Rasmussen: Obama strong disapproval at peak
posted at 11:40 am on August 30, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
If Barack Obama hoped to gain some breathing room with his vacation, or perhaps even pick up some sympathetic vibe for eulogizing Ted Kennedy on Friday, Rasmussen’s latest poll shows that nothing has changed in the direction of his approval ratings. With one of the three days in Rasmussen’s presidential tracking poll after the wake, Obama has hit his highest level of strong disapproval yet, at 42%. The “passion index” has now hit -10 — not the worst of his term thus far, but certainly not good:
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 32% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove. That’s the highest level of Strong Disapproval yet recorded for this President and it gives Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10 …
Overall, 47% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. That matches the lowest total approval yet measured for Obama. Fifty-two percent (52%) now disapprove.
Support for the health care reform package proposed by the President and Congressional Democrats has stopped falling, but most voters are still opposed.
The polling on ObamaCare has frozen at 53%-43% disapproval. That’s unchanged from two weeks ago, which indicates that the big push from unions, AARP, and other advocates in the wake of the town-hall meetings has had little effect. They may have arrested the free-fall, but they’re not changing any minds.
Congress has a mighty challenge in front of them when they return, and not just on health-care reform. They also have to convince a strong majority that they belong on Capitol Hill:
If Americans could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, 57% would throw out all the legislators and start over again. Just 25% would vote to keep the Congress.
Before anyone gets too giddy about that result, it’s just about the same as it was in October, when Democrats gained a large majority in both chambers:
Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.
Unsurprisingly, a plurality of Democrats (43%) want to keep the Congress they have. Unfortunately, few Democrats in the House and none in the Senate can get re-elected just on the basis of party-line votes. Independents, who broke hard for Democrats in the last two Congressional elections, are much less sanguine about their leadership. Seventy percent would vote to throw out Congress, as opposed to just 15% that would keep them, another indicator of big trouble ahead for Democrats in 2010.
No one has been terribly impressed with the performance of Congress lately, which drives those numbers. A solid majority, 54%, believe Congress doesn’t understand bills before voting on them. That wins pluralities or majorities across almost all demographics, but especially independents, who go 65%-20% for lack of comprehension. Only 38% of Democrats think Congress understands the bills, as opposed to 32% who think Congress hasn’t a clue — hardly a vote of confidence in their own leadership.
The consensus seems to be that we have a collection of Fools on the Hill. Unfortunately, it’s not in an ironic sense, as the Beatles song had it (a tribute to their guru, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi), either. Here’s my favorite version of the song, by Sergio Mendes & Brasil ’66, shown here performing it live:
Related Posts:









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
Sweet. How sweet it is.
Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM
This.
When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM
ear relevant…
driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.
kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM
This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.
savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM
Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.
However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)
What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.
In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.
It’s not socialism. It’s worse.
EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”
jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM
A fitting capstone to Ed’s story about loss-prevention (aka employee theft) and management’s “permission structure” in this post.
(Not to mention the jaw-dropping statements of Eleanor Clift in this one.)
AesopFan on May 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM
I enjoy popcorn and hope it is a long week.
Drill and Fill on May 20, 2013 at 12:41 AM
Hey give Barky a break. He had to get his sorry ass out to Vegas.
tbear44 on May 20, 2013 at 4:49 AM
Of course they sent Pfeiffer out to do the Sunday shows. He was the most senior expendable staff member they had . . .
BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM
Pfeiffer… The guy with the red shirt in the landing party…
Boudica on May 20, 2013 at 5:53 AM
Perfect!
lea on May 20, 2013 at 7:11 AM
Does anybody else remember the campaign in 2008 when Obama defended his lack of administrative experience by saying he was just so smart and tuned in that his instincts were better than experience. Someone needs to dredge up these sound bites and play then with the current line about the government being too large to control and that the White House only knows what it reads in the newspaper.
bartbeast on May 20, 2013 at 8:43 AM
If where the president was during the Benghazi crisis is “irrelevant”, then he wasn’t where one would expect the Commander-in-Chief to be. So, where was he? Was he watching a movie in the residence? Was he bowling? Or was he having a bi-curious outing with his good buddy Reggie Love? If Obama was AWOL, as I suspect he was, it is he who is irrelevant. This entire stinkin’ criminal Obama Regime must go and now!
SpiderMike on May 20, 2013 at 9:31 AM
If this continues all week, it will be ‘O’ himself doing the rounds on the Sunday talk shows – except for Fox, of course. (‘O’ can do everything better than everyone else as he has been known to say.)
He then gets the extra benefit that no one will challenge him like they have begun to do with his minions.
Carnac on May 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2