the progressive wave, that this is their high water mark, and they will now recede from the American political landscape.
God Bless America Please.
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:33 PM
One quote that stands out in my mind from Zell Miller. After 9/11, he gave us an analogy on terrorists…I don’t remember the exact quote…but, he explained that he has many grandchildren that play around his porch. If there was a nest of copperheads under the stairs of his porch, he would not try to question what their grievances were…he would just kill them all. I know I butchered this quote, but it pointed out that, unlike the jelly spined limpoids of the democratic wing, HE understood what was at stake.
HornetSting on August 28, 2009 at 1:33 PM
No it won’t…because 99.9% of all “historians” suffer from BDS, and to a greater degree than the general public does.
Until his death 2 years ago, the Dean of American “historians” was former JFK kneepad Arthur Schlesinger. He likened Dubyah’s going into Iraq to what the Imperial Japanese Navy did at Pearl Harbor in 1941.
Remember, “historians” have managed to whitewash the “legacies” of FDR and JFK and LBJ for a half a century. They would rather be waterboarded than say anything nice about the Smirking Chimp from Texas.
Del Dolemonte on August 28, 2009 at 1:34 PM
The only explanation I can come up with that put him in office was denial on the part of the voter and the perfect storm of events (some of them starting decades ago). The country made a huge mistake with two silver linings in my opinion. One, Obama has done one good thing and that is make politics an unavoidable issue. Voter apathy should be diminished greatly by the time this whole thing is over. Two, as much as there is the threat of democrate rule for eternity, it will hopefully go the other way. He has tarnished the name of Democrats for a long time. With the help of Pelosi, etc, the trust people had in that party is all but shot. Yes, yes, there will always be a percentage of the population devoted to the dem program but watching what a true liberal is capable of is scaring the heck out of most and will never be forgotten. When he first started to feel the backlash, he had an opportunity to come out and manage the expectations he created on day one with a moderate approach, but no he chose to hold tight to his ideology and pull every Alinsky tactic he could. Huge mistake and a hole he will not be able to crawl out of anytime soon. Even if he gets slapped in 2010, he won’t back down. His wife won’t let him :)
sherry on August 28, 2009 at 1:35 PM
That’s a bull$h!t generalization of independents. The D’s suck eggs, no doubt about it, but the R’s have been an embarrassment for at least the last 5 years. Pro-Amnesty, porkulus, cronyism, etc…I won’t put an R next to my name until I see someone with the balls to come in and do what Palin did in the Alaskan Republican Party. Bust the corruption, honor the Constitution, get gov’t out of the marriage business, and return the power back to the people. Stay out of my bedroom, hell, stay out of my house, and leave me & my business alone. I’m actually a registered Libertarian, pro-individualism, fiscally conservative, but socially leave-me-the-hell-alone!
ornery_independent on August 28, 2009 at 1:36 PM
To say nothing of their laying plenty of eggs.
“Very intelligent”? In a sociopathic way, I suppose.
onlineanalyst on August 28, 2009 at 1:36 PM
Not sure what to make of this. Does not seen that intelligent to me, but whatever.
Not sure where this idea that Obama is some sort of genius.
jharada on August 28, 2009 at 1:37 PM
sherry on August 28, 2009 at 1:35 PM
great analysis sherry
ted c on August 28, 2009 at 1:37 PM
We got no one in the stable.
Holger on August 28, 2009 at 1:38 PM
The only effective opposition is to target and isolate the socialists. Conservatives play into Obama’s hand by targeting “liberals”, which turns off many libertarians, independents and real/classic liberals.
modifiedcontent on August 28, 2009 at 1:38 PM
A lot of my moderate friends really were leaning to McCain until the crash.
That’s when they veered left.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:39 PM
…and no, I don’t think Ogabe is “intelligent, honest, and truthful”. Far, far from it.
ornery_independent on August 28, 2009 at 1:40 PM
It’s a matter of correlation. One would think that intelligence should be accompanied by fiscal responsibility. Moreover, one would think good leadership skills would accompany intelligence. Both are pure fiction. There are tons of intelligent idiots that don’t even manage their own checkbooks–Obama is one of them. Second, there are scores of high school dropouts that have demonstrated extraordinary leadership–many of them in wartime as squad leaders, etc. This is not to say that some leaders have been both brilliant and fiscally responsible or that some wartime leaders aren’t both well-educated and great leaders. However, its fallacious to equate intelligence with $$ responsibility.
ted c on August 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM
I bing-ed this: November 2008 obama buyer’s remorse.
And you’re right, happened almost immediately. For example, from this article on the 7th November:
Or Newsbusters on the 10th November.
Or even Joe Biden’s comments about Hillary before the election!
You get the point. Now that I look at it and see these poll numbers, I think the U.S. really did “hold their nose” when we voted last November. Just not how McCain’s mom originally meant it.
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM
Any of ya’ll remember that SNL skit where the fake Barry was calling the fake Hillary at 3AM in a blind panic, head in hands, begging Hillary for help?
Yeah, that was funny back then. It’s just scary now.
JoeinTX on August 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM
Sherry after McCain voted for the first TARP, I believe it sealed a lot of Conservatives minds not to vote for him. They say people stayed home. To what end to what teach the Republicans a lesson? McCain did not respond to the charges that he was weak on the Economy.
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:42 PM
And drove off a bridge?
HornetSting on August 28, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Yeah, it looks that way to me, too. I really don’t think any leader should let ideologues control them.
A sense of vision and a grasp of what the challenges are should be quite enough to steer with conviction.
I’m just not seeing, even now, what Obama’s vision is. He seems to me to be an entirely political animal. I feel like we’re in one long campaign.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Hear hear!
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 1:43 PM
Well, nobody can ever say for sure, but I will ALWAYS believe that McCain’s suspension was the decider.
He simply lived up to a fear that he was erratic in old age. People made up their minds right then.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:44 PM
And the smell is getting worse, we could really use those nose plugs now. I wonder if Michelle Malkin will get them back out – now as the stink gets worse ;)
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:45 PM
He is the most intelligent Marxist I know.
faraway on August 28, 2009 at 1:45 PM
modifiedcontent on August 28, 2009 at 1:38 PM
Having read your posts on this threat with interest, who/what are you suggesting to get the independents who don’t lean left on board?
Firefly_76 on August 28, 2009 at 1:45 PM
Or, as us independents put it — to0 smart to swallow, with hook and sinker, the party line.
I have significant problems with both the Democrats and the Republicans, but I certainly have more problems with the Democrats. The Republicans seem closest to the Party of Lincoln, except when they rail against illegal immigration and how laws are made to be upheld.
Try telling your side to a Republican of the late 1850′s or early 1860′s who’s running a station on the Underground Railroad, deliberately disobeying what they consider an unjust law. Try telling that to Lincoln, who was quite in favor of unrestricted immigration, expecting only that the immigrant should pay the landing tax as earnest money showing that they expected to be a net asset and not a net liability to our nation.
So don’t ballyhoo us independents, some of whom know more about Republicanism than many modern day Republicans.
unclesmrgol on August 28, 2009 at 1:45 PM
This election was so racially charged, I’m not sure he could respond to much, frankly.
I’ve not ever seen anything like it.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:45 PM
Obama is exciting the base like McCain never could.
Can’t wait for his vacation to end.
faraway on August 28, 2009 at 1:47 PM
I would tend to agree with you on the first point, not so much on the second.
Chainsaw56 on August 28, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Whoever won the 2008 election would destroy their own party.
Thanks Obama.
faraway on August 28, 2009 at 1:50 PM
Good analysis. I thought Barry would be ineffectual: allowing the media their (I think marginal) claims to his “great intelligence”, the only way you go from a shitstirring “community organizer” to POTUS in one step is if you adopt a do-nothing approach as POTUS.
A complete executive neophyte trying to “remake America” was always destined to be a train-wreck. He’s getting eaten alive. I suspect, at some level, he knows it, and America is waking up to it as well.
mr.blacksheep on August 28, 2009 at 1:51 PM
T
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 1:52 PM
I think age was a huge factor. And Palin (nor Biden) either one were ready to be president.
McCain lost, in my opinion, because of his age.
Of course, I think a lot of more mature voters saw with crystal clarity that Obama wasn’t vetted, was being given a very easy path due to his race and the historical significance. And they also saw a very weak government record that showed little or no real experience.
They knew.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM
That’s a tough argument to sell (and I admit that, knowing full well I wrote it up above). In 2004, W received 62 million votes; Kerry 59 million (I’m rounding, I know). In 2008, McCain received 59.9 million; Obama 69.5 million. The GOP candidate showed a slight change from 2004 to 2008 (dropped 3-4%); what was vastly different was the 10 million more the Democrat candidate received (up 17%). Yes, I know population changes also need to be taken into account. But while the population didn’t shoot up 17% in those four years, the Democrat’s total vote did. And I’m inclined to say this tell us more about Obama than McCain.
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 1:54 PM
I swear I think McCain got the Nomination at some machination of Rove and Obama got elected thanks to Rove as well. It is his plot to finally destroy the DNC party.
Holger on August 28, 2009 at 1:55 PM
or D. I’m a Racist
86% – Very Intelligent!
mankai on August 28, 2009 at 1:56 PM
I don’t suppose anybody knows how Obama was polling in Aug. ’05.
Jim Treacher on August 28, 2009 at 1:57 PM
So don’t ballyhoo us independents, some of whom know more about Republicanism than many modern day Republicans.
unclesmrgol on August 28, 2009
Until the Republican Party returns to it’s conservative, constitutionalist roots I am happy to identify myself as a conservative-independent. I will vote for any real conservative candidate no matter their party. Of course, in reality, that leaves all current Democrats out.
SKYFOX on August 28, 2009 at 1:57 PM
I don’t know that much about the GOP, since I voted Dem all my life until last year.
But I understand it’s a kind of “next in line” white guy tradition?
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:57 PM
Exactly unclesmrgol.
Something that seems conspicuously left out of the discussion on “How Obama got elected” is the effect of “white guilt”. (Does bringing this up make me a racist?) I mean, here we had a hansome, clean, and (um, er, uhhhh) eloquent (half) black man who elicited tingles up the leg with his teleprompter-driven speeches. I even remember my mother infuriating me by asking “Don’t you want to be a part of this historic event?”
Excuse me while I go puke.
ornery_independent on August 28, 2009 at 1:57 PM
I seriously question the intelligence of anyone who thinks Obama is honest, keeps his promises or is truthful. He has been caught in lie after lie in his presentations of Obamacare. What are these people thinking?
katieanne on August 28, 2009 at 1:59 PM
.
I’ve concluded the same for me, personally. I am done with partisanship stuff. Even the constant analysis of party politics is killing this country.
I’m opting out. I’ll vote for the candidate, and I don’t care what the label is.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Obama is a classic hardline academic marxist. His mother Ann Dunham was indoctrinated with Frankfurter Schule marxism in high school. As a student she clearly bought into the Third World as revolutionary vanguard idea – Frantz Fanon etc. That’s why she became an anthropologist, “married” a Kenyan socialist and later an Indonesian muslim. This brand of marxism was full of white guilt and also led directly to groups like the Weather Underground and the Rote Armee Faktion who respectively idolized the Black Panthers and palestinian terrorists.
In the 1970s Obama had communist poet uncle Frank as his father figure. In the 1980s he first was in New York, was active in the anti-Apartheid movement – worthy cause, but very much coopted by communists. He also hung around Edward Said and other palestinian activists and probably met Bill Ayers there.
During the early 1980s Obama also wrote a piece against stationing Pershing cruise missiles in Europe. This was a big issue in Europe at the time and when the archives opened after the collapse of the Soviet Union it became clear that much of that “anti-war movement” was directly orchestrated by the KGB. Obama’s piece was in the same style. To me it’s obvious he took his orders from the Soviets.
In the 1990s Obama was involved with ACORN and a member of the New Party, a very thinly disguised communist front party.
2009: Obama as American president is strangling the private sector and expanding government into every corner of society.
Why is it so hard for you to see what his vision is?
modifiedcontent on August 28, 2009 at 2:00 PM
For me the worst day of his campaign was the summit meeting in D.C. after the “suspension” and he sat there twirling a pen in his hand and said absolutely nothing while Obama sat there with a smug smile on his face. I lost what little faith I had in him that day. Second worst day, his campaign speech in Minn. I, like others, dragged myself to the voting booth. He was intimidated by Obama’s popularity and of course, the fundraising capabilities. He gave up long before November and probably decided he better watch his words and not offend anyone given the writing on the wall. He had no need to defend anything strongly as was clear even after the election when he couldn’t make a stand on the attacks on Palin. One good thing to come out of this is the country’s cry for a heavyweight in the ring. The energy demanding a strong leader is palpable out there. I’m not that old but I’ve never experienced anything like this.
sherry on August 28, 2009 at 2:00 PM
well, then get educating your peers…apparently they don’t have the same amount of moxie that you apparently contain.
ted c on August 28, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Well -and this is being said by someone did a lot for his campaign – I really think that he had his chance and he lost, so he should STFU (sorry for the language) and get off the stage.
I’m not so sure they knew – it was more the ‘historical significance’ thing.
Chainsaw56 on August 28, 2009 at 2:01 PM
That’s why I included that in my list of reasons we elected Obama: electing a minority candidate. I think there was a collective feeling of white guilt (as Shelby Steele would call it) that influenced a few million (and that’s all it would take) moderate white voters to vote for Obama even if they didn’t like him — think of it as the reverse Bradley Effect. We willingly set a second standard for the minority candidate (it didn’t hurt that the media helped us) and now that he’s in the “cauldron of competition” (as Thomas would say) we find unsurprisingly that he can’t cut it. It’s in this sense that I blame us; we the voters are as culpable for Obama’s poor performance as he is. (I know some will think that’s too harsh, I’m fine with that.)
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 2:02 PM
Great analysis. Great post.
I remain disappointed that he didn’t come out and disavow the campaign “insiders” who kept putting out nonsense about Palin.
That was not classy at all.
You put your finger on the problem.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 2:03 PM
McCain threw the election when he suspended his campaign to “get back to Washington.”
While a principled move, it certainly wasn’t intelligent. Either way, Obama’s election was a fait accompli by that time. It was simply a perfect storm that he seemed to benefit from. Trouble is, he thinks that the storm is still around and he can benefit from it. Hate to be the bearer of bad news for The Won–but that just ain’t happenin’
ted c on August 28, 2009 at 2:04 PM
I didn’t realize till this thread, how many Libertarians and Independents there were commenting on Hot Air.
Dr Evil on August 28, 2009 at 2:05 PM
I’m not leaving it out, see my comment at 2:02. I’m a huge fan of Steele and I’m convinced at this point that “white guilt” was a significant factor.
LastRick on August 28, 2009 at 2:06 PM
I think he will “cut” it. He’s already figured out a lot. I don’t mean I’ll like his policies. I’m sure I won’t, in fact, but he’ll “cut the mustard,” so to speak.
But I do totally get your post and know what you’re talking about.
There’s nothing wrong with the historical significance or the fact that the country rather yearned for a minority personage in that position.
I do think there is definitely racism involved, too, but then the notion that he needed to be treated with kid gloves is repugnant and racist to me. Stuff and nonsense.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 2:07 PM
Absolutely. I think Geraldine Ferarro acknowledged that. She got blasted, but she was dead right.
AnninCA on August 28, 2009 at 2:08 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »