Poll: 58% say Obama’s policies driving gas costs higher, 48% expect unemployment to rise

posted at 11:35 am on March 19, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

While the national media focuses on polls from Reuters and Pew that use skewed samples to show Barack Obama’s approval rating going back up, The Hill takes a look at what might come in the future — and it’s not pretty for the President.  In a survey of 1,000 likely voters in the 2012 general election, almost half expect the Supreme Court to overturn ObamaCare, with only 29% confident of its constitutional legitimacy.  And that’s not the worst of the poll, either:

Half of likely voters expect the Supreme Court to strike down President Obama’s signature healthcare law, and strong majorities see other major policies coming from the White House making life more difficult for themselves and the country, according to this week’s The Hill Poll.

The poll indicated that 49 percent of likely voters said they expect a court ruling that is unfavorable to the Affordable Care Act, while just 29 percent think it will be upheld and 22 percent aren’t sure.

On economic issues, 62 percent of voters say Obama’s policies will increase the debt, while 25 percent think they will cut it, and by a 48-percent-to-38-percent margin, voters believe those policies will increase joblessness rather than put people back to work.

On energy, 58 percent say Obama’s policies will result in gasoline prices increasing, while just 20 percent expect them to cut prices — and by a 46-percent-to-36-percent margin, voters believe they will cause the United States to become even more dependent on foreign oil.

The sample in this case is a little skewed, but in an unusual direction.  The D/R/I is 32/36/32 for an R+4 advantage, one of the rare occasions when a pollster favors Republicans.  The four-point advantage for the GOP has low odds of becoming reality in the fall, though; the midterm elections, without a Democrat defending the White House, had a 35/35/30 split in CNN exit polling.  Republicans will do well if they get to that kind of parity in November with Obama at the top of the ticket.

Even adjusting for the R+4, these numbers look very bad for the President, especially on gas prices.  Overall, blame for increases in gas prices falls on Obama by 38 points, which means he’s especially vulnerable if prices shoot up this summer as they did in 2008 and 2010.  Younger voters put even more blame on Obama, 70/8, as do lower-income earners ($40-60K is the worst for Obama, 75/13 but the under-$20K is almost as bad at 62/15), perhaps because they feel the loss of disposable income and capacity for independent travel even more.  Independents blame Obama 61/13, while only a plurality of Democrats think Obama has made gas prices lower, 31/42.

Rasmussen also polled likely voters on ObamaCare, and finds that support for repealing it has remained remarkably consistent:

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on the constitutionality of the national health care law next week, and the number of voters who Strongly Support the law’s repeal is now at an eight-month high.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters shows that 56% at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care law, including 46% who Strongly Favor it.  Thirty-nine percent (39%) oppose repeal, with 29% who are Strongly Opposed.  (To see survey question wording,click here.)

Overall support for repeal is up three points from two weeks ago  and is at its highest level since last September.  The number that Strongly Favors repealing the law is at its highest point since July of last year. Since the law’s passage, most voters have favored repeal in nearly every survey, with support running as high as 62%. Opposition to repeal has ranged from 32% to 44%.

Strong support for repeal hit an eight-month high, but the range on overall demand for repeal in those eight months has been very steady indeed.  Today’s number is 56%; the lowest it has gone in those eight months is 51%, and the high was 57%.  Opposition to repeal has never gone above 42% in the past two years.  At the moment, independents back repeal 57/39, with almost half (48%) strongly supporting its repeal.  Even among Obama’s natural constituencies, support for repeal is strong or at a dead heat with support for ObamaCare: women (51/42), 18-29YOs (47/45 split), black voters (48/49 split), under-$20K income (50/35), $20-40K (53/39), and so on.

Given that the only real accomplishments of the Obama term has been ObamaCare, the failed stimulus bill, and Dodd-Frank, the fundamentals of this election look very bad for Obama — and will get worse if the Supreme Court throws out ObamaCare and gas prices continue to rise.

Update: I almost missed this from the Washington Post, which looks even worse:

Most Americans want the Supreme Court to invalidate at least part of the landmark health-care law that was passed in 2010, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. …

More than four in 10 — 42 percent — want the high court to throw out the entire law, 25 percent want to do away with the mandate alone and a similar proportion wants the justices to uphold the entire law.

Overall, among general population adults, 67% want the Supreme Court to partially or completely overturn Obama’s signature accomplishment.  That number rises to 70% among independents, and it’s 48% among Democrats.


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

Suckee results from a suckee president. Unexpected?

DrStock on March 19, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Meanwhile, useful idiot Sandra Fluke is going to be back on Capitol Hill:
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/19/fluke-back-on-capitol-hill/

Must distract the American voters with fearmongering about nonissues.

rbj on March 19, 2012 at 11:38 AM

policies coming from the White House making life more difficult for themselves and the country, according to this week’s The Hill Poll.

…but they wanted HOPE AND CHANGE!!!

TX-96 on March 19, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Overall, among general population adults, 67% want the Supreme Court to partially or completely overturn Obama’s signature accomplishment. That number rises to 70% among independents, and it’s 48% among Democrats.

Devastating.

Kataklysmic on March 19, 2012 at 11:39 AM

In all this Obama is either tied or beating the Republican candidates…

liberal4life on March 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Obama is so bad, Bod Dole could win this year…or McCain could win…we will not lose this, but I just wanted to have the most conservative candidate, and that won’t happen…

right2bright on March 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM

You elect an empty suit, you get an empty suit.

GarandFan on March 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Time to unite behind Romney, kids.

Never thought I’d type that. He simply must go, Meghan McCain be damned.

Marcus on March 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM

The numbers are encouraging, but that doesn’t directly or indirectly correlate to what the Supreme Court might or might not do. I won’t relax ’till I hear the fat lady singing a happy tune.

Woody

woodcdi on March 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM

On energy, 58 percent say Obama’s policies will result in gasoline prices increasing

It’s ok. On the news today they said there are ways to cope with sky high gas prices, like, buying a new car and pumping up your tires.

CorporatePiggy on March 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM

La la la, I can’t hear you
-lsm

All hail dear leader

cmsinaz on March 19, 2012 at 11:43 AM

This is my favorite picture – much better than the creepy eye one.

This post is just full of excellent news. :)

gophergirl on March 19, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Given that the only real accomplishments of the Obama term has been ObamaCare, the failed stimulus bill, and Dodd-Frank

Would you fail to mention “capturing bin Laden” if Bush were President?

bobs1196 on March 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

I can link to a poll that says polls don’t mean anything. Move along.

liberal4life

Rovin on March 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

while only a plurality of Democrats think Obama has made gas prices lower, 31/42.

This makes no sense to me. How can anyone think Obama has made gas prices lower?

BlueCollarAstronaut on March 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Gas under $3.50 and unemployment a hair under 8% just before the election, with the media massaging the data all along the way and of course giving Obama full credit.

Christien on March 19, 2012 at 11:45 AM

bho is going to get out of dc again going to four states on the gas issue. Somehow I don’t think bho will be able to gloss over his gas policy mess?

http://freebeacon.com/obamas-gas-price-apology-tour/
L

letget on March 19, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Yepper GG :)

That’s why you’ll never hear it on the evening news

cmsinaz on March 19, 2012 at 11:45 AM

But Mittens Romney said Obama isn’t to blame for high gas prices. So confusing.

angryed on March 19, 2012 at 11:46 AM

In all this Obama is either tied or beating the Republican candidates…

liberal4life on March 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Many Dems have no idea what’s going to happen to their party in November. And that’s a good thing.

WordsMatter on March 19, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Time to bust out the “I killed bin Laden with my bare hands” mantra (for the next 8 months).

nobar on March 19, 2012 at 11:46 AM

This is my favorite picture – much better than the creepy eye one.

This post is just full of excellent news. :)

gophergirl on March 19, 2012 at 11:43 AM

The long sad face was a great lead in for this article, lol.

I am concerned, though, about national reaction if the SC doesn’t repeal O’care. With that many people expecting a repeal, and emotions running so high on this issue, what might we be facing if they don’t get the job done?

Dee2008 on March 19, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Time to unite behind Romney, kids.

Never thought I’d type that. He simply must go, Meghan McCain be damned.

Marcus on March 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Unite behind the guy who said Obama’s a great man and we shouldn’t blame him for high gas prices? Sure, why not.

angryed on March 19, 2012 at 11:47 AM

…and yet!…We STILL have…the COVER-UP MEDIA.
As a business entity you would think these people would figure out, in their case…why readership or viewership is declining. They have had long enough to figure it out! They blame the internet for the change. My father had TIME MAGIZINE since the 50′s, I had it since the 80′s. He cancelled his, and I terminated mine last year, since it was a hopeless case. They don’t get it!

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2012 at 11:47 AM

So tell me, how exactly would Romney have lowered gas prices?

He would have said no to Keystsone. He would have said no to building more refineries. He would have said no to drilling in ANWR.

Everything Obama has done to increase price would have been done by Romney as well. But it’s cool. When an “R” socialist does things, we approve because R > D.

angryed on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

How can anyone think Obama has made gas prices lower?

BlueCollarAstronaut on March 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

I am sure there are liberals who seriously believe that without Obama’s great (???) leadership, the gas prices would be even worse.

On the other hand, there are liberals such as Chu and Obama himself who have gone on record as saying the only problem with gas prices is that they’re not high enough.

jwolf on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Would you fail to mention “capturing bin Laden” if Bush were President?

bobs1196 on March 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

bin leaded was not “captured”, bobs.

VegasRick on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

In all this Obama is either tied or beating the Republican candidates…

liberal4life on March 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM

…and what ‘POLE’ are you holding onto?

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Meanwhile, useful idiot Sandra Fluke is going to be back on Capitol Hill:
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/19/fluke-back-on-capitol-hill/

Must distract the American voters with fearmongering about nonissues.

rbj on March 19, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Good for her. She’s not taking it lying down.

RBMN on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

The gas prices poll shows just how uneducated so many Americans are about global politics and global capitalism. *SIGH*

libfreeordie on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

On energy, 58 percent say Obama’s policies will result in gasoline prices increasing, while just 20 percent expect them to cut prices

How dumb do you have to be to see gas prices rising on a daily basis and still think Obama’s policies will result in lower prices?

BKeyser on March 19, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Republicans will do well if they get to that kind of parity in November with Obama at the top of the ticket.

This is anecdotal to be sure, but I have heard even “middle of the road” type folks saying Obama has got to go.

With his support not equal to 2008 and a lot of people that are OMG, or ABO, the reps might just match 2010. Maybe The Hill is on to something.

In all this Obama is either tied or beating the Republican candidates…

liberal4life on March 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Just keep thinkin’ that.

cozmo on March 19, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Would you fail to mention “capturing bin Laden” if Bush were President?

bobs1196 on March 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

bin Laden was captured? Really?

joejm65 on March 19, 2012 at 11:52 AM

In the meanwhile, the land’s ‘royalty’ has beaucoup loads of money to waste. Work fools, so your taxes support this, in such ‘good’ times.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2012 at 11:53 AM

I ‘love’ nothing more than delusional lefties.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2012 at 11:54 AM

A nothing burger if you ask me

liberal4life on March 19, 2012 at 11:03 AM

NoFanofLibs on March 19, 2012 at 11:54 AM

How dumb do you have to be to see gas prices rising on a daily basis and still think Obama’s policies will result in lower prices?

BKeyser on March 19, 2012 at 11:52 AM

libfreeordie on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

That dumb.

VegasRick on March 19, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Are we really naive enough to believe that a radically politicized Supreme Court, that outdid Houdini when it pulled the magical right to slaughter 53 million of our own children, from it’s miraculous, “emanations from penumbras” hat, will overturn Obamacare? Maybe you didn’t notice Kelo, because it wasn’t your house that some local politician didn’t take for a more profitable Porno parlor?

All those who kept silent because that appeared to be so much guilt-free candy for their unbridled sexual appetites, now have to live with losing both their right of privacy to a zillion bureaucrats, but their freedom to the socialist gods. Don’t blame Obama.

We all know what the simple language of the constitution says -and we all know they make it up depending upon their immoral beliefs or political infulences -but we somehow never get around demanding they be impeached, immediately.

Nor do we aggressively seek to put in morally principled politicians who would do it -instead we’re busy looking for clever businessmen who could care how many innocents get slaughtered and will sway with the vote-breeze and to Hades with the nation or the constitution.

Don L on March 19, 2012 at 11:56 AM

58 percent say Obama’s policies will result in gasoline prices increasing,

Note that the scorn is for Obama’s policies not the mythical speculators as espoused by the jug-eared liar. And BTW, when gas prices rise so do the cost of groceries, electricity and everything else that requires delivery or production. In other words, 58% of people think Obama can do something about rising gas prices.

That this utterly incompetent socialist has as many mindless cheerleaders as he does is amazing and a true indictment of our public school system.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Obama is so bad, Bod Dole could win this year…or McCain could win…we will not lose this, but I just wanted to have the most conservative candidate, and that won’t happen…

right2bright on March 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM

…I say Bob Dole says Bob Dole can win this year…but I think McCain is such a dufus..he still would lose! He would reach across the isle and ask JugEars, if there was anything he could do to help JugEars beat him!

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Unite behind the guy who said Obama’s a great man and we shouldn’t blame him for high gas prices? Sure, why not.

angryed on March 19, 2012 at 11:47 AM

It was his son who said that “great man”, no? And if that’s the rule then Ronald Reagan wouldn’t have got within a hundred miles of the Oval Office. I remember Patti was WORSE than Ron.

Marcus on March 19, 2012 at 11:58 AM

But Barack speaks to people “every day” in the hospital thankful that Obamacare was passed.

SouthernGent on March 19, 2012 at 11:59 AM

For the next 8 months whenever you engage a liberal remember to scratch the side of your head with your middle finger while you grin at them. They like that and will appreciate the humor.

DanMan on March 19, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Patti was WORSE than Ron.

Marcus on March 19, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Bur easier on the eyes.

cozmo on March 19, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Side topic: it is now very clear to me why Bin Laden had to be killed, and not captured. If he had been captured, the way he is treated would have become a political football that would have erased the aura of success that surrounded the mission.

Dextrous on March 19, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Ot:dang it just heard that manning going to broncos, thought we would have a chance

cmsinaz on March 19, 2012 at 12:02 PM

But Barack speaks to people “every day” in the hospital thankful that Obamacare was passed.

SouthernGent on March 19, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Thankful for a program that hasn’t been implemented yet? People are just plain stupid.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2012 at 12:03 PM

A nothing burger if you ask me

liberal4life on March 19, 2012 at 11:03 AM
NoFanofLibs on March 19, 2012 at 11:54 AM

lobotomy4life is talking about its own brain mass again…….but where are you getting that post? This is the second one where the time on its post, is before the thread starts!
This thread started at 11:35…11:03?

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2012 at 12:03 PM

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2012 at 11:57 AM

I stand corrected, you are probably right…sighhhh…

right2bright on March 19, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Looks like they have some more brainwashing to do.

forest on March 19, 2012 at 12:05 PM

There is nothing to see here, move along….

I said get away from that, don’t you listen.

MSM

D-fusit on March 19, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Overall, among general population adults, 67% want the Supreme Court to partially or completely overturn Obama’s signature accomplishment. That number rises to 70% among independents, and it’s 48% among Democrats.

“We the People….”

BobMbx on March 19, 2012 at 12:10 PM

58 percent say Obama’s policies will result in gasoline prices increasing

And 42 percent are drooling morons.

SubmarineDoc on March 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Nor do we aggressively seek to put in morally principled politicians

Isn’t that like ordering hot ice cream?

BobMbx on March 19, 2012 at 12:12 PM

And 42 percent are drooling morons.

SubmarineDoc on March 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM

42% don’t have or want a job.

BobMbx on March 19, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Looking forward to a few threads in The Blog and Top Picks which aren’t about politics. Variety, spice of life, all that jazz.

Christien on March 19, 2012 at 12:15 PM

By more than 20 points, Americans expect the Supreme Court to strike Obamacare down as unconstitutional. I’ve seen polls in swing states like Ohio that show upwards of 75% believe that the individual mandate is unconstitutional.

If the Court upholds Obamacare, it will be the greatest GOTV gift to a political party (in this case, the GOP) in the history of American politics. 2010 will look like child’s play.

Resist We Much on March 19, 2012 at 12:17 PM

…lobotomy4life is talking about its own brain mass again…….but where are you getting that post? This is the second one where the time on its post, is before the thread starts!
This thread started at 11:35…11:03?

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2012 at 12:03 PM

I got that from the Holder thread. I just knew that was going to be the response.

NoFanofLibs on March 19, 2012 at 12:18 PM

APPLYING ALINSKY RULE 4: MAKE THE ENEMY LIVE UP TO ITS OWN RULES. — A “tea party leech” is deemed a “tea party leader” in our local press after he is arrested for rape. This belies that fact that there have been 75 rapes in the Occupy camps, so examples of alternative headlines to suggest in the “Comments” sections of offending sites is offered. “Occupy” is a subsidiary of the “War in Women”: A Tea Party is one of the safest place for women in the world.

Mutnodjmet on March 19, 2012 at 12:21 PM

2010 will look like child’s play.

Resist We Much on March 19, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Did you factor in the zombie vote, the untouched black panther election guards, the gazillion Soros paid to elect secretaries of state to miscount,the masses of angry leftist-divided grous, the full-scale assault by the left wing (and some on the right) media, the emergency declared by Obama, the many stabbed in the back again by the GOP elitists who hate Sarah (reform) and the tea-party?

I thought not. Blind exhuberance in the pursuit of political victory has another name -suicide.

Don L on March 19, 2012 at 12:26 PM

I thought not. Blind exhuberance in the pursuit of political victory has another name -suicide.

Don L on March 19, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Yes, I factored those in and you presume much. You’ve probably assumed that I am a Republican, a Conservative, a Christian, etc.

Resist We Much on March 19, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Overall, among general population adults, 67% want the Supreme Court to partially or completely overturn Obama’s signature accomplishment. That number rises to 70% among independents, and it’s 48% among Democrats.

“We the People….”

BobMbx on March 19, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Nice feeling but naive….

When Roe vs. Wade was forced upon innocent life -the polls reported that 79% of the nation was against abortion.

Polls don’t control those dastardly robed permanently protected SC lawyers.

Don L on March 19, 2012 at 12:31 PM

The gas prices poll shows just how uneducated so many Americans are about global politics and global capitalism. *SIGH*

libfreeordie on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Heart-f’cking-ache…

spinach.chin on March 19, 2012 at 12:32 PM

The antipathy toward this sociopathic liar is much stronger than is reflected in polls or anecdotal evidence. In most polite company, most people just don’t want to discuss how much they don’t like this President, because Heaven forbid they find they are talking to an Obama supporter and get branded a racist.
There is no truly accurate way to measure what I believe is a pretty widespread disgust with this administration. But one can look to the 2010 election results, which were absolutely a reflection on Obama and on Obamacare in particular, to get some indication.
I think more people are fuming, miserable and desperate to vote him out than any poll would suggest, and that’s notwithstanding the uninspiring GOP candidates we are stuck with.

Right Mover on March 19, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Christien on March 19, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Why don’t you head over to the White House blog? They don’t talk about boring things like politics or economics there.

BobMbx on March 19, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Not being an oil speculator or even an economics major, it seems to me that at the most basic level, if you’re purchasing futures, your guessing (or speculating) on the relative nature between supply and demand. This is what always gets me about BOR’s incessant fight against these speculators as the sole, or main cause in oil price escalation.

Right now, if you’re choosing to buy oil on the market, you’re doing it because globally, the supply chain looks threatened. Iran is a mess and they have a significant say on whether or not supply is interrupted. Couple that with the natural increase in summertime demand, and hurricane season, and you’re looking at price increases. So, if you’re buying, buy now. This doesn’t seem so evil to me. BOR makes it out to be unethical, as though purchasing something now that you expect to increase in value later, is wrong.

But forward-thinking policy does have an effect on futures. How odd, right? /s If you signal to the global economy that knows you have an abundance of this product -and the capability to harvest it and add it to the global market- that you’re unwilling on every front to do so, people believe you, and use that information to help determine the “supply” element in their calculations. That’s why this whole argument that Keystone oil was earmarked for overseas sale is utterly ridiculous. Yes, it’s a global market. If the oil gets in the market, it increases global supply. Greater supply relative to demand means lower prices. Globally. (Hence the reason OPEC is always asked to crank up the volume when prices start to rise. Sheesh. This isn’t rocket science.) However, if China gets that oil and either doesn’t put it on the global market (which they surely won’t) or does so based on their manipulated currency, it’ll have a minimal effect on the global prices. Keystone oil being sold by Canada will benefit Canada; and if it’s bought by China, it’ll benefit China. The President missed an opportunity to benefit the US and/or global markets as a whole. The same can be said for the lack of Federal lands and offshore areas opened for drilling.

Now, had we taken a “drill here, drill now” approach since 2009, Iran’s actions regarding oil supply would be much less significant on global markets -AND, wouldn’t carry the same threat in countering sanctions as it does now. Had we opened our lands and offshore reserves in ’09, the world, especially Europe, would be able to say to Iran, “Ok, you want to close the Straights? Go ahead. The US can offset most of your output and we won’t risk putting our weak recovery in jeopardy due to higher energy prices. By the way, when you close the Straights, remember, while nothing goes out, nothing goes in.”

The President weakened the US in global markets by trying to shut down what could be a major job creator and a product that would be used domestically and globally. He weakened our ability to enforce tougher sanctions on a terrorist state hellbent on acquiring a nuclear weapon. Speculators, it would seem to me, would be right in assuming the supply won’t meet demands in the global marketplace of 2012- largely due to the policies of the United States.

BKeyser on March 19, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Looking forward to a few threads in The Blog and Top Picks which aren’t about politics. Variety, spice of life, all that jazz.

Christien on March 19, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Peyton Manning’s going to Denver. Have at it.

Right Mover on March 19, 2012 at 12:38 PM

It was his son who said that “great man”, no? And if that’s the rule then Ronald Reagan wouldn’t have got within a hundred miles of the Oval Office. I remember Patti was WORSE than Ron.

Marcus on March 19, 2012 at 11:58 AM

But you’re comparing apples to bananas. Patti was anti-Reagan so the shit she said didn’t reflect what Ron thought.

Willard’s son is pro-Willard. So what he says does reflect what Willard says.

But all that aside, Romney (Willard) has praised Obama repeatedly calling him a great leader, a nice guy, etc. And most importantly, he said the president is not to blame for high gas prices.

ROMNEY = OBAMA = ROMNEY

angryed on March 19, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Right Mover on March 19, 2012 at 12:38 PM

On it. Thanks for the heads up.

Christien on March 19, 2012 at 12:43 PM

For anyone who wants to project what the U.S. unemployment may be two years from now as a result of today’s elevated gasoline prices, we’ve brought back our popular “Good Morning, White House Staffer” feature that we originally ran through much of 2011 at the top of our site. (And yes, the White House does monitor it!)

Enjoy!

ironman on March 19, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Given that the only real accomplishments of the Obama term has been ObamaCare, the failed stimulus bill, and Dodd-Frank

Would you fail to mention “capturing bin Laden” if Bush were President?

bobs1196 on March 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Wow!

Where have O’bama and Biden been stashing him since that time?

Face it, Kid, if bin Laden had been “captured” on Bush’s Watch, you and the Democrat Media would downplay it as much as possible, claiming he was just a “figurehead” or some such nonsense.

O’bama got nowhere near as much of a bump in the “polls” after he and Biden “captured” bin Laden with their bare hands as Bush did after 9/11 simply for being President. And the latest poll shows only 1% of Americans now consider fighting terrorism as the most important national priority. While 42% say jobs and unemployment are much more important.

Del Dolemonte on March 19, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Face it, Kid, if bin Laden had been “captured” on Bush’s Watch, you and the Democrat Media would downplay it as much as possible, claiming he was just a “figurehead” or some such nonsense.

In 2004, I knew libs who were convinced that Bush either knew where Bin Laden was or that Bin Laden had already been killed, and that the White House was going to release the news right before the election.
Of course, it was a bigger issue proportionately in 2004, when, among other things, unemployment was around 4.5%.

Right Mover on March 19, 2012 at 12:51 PM

This post is just full of excellent news. :)

gophergirl on March 19, 2012 at 11:43 AM

You traitor to the emperor, you :)

The gas prices poll shows just how uneducated so many Americans are about global politics and global capitalism. *SIGH*

libfreeordie on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Says the broad who’s stupider than a blank wall. Your English and comprehension are wanting, badly.

Get this into your gnat brain. NO president can affect the economy or gasoline prices too much. However, ALL get the credit or the blame, and your emperor will not be an exception.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Would you fail to mention “capturing bin Laden” if Bush were President?

bobs1196 on March 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

bin leaded was not “captured”, bobs.

VegasRick on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Yep so informed are these people Rick. I read a local opinion section today and they even had Mr. Obama taken down Saddam Huesein in Iraq, whats next world hunger.

DDay on March 19, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Many Dems have no idea what’s going to happen to their party in November. And that’s a good thing.

WordsMatter on March 19, 2012 at 11:46 AM

It’s great they think all their recent losses are anomalies. Let them keep ignoring reality. (It is the one thing they do very very well)

Zero knows he’s in trouble. All the fake polls and all the fake news cannot the put Zero in office again….

On a related note, the WaPo also ran an article yesterday that confirms Boehner tried and tried to work with Zero over the debt deal and that it was Zero and the clown posse that screwed it up. An amazing piece from them.

dogsoldier on March 19, 2012 at 1:00 PM

bin Laden was captured? Really?

joejm65 on March 19, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Wow, how much play are you going to get out of that I wrote “captured” and not “killed”? It reminds me of when I made the mistake of responding to some article at MarketWatch, and their idiot reporter Jon Friedman’s only response was that I had mistakenly used their former corporate name of CBS MarketWatch.

Surely we’re better than that here. And my point remains: getting rid of bin Laden IS a big deal, and strengthens Obama’s foreign policy credentials. And we would not be downplaying it if it happened under Bush.

bobs1196 on March 19, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Get this into your gnat brain. NO president can affect the economy or gasoline prices too much. However, ALL get the credit or the blame, and your emperor will not be an exception.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2012 at 12:56 PM

All the President’s ability to affect gas prices is indirect. Zero’s policy decisions, and the drilling ban is making a big contribution to the price increases.

When bush announced that he would open offshore drilling and followed through with it, the price of gas dropped. Its all policy and – attitude.

dogsoldier on March 19, 2012 at 1:06 PM

dogsoldier on March 19, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Agreed, good one. Still, the left won’t get away with “nothing he can do, our great one”…only point I wished to make. They, the delusional cheaters, wish for all his laudits and none of the blame…just because he is he. Well, he’s not an emperor and he goes to the bathroom like the rest of us do.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2012 at 1:10 PM

On economic issues, 62 percent of voters say Obama’s policies will increase the debt, while 25 percent think they will cut it . . .

They totally buried the lead for this story. The headline should read: “25% of American adults are illiterate or can’t perform basic arithmetic.”

JDF123 on March 19, 2012 at 1:12 PM

The gas prices poll shows just how uneducated so many Americans are about global politics and global capitalism. *SIGH*

libfreeordie on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Wait, he told us himself that he could slow the rise of the oceans. And Evan Thomas from Newsweek said he was “like a God.” But he can’t have any effect on gas prices?

Which is it?

Right Mover on March 19, 2012 at 1:15 PM

I am concerned, though, about national reaction if the SC doesn’t repeal O’care. With that many people expecting a repeal, and emotions running so high on this issue, what might we be facing if they don’t get the job done?

Dee2008 on March 19, 2012 at 11:47 AM

The inexplicable retirement of seven justices, followed by in and out rehab, followed by suicides…

…never underestimate the weak-willed or the spineless.

Turtle317 on March 19, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Big unknown: the Bradley Effect has never been tested on a presidential scale, and it will be amplified by the general thuggery and intimidation tactics of President Jackass McDowngrade. Look for a blowout.

slickwillie2001 on March 19, 2012 at 1:39 PM

I’m concerned about the 25% that think Obama isnt adding to the deficit. How many villages are missing their idiots? Inquiring minds….

ldbgcoleman on March 19, 2012 at 1:40 PM

The gas prices poll shows just how uneducated so many Americans are about global politics and global capitalism. *SIGH*

libfreeordie on March 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

“The candidates with the Washington experience — my opponents — are good people. They mean well,” Obama said. “But they’ve been in Washington for a long time, and even with all that experience they talk about, nothing has happened. This country didn’t raise fuel efficiency standards for over 30 years. So what have we got for all that experience? Gas that’s approaching $4 a gallon, because you can fight all you want inside Washington, but until you change the way it works, you won’t be able to make the changes Americans need.”

- Senator Barack Obama, 25 April 2008

“In the end, we’ll only ease the burden of gas prices on our families when Hoosiers and people all across America say ‘enough.’ It’s time to free ourselves from the tyranny of oil and stop funding both sides in the war on terror. I’ve been a strong supporter of ethanol. Corn-based ethanol is a transitional technology.”

- Senator Barack Obama, 25 April 2008

“But the truth is, there is no easy answer to our energy crisis — and we need a president who’s going to be straight with us about that; a president who’s going to tell the American people not just what they want to hear, but what they need to know.”

- Senator Barack Obama, 11 May 2008

“I think that… we have been slow to move in a better direction when it comes to energy usage. And the president, frankly, hasn’t had an energy policy. And as a consequence we’ve been consuming energy as if it’s infinite. We now know that our demand is badly outstripping supply with China and India growing as rapidly as they are. … I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment. The fact that this is such a shock to American pocketbooks is not a good thing. But if we take some steps right now to help people make the adjustment, first of all by putting more money in their pockets, but also by encouraging the market to adapt to these new circumstances more rapidly, particularly U.S. automakers.”

- Senator Barack Obama, 11 June 2008

Translation: “Suck it up, buttercup. Buy a Volt.”

PS: I remember when this was said:

“But the Administration’s greatest contribution to the rising oil prices is its steady stream of threats to attack Iran if it does not back down on the nuclear issue. The Iranians have made it plain that they would retaliate by attempting to block the flow of Gulf oil and otherwise cause turmoil in the energy market. Most analysts assume, therefore, that an encounter will produce a global oil shortage and prices well over $200 per barrel. It is not surprising, then, that every threat by Bush/Cheney (or their counterparts in Israel) has triggered a sharp rise in prices. This is where speculators enter the picture. Believing that a U.S.-Iranian clash is at least 50 percent likely, some investors are buying futures in oil at $140, $150 or more per barrel, thinking they’ll make a killing if there’s an attack and prices zoom over $200.”

Resist We Much on March 19, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Emily Obama Litella: “You know how I said that high gas prices were Bush’s fault in 2008? Never mind. Never mind. Never mind.”

Resist We Much on March 19, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Anyone who is hoping for an Obama win in November is going to be disappointed

Conservative4ev on March 19, 2012 at 4:38 PM

I think more people are fuming, miserable and desperate to vote him out than any poll would suggest, and that’s notwithstanding the uninspiring GOP candidates we are stuck with.
Right Mover on March 19, 2012 at 12:36 PM

I agree. Whenever “Obama” is mentioned lately, all I hear is moans. People are just sick of him.

txhsmom on March 19, 2012 at 8:19 PM