Obama most polarized first-year presidency
posted at 2:20 pm on January 25, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
Gallup reports today that Barack Obama has polarized the nation more than any other first-year President, with partisan gaps on approval ratings wider than anyone since Gallup started polling. Bill Clinton held the record before now, but Obama bested him by 12 points:
The 65 percentage-point gap between Democrats’ (88%) and Republicans’ (23%) average job approval ratings for Barack Obama is easily the largest for any president in his first year in office, greatly exceeding the prior high of 52 points for Bill Clinton.
Overall, Obama averaged 57% job approval among all Americans from his inauguration to the end of his first full year on Jan. 19. He came into office seeking to unite the country, and his initial approval ratings ranked among the best for post-World War II presidents, including an average of 41% approval from Republicans in his first week in office. But he quickly lost most of his Republican support, with his approval rating among Republicans dropping below 30% in mid-February and below 20% in August. Throughout the year, his approval rating among Democrats exceeded 80%, and it showed little decline even as his overall approval rating fell from the mid-60s to roughly 50%.
Thus, the extraordinary level of polarization in Obama’s first year in office is a combination of declining support from Republicans coupled with high and sustained approval from Democrats. In fact, his 88% average approval rating from his own party’s supporters is exceeded only by George W. Bush’s 92% during Bush’s first year in office. Obama’s 23% approval among supporters of the opposition party matches Bill Clinton’s for the lowest for a first-year president. But Clinton was less popular among Democrats than Obama has been to date, making Obama’s ratings more polarized.
Gallup makes a good point about why Obama ended up lower than George W. Bush. In the aftermath of the 2000 presidential election, the dispute over Florida’s votes created a huge partisan rift — but in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, that was set aside for a while. The polarization that would have normally continued otherwise may have equalled or bested Obama’s ratings, although that is difficult to determine in hindsight.
However, the polarization refutes the notion that Obama has done anything to change the way politics get conducted, both in Washington DC and the nation as a whole. His radical legislative agenda has infuriated conservatives and independents, as has the manner in which that agenda has been conducted. Obama claims that he has reached out to Republicans, a notion his surrogates attempted to reinforce on yesterday’s political shows, but Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid locked Republicans out of drafting the three main pieces of legislation pursued in 2009: Porkulus, cap-and-trade, and ObamaCare. That may thrill Democrats, but shrugging and claiming “I won” is not the Hope and Change Obama promised on the campaign trail.
Now for the bad news. Before 1980, no President had ever scored above 40 points in polarization in their first year on the job. Since 1980, only one President has scored below 40 points on polarization in his first year. Which President was that? The only President to lose his re-election bid, George H. W. Bush.









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
During the campaign, when Michelle started talking about “pie”, I just knew we were headed for trouble.
Barb Dwyer on January 25, 2010 at 3:35 PM
Doughboy on January 25, 2010 at 2:30 PM
Sigh. How many times do I have to tell you folks? Bush41 didn’t lose because of his “Read My Lips” broken pledge. He would’ve survived that if he hadn’t been so, er, non-committed to running for re-election in ’92. Clinton, Perot, even Pat Buchanan all saw that lack of energy, and capitalized on it.
BradSchwartze on January 25, 2010 at 3:38 PM
How long until we start hearing commentary about how racism is the real reason for this partisan gap?
Of course it couldn’t be 1) Obama’s serially breaking promises, 2) his vilification of anyone who opposes him, 3) his anti-business rhetoric 4) sweatheart deals with Unions and democrat constituencies 5) utter failure of the stimulus 6) weakness on terrorism 7) faux-populism 8) Big government answer to everything 9) persisent cry baby claims of Bush did it and 10) Blind faith and near religious support from his progressive base.
Nah, you’re all racists.
GopherCon on January 25, 2010 at 3:41 PM
I swear they will be re-writing the SOTU speech right up until he delivers it; “No, you can’t say that, I already got busted lying about it”, “No, gotta take out the housing recovery part”, “No, we didn’t do it for Teddy”, “No, not sure about the whole Gitmo thing anymore”, “No, the gays still can’t ask or tell”
“Oh well, I guess we’ll go with Bo isn’t peeing in the Whitehouse anymore”
anniekc on January 25, 2010 at 3:42 PM
lonesomecharlie on January 25, 2010 at 2:54 PM
That’s nice. Tell me another good conspiracy story.
BradSchwartze on January 25, 2010 at 3:43 PM
Its stunning to consider that 88% of Dems still approve of Maobama.
Democrat voters are like alcoholic spouses or business partners, making one bad decision after another. If they can’t get their acts together, eventually you have to cut them loose or let them take your entire family or business down.
james23 on January 25, 2010 at 3:45 PM
Andrew Sullivan.
nyx on January 25, 2010 at 3:45 PM
To paraphrase Tom Bevin:
Thou shalt not crucify mankind on a cross of arugula.
Dhuka on January 25, 2010 at 3:46 PM
Polarity is due to racist, stupid, angry US voters who drive pickup trucks, therefore GMC will focus on building trucks which will result GMC profitability with Obama claiming credit due to his polarity which is the new buzz word for bipartisanship and market recovery.
Romans34 on January 25, 2010 at 3:47 PM
That’s a good analogy with the alcoholic or abusive spouse; The excuses Dem’s make to support their positions are often based solely on loyalty. It’s kind of bizarre, I’ll never forget hearing my brother in law in CA, rail about “all the welfare recipients he was supporting with his outragous taxes”! He wasn’t about to admit how that all came about, and STILL votes straight party ticket. Lame, really lame.
anniekc on January 25, 2010 at 3:53 PM
I’m not sure any of us, leaning left or leaning right, know the answers.
I think we’re in an interesting transition. I personally think the US has been in an economic upswing since WWII. We’re evening out now, for a slew of reasons.
I’m not sure we KNOW how to best adjust, and, hence, the extreme voices emerge to command attention.
But I do think we will survive and go beyond survival. We’ll thrive. But we have to find the real limits right now.
AnninCA on January 25, 2010 at 3:59 PM
Slightly OT, but in following the links under the Headlines, I’ve noticed that there seems to be a slew of articles about Obama that focus on how he is in private, as opposed to his public persona. I find it interesting that part of the solution to his cratering popularity (and therefore his impotence as a campaigning force for vulnerable Dems) is to “humanize” him. Remember, to a progressive, your actions are excused by your purity of heart and compassionate motives.
“It is extraordinary what damage is sometimes done in the name of compassion.” – Margaret Thatcher
Animator Girl on January 25, 2010 at 4:05 PM
I’m waiting for bleedsblue to weigh in on these crayon wielding racists.
booter on January 25, 2010 at 4:12 PM
Funny how libbies dismissed Sarah Palin because she didn’t “appeal” to liberals and independents.
Now they have a problem – we can shove that argument right back in their faces because their guy no longer appeals to conservatives and independents.
Think they care?
Hell no – they’re all hypocrits.
HondaV65 on January 25, 2010 at 4:18 PM
Success! Polarization… precisely what he was after.
PrincipledPilgrim on January 25, 2010 at 4:20 PM
No! Really?
kens on January 25, 2010 at 4:34 PM
Are you aware of how narcissistic you sound when you post?
fossten on January 25, 2010 at 4:35 PM
Ann-in-a-Can is Ellie Light lite!
Dhuka on January 25, 2010 at 4:42 PM
Whatsamatta yu? You no unnerstan his brilliance?
Cybergeezer on January 25, 2010 at 4:46 PM
The teleprompter and presidential podium in front of the sixth grade class shoot down any notion that the prez and his administration know what they are doing and why they are doing it.
AltTuning on January 25, 2010 at 5:04 PM
No one should be posting this by this time of the day. Yes, he used a teleprompter for a press meeting. No, he did not use the teleprompter with the 6th grade class. Instapundit has links for your perusal.
chemman on January 25, 2010 at 5:20 PM
First time I ever was able to guess your age.
You obviously don’t remember the Carter years, with 21% interest rates, double digit unemployment, gas prices skyrocketing, and Carters’ “malaise” speeches.
We were in an upswing since 1981, and didn’t have more than a downward blip until 2006 (except for after 9/11, but even that only lasted a relatively short while). Let’s see, what happened in 2006?
Now the economy is creeping up on the Carter years, and you’ll finally have a real basis for comparison.
Must’ve been something George Bush did.
Squiggy on January 26, 2010 at 6:20 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2