New poll shows Obama at 51% job approval, but …

posted at 10:25 am on March 16, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

National Journal joins Reuters and Pew in showing Barack Obama back to a 50% or better rating on job approval.  The new level in the NJ/Allstate poll is Obama’s best in the series since May 2011, taken after the killing of Osama bin Laden, but he still trails on his re-elect numbers:

Boosted by growing optimism about the economy, President Obama is showing signs of reassembling the coalition of support that powered him to his 2008 presidential victory.

In the latest Allstate/National Journal Heartland Monitor poll, Obama’s approval rating rose to 51 percent, up from only 44 percent in each of the previous polls taken in October and December. That’s Obama’s highest approval rating in the Heartland Monitor since the survey taken immediately after the killing of Osama bin Laden in May. Other than that, the new survey marks the first time that Obama’s approval rating in the poll has crossed the critical 50 percent threshold since September 2009.

The survey suggests the overall verdict is split—Obama’s support is strengthening but hardly yet secure, and the country remains divided closely enough on his performance and agenda to virtually ensure a competitive general election against the Republican nominee. Indeed, just 44 percent of registered voters surveyed said they intend to vote for the president’s reelection, while 49 percent said they will likely or definitely vote for someone else. A series of economic measures also shows that Obama is continuing to receive equivocal ratings, especially from whites.

But the most revealing measure of electoral strength for an incumbent is his overall approval rating, and on that front the survey, conducted from March 3 to 6, showed Obama recording clear progress. Compared with the December survey, the new poll found his approval rating rising by 11 percentage points among independents; 8 among nonwhites; 6 among all whites; 7 among both college-educated white men and women; and 9 among the so-called waitress moms—white women without a college degree. Only among noncollege-educated white men did Obama remain stuck in neutral with virtually no gain from December.

You know what else in this poll is similar to Reuters and Pew?  The composition of the sample.  NJ didn’t provide a link to the data in its article, but supplied it to me on request — and the D/R/I is about what you’d expect.  The sample gives Democrats an eight-point advantage, 34/26/35, which both overstates independents and vastly underrepresents Republicans.  Even in 2008, when Democrats surged to the polls after eight years of George W. Bush, the exit polls showed a seven-point advantage for Democrats, 39/32, which mirrored Obama’s seven-point victory in the popular vote.  In 2010′s midterms, exit polls showed a 35/35/30 split, which means that either the poll undersampled Republicans by six or nine points, depending on which turnout model one presumes this general election will most closely resemble. On top of that, the approval numbers are based on general-population adults, not the subsample of registered voters.

The re-elect numbers numbers come from the registered voter sample, though, and they’re not good at all for an incumbent — especially one whose opposition is in the middle of a tough primary fight.  Even with a skewed sample with an eight-point advantage for Democrats, only 27% of men and 32% of women say they will definitely vote for Obama in 2012, and only 31% overall.  That’s actually lower than the percentage of women in the sample who are Democrats (37%) and men as well (32%).  Both are also lower than the percentage that believe Obama increases opportunity for people like them to “get ahead” (30% among men, 32% among women, and 31% of overall respondents).  Obama isn’t even convincing his own party’s voters, let alone anyone else.

In comparison, 39% in this skewed sample say they will vote against Obama in 2012, thirteen points higher than the GOP representation in the sample.   The same is true in the gender breakdowns, with 38% of men decided against Obama and 36% of women, both higher than those who have decided to vote for Obama, and much higher than Republican representation in the gender demo (27% of men, 26% of women).   This poll is bad news for Obama’s re-election chances even with the skew — and probably would have been much worse with proper sampling.

Update: The 2008 exit poll data can be found here, and the 2010 exit poll data here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3

The polling companies aren’t using arbitrary sampling. They are using the most generous sampling they can justify weighted for the liberals they support and who pay them.

You have no support for this statement whatsoever.

cjw79 on March 16, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Throughout this thread we have cited repeated, documented examples of the use of biased sampling in “polls” solely designed to favor the Democrats, especially the Associated Press “polls” that sampled 2 times as many Democrats as Republicans, as well as CBS and the NY Times regularly oversampling Democrats by anywhere from 14% to 19% in the past. It’s those wide gaps we are singling out for attention, not the “polls” with a sample difference of 4 to 6%, which is generally accepted as Reality.

And yet, a few years ago when Leftist political poll analyst Nate Silver was asked if Republicans to his knowledge had ever been deliberately oversampled public opinion polling, he said “No”. I’ve seen others on the Left claim that Republicans were oversampled in polls during the Bush Presidency, but all they do is Blame Karl Rove, because they can never offer any such evidence.

Seems to me that if the Republicans at that time wanted to make Bush “popular”, they would ask the “pollsters” to be more honest in their poll samples. Bush’s “poll” numbers prove in spades that there was never massive oversampling of Republicans in any poll done between 2001 and 2009. To the contrary, the dishonest “polling” during those years drove his numbers down. That’s not a coincidence, that is a conspiracy.

BTW, the original poster you are replying to uses the term “polling companies” but it is very important to remember that many of these “polls” are in fact done by Democrat News Organizations. For decades, Gallup remained independent of the Democrat News Organizations, but then they were forever tainted after they partnered with CNN, which itself is a Journalistic Joke. Gallup never recovered.

BTW, it’s curious that it was CNN who threw Gallup under the bus; they replaced Gallup with ORC (Opinion Research)in 2007.

The reason CNN did this? ORC is run by Vinod Gupta, who has been a Bill and Hillary Clinton Groupie/Fluffer since the 1990s. CNN’s original “logic” in doing this was to grease the way for Hillary in 2008. but like everyone else, they never saw The Manchurian Candidate coming.

Del Dolemonte on March 16, 2012 at 2:52 PM

What will be the excuse of Republicans when Romney loses?

liberal4life on March 16, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Not sure, but conservatives will rightly blame it on Republicans. And Mitt Romney.

Spliff Menendez on March 16, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Del Dolemonte on March 16, 2012 at 2:52 PM

You are quite correct, but even the liberal press receives some form of reward for performing these polls. There are a lot of ways to repay a favor. Now last week we had two polls showing Zero at 40% now this week we have three showing him at 50. And ine of those had to employ the use of 51% liberals to generate that outcome.

A. That’s an epic failure, and,
B. A pretty obvious and funny attempt to help Zer0.

dogsoldier on March 16, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Not sure, but conservatives will rightly blame it on Republicans. And Mitt Romney.

Spliff Menendez on March 16, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Actually, Romney has won self-described “conservatives” in almost every contest, and been at least even in “Tea Party” support in most as well. It is only among those who describe themselves as “very conservative” and “very strongly support” the Tea Party that he has trailed.

The borderline psychotics one sees so many of on websites’ comments sections aren’t representative of the Republican electorate or the conservative movement generally. Thank God!

Adjoran on March 16, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Here’s some numbers that are hard to fudge.

After 103 fund-raisers, averaging one every three days since last April (twice his predecessor’s pace) the Obama campaign itself reported that fewer than 7% of 2008 donors renewed their support in the first quarter of Obama’s re-election campaign. That’s about one-quarter to one-third of a typical renewal rate. In the first quarter of the Bush re-election campaign,about 20% of the donors renewed their support.

And I think it’s pretty safe to assume a 100% democrat donor sample for those abysmal Obama donor numbers.

Cavalry on March 16, 2012 at 3:26 PM

What will be the excuse of Republicans when Romney loses?

liberal4life on March 16, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Not sure, but conservatives will rightly blame it on Republicans. And Mitt Romney.

Spliff Menendez on March 16, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Romney himself will get the blame if he loses big, by 10% or more.

Del Dolemonte on March 16, 2012 at 3:28 PM

More on the proven Democrat Media Bias, this time from 2004. This was written by the Token Conservative at the NYT-owned Boston Glob, Jeff Jacoby. He first cites Evan Thomas, Assistant Managing Editor at Newsweek, which spiked a huge news story in 1998 because it would Hurt a Sitting Democrat President.

`Let’s talk a little media bias here,” he said on the PBS program “Inside Washington” on July 11. “The media, I think, want Kerry to win. And I think they’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards . . . as being young and dynamic and optimistic and all, there’s going to be this glow about them that is going to be worth, collectively, the two of them, that’s going to be worth maybe 15 points.”

Just how lopsided is the pro-Kerry bias? When New York Times reporter John Tierney surveyed reporters covering the Democratic National Convention last month, the results were striking.

“We got anonymous answers from 153 journalists, about a third of them based in Washington,” he wrote on Aug. 1. “When asked who would be a better president, the journalists from outside the Beltway picked Mr. Kerry 3 to 1, and the ones from Washington favored him 12 to 1. Those results jibe with previous surveys over the past two decades showing that journalists tend to be Democrats, especially the ones based in Washington. Some surveys have found that more than 80 percent of the Beltway press corps votes Democratic.’

Del Dolemonte on March 16, 2012 at 3:35 PM

You’ll see one the morning of November 7.

ghostwriter on March 16, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Why didn’t I see one the day after the 2008 election?

lol! It was an outlier, silly.

ghostwriter on March 16, 2012 at 3:39 PM

What will be the excuse of Republicans when Romney loses?

liberal4life on March 16, 2012 at 11:33 AM

What will be the excuse of Democrats when Obama loses?

itsspideyman on March 16, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Looks like you still misspelled “will not”

dernst2 on March 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Public schools and Rutgers results

Schadenfreude on March 16, 2012 at 4:16 PM

The sample gives Democrats an eight-point advantage, 34/26/35, which both overstates independents and vastly underrepresents Republicans. Even in 2008, when Democrats surged to the polls after eight years of George W. Bush, the exit polls showed a seven-point advantage for Democrats, 39/32, which mirrored Obama’s seven-point victory in the popular vote. In 2010′s midterms, exit polls showed a 35/35/30 split, which means that either the poll undersampled Republicans by six or nine points, depending on which turnout model one presumes this general election will most closely resemble. On top of that, the approval numbers are based on general-population adults, not the subsample of registered voters.

Not registered voters, but a popularity contest by telephone.

They can only use old data to proportion their votes by dem and republican, they are not using the temperature that they find out there to guess how people are feeling now. There is no evidence that more democrats will come out or that independents will be skewed dem this election. People who cannot bring themselves on social issues to pull the lever for the republican, might say something like,”Oh, is it election day, I forgot.”

Fleuries on March 16, 2012 at 4:54 PM

What will be the excuse of Republicans when Romney loses?

liberal4life on March 16, 2012 at 11:33 AM

What will be the excuse of Democrats when Obama loses?

itsspideyman on March 16, 2012 at 3:57 PM

I asked l4l (or should I say “lol”?) that question last night. It wouldn’t answer.

If O’bama loses in November, the Democrats will blame everyone and everything except for him.

I’m sure some of them will even blame Bush! Some will also no doubt blame Rush Limbaugh and Faux News.

If he loses by a tiny margin, a la Algore in 2000, expect a replay of that scenario, with lawsuits, etc. When Democrat Thurston Howell the 5th lost in 2004 to Chimpy, his supporters blasted him for conceding, and many suggested with a Straight Face that Bush had “stolen” the votes in Ohio they same way he “stole” the votes in Florida in 2000.

But if he loses by 10% or more (which I don’t see happening), expect them to cry “Racism”.

But they will never blame their Candidate Himself, because the rest of us who voted against him aren’t fit to Wash His Feet. This despite the fact that he has absolutely no “record of accomplishment” to run on this time.

Even Killing bin Laden with his bare hands only gave him a tiny bump up in the “job approval” department, and even then as we noted earlier in this thread his Associated Press had to sample twice as many Democrats as Republicans to achieve that.

Del Dolemonte on March 16, 2012 at 5:48 PM

It is only among those who describe themselves as “very conservative” and “very strongly support” the Tea Party that he has trailed.

The borderline psychotics one sees so many of on websites’ comments sections aren’t representative of the Republican electorate or the conservative movement generally. Thank God!

Adjoran on March 16, 2012 at 3:25 PM

So what you are saying here is that people who very strongly support the Tea Party are borderline psychotics. First of all, I would like to know what aspects of the Tea Party do you NOT strongly support? What do you call “the conservative movement” that doesn’t include the ideas of the Tea Party?

Dollayo on March 16, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Did they poll dead people & illegals to bring those numbers up?

CTpatriot on March 16, 2012 at 8:29 PM

That SW corner of NH has always been Leftist; a lot of that is due to Keene State University but also a large concentration of Starving Artist Types in area towns like Peterborough, which was the inspiration for Thornton Wilder’s classic “Our Town”.

Del Dolemonte on March 16, 2012 at 1:23 PM

..he’s my bro..literally. And he lost his seat because the Dem gov endorsed the his (R) opponent. The guy has been pisssing in his oat meal ever since. Kinda hoping if you were ever over close to Acworth you could go over to his place and give him a raspberry for me!

The War Planner on March 16, 2012 at 10:15 PM

Noam Chomsky coined a phrase, as I recall: “Manufactured Consent.”

Modern “scientific” polls are “scientific” frauds. All polls have a “point of view” – usually that of the group paying for it.

Choice of the question wording, order of the questions, pre-loading ot pre-selecting the universe, data smoothing, or even plain deceit all go towards generating poll results.

Nobody in the political trenches believes these media polls. The far left media is in the business of guaranteeing the election for Obama. Hence, if it’s close, they lie and cheat. They will overstate Obama’s numbers in the hopes of suppressing Republican turnout while exciting the base.

Manufacturing consent – consent to reelect Obama, just as it was to elect him in the first place is their job.

I always ignore media paid-for lies.

The ONLY POLL THAT COUNTS IS THE ONE ON ELECTION DAY.

georgej on March 17, 2012 at 12:07 AM

Remember yesterday when they were whining about the polls being broken? I think that is because they pulled every trick in the book to make the numbers support Obama and failed. I think the numbers are that bad for the Chicago Jesus.

After the Republican primaries are over, people will come together to oust this massive American mistake from office.

I lived through Jimmy Carter. This guy is worse.

hachiban on March 17, 2012 at 2:22 AM

What will be the excuse of Democrats when Obama loses?

itsspideyman on March 16, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Cmon, we all know the answer to this one…RAAAAAACCCIIIIST!

airmonkey on March 17, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Don’t expect the truth from the MSM any time soon. Somewhere, George Orwell is laughing his ass off!

GarandFan on March 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Not sure, but conservatives will rightly blame it on Republicans. And Mitt Romney.

Spliff Menendez on March 16, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Actually, Romney has won self-described “conservatives” in almost every contest, and been at least even in “Tea Party” support in most as well. It is only among those who describe themselves as “very conservative” and “very strongly support” the Tea Party that he has trailed.

The borderline psychotics one sees so many of on websites’ comments sections aren’t representative of the Republican electorate or the conservative movement generally. Thank God!

Adjoran on March 16, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Your response made me laugh. Here you are extolling the virtues of a poll in which Romney does well in a thread discussing poor polling procedures/practices.

Are you lost, perhaps?

kim roy on March 17, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3