Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Pres. Obama’s Poll Position and 2010

posted at 8:12 am on June 23, 2009 by Karl
printer-friendly

The Politico, like CQ and other media outlets, is noticing the erosion in Pres. Obama’s poll numbers:

Eroding confidence in President Barack Obama’s handling of the economy and ability to control spending has caused his approval ratings to wilt to their lowest levels since he took office, according to a spate of recent polls, a sign of political weakness that comes just as he most needs leverage on Capitol Hill.

***

Surveys released last week by Pew, NBC News/Wall Street Journal and The New York Times/CBS News show a similar pattern. The Pew survey, for example, registered an 8-percentage-point drop in public approval for Obama’s handling of the economy — falling from 60 percent to 52 percent between mid-April and June. The percentage of Americans who disapprove jumped by 7 percentage points during the same period.

Though Democrats are still generally more supportive of the administration overall, the slide in the president’s economic numbers defied partisan boundaries. The Pew survey, for instance, showed support for Obama’s handling of the economy sliding 6 percentage points among Democrats and independents.

The same trend appears in the latest ABCNews poll, which shows “a retrenchment in the expectation that his stimulus plan will improve the economy — and, consequently, a halt in what had been steadily improving views of the nation’s direction.” ABCNews polled adults. The latest Rasmussen poll finds that 39% of likely voters say our economic problems are caused more by Obama’s policies than those of fmr. Pres. Bush, a 12-point jump from a month ago. Independents split almost evenly on that question.

Most of the analyses of Obama’s current poll numbers also note Pres. Obama’s continued overall popularity, as does Ed Morrissey:

Conservatives shouldn’t get too excited about Obama’s numbers. He remains a likable figure, with personal polling remaining high. Ronald Reagan had high personal numbers, too, and he leveraged his popularity to win political battles many predicted he’d lose.

The bit about Reagan is a myth, part of The Narrative of the Eighties, in which the Left convinced itself that Reagan was all about charisma, instead of ideology or policy. In his first term, Reagan’s job performance and policies were often rated more highly than Reagan personally.

Ed is more on target in noting the impact that rising unemployment will have on Obama’s popularity and the Democrats’ prospects for the 2010 midetrm elections. As ABCNews notes:

Obama’s vulnerability on the economy remains — exemplified by Reagan, the last president to take office in the teeth of a recession. His approval fell from a peak of 73 percent in March 1981 to 48 percent as the economy still struggled 11 months later. And today, public ratings of current economic conditions are just a few points from their record low in 23 years of weekly tracking by ABC News.

Open Lefty blogger Chris Bowers recently noted that in early June 1981, Reagan had an approval rating similar to Obama’s current approval. Bowers then plotted Reagan’s disapproval ratings against the unemployment statistics in 1981-82, complete with charts and graphs (Jay Cost has a graph for the entire Reagan presidency that underscores the point). Given how closely those numbers track, Bowers concluded:

Ideally for Democrats, unemployment would start to decline by February of 2010, which would provide enough time before the elections to recoup whatever losses they would suffer between now and peak unemployment. However, few economists seem to be predicting such an early unemployment peak, so that is a longshot.

Since Bowers wrote that, the Congressional Budget Office has projected that the unemployment rate will continue to rise into the second half of next year. Unemployment is not the whole ball game electorally; some studies show personal income is the key factor. However, the US economy was on the upswing in 1982, 1992 and 1994 — and in each case, the party of the president was punished at the polls, as the public did not see conditions improving fast enough. Unemployment may be a lagging indicator, but forecasts pushing the peak further into the future are suggesting any recovery next year will be less than robust.

In short, based on the current projections, it is small wonder some in the Obama White House are sad they don’t have George W. Bush to kick around anymore.

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

Karl – one other number to keep an eye on.

Gas prices.

Yes, China isn’t sucking down nearly as much oil as they had been, but if Iran goes unstable, it’ll have an effect.

Another summer of $4/gal prices may make the greener parts of the Dem party happy, but they’ll not make Obama any more popular with the Janes and Joes in the middle…

Mew

acat on June 23, 2009 at 8:46 AM

Karl – one other number to keep an eye on.

Gas prices.

I agree. Thanks to the unemployment problem, I was laid off and had to take a lower paying job an hour away. Thanks to the housing problem I can’t sell my house and move. So I now have a huge gasoline expense.

It’s going to be a real burden if the gas prices go up to $4 or more this summer. I can’t be the only one who has to deal with these things, and Obama is (rightfully) going to take some of the blame.

Daggett on June 23, 2009 at 8:56 AM

Beyond Iran, the run up in oil and other commodity prices likely was related in no small part to Obama’s foreign and domestic policies. Institutional investors are looking ahead to possible inflation, enviro policies that will push up energy costs, etc.

Karl on June 23, 2009 at 9:56 AM

So O!bama really is the Anti-Reagan…

WHO KNEW!

I think if anyone was wondering, that difference has been underscored this week by his timid response during the Iranian election protests…

Great as usual Karl

RocketmanBob on June 23, 2009 at 11:31 AM

It’s going to be a real burden if the gas prices go up to $4 or more this summer. I can’t be the only one who has to deal with these things, and Obama is (rightfully) going to take some of the blame.

Daggett on June 23, 2009 at 8:56 AM

Daggett, condolences on a rough year. You’re far from alone in this… I know of several friends whose daily drives are around the same, and they were all hurting last year. One bought a motorcycle, one is moving, but the rest are just bearing up as best they can.

The brutal part is yet to come. A lot of trucking companies ran in the red last year hoping this year would be better – if prices for diesel spike like they did last year, they’ll just fold… and shipping costs will continue to rise, pushing everything shipped right along with ‘em.

This has the potential of getting really ugly….

Mew

acat on June 23, 2009 at 1:35 PM

Gas prices.

Yes, China isn’t sucking down nearly as much oil as they had been, but if Iran goes unstable, it’ll have an effect.

Another summer of $4/gal prices may make the greener parts of the Dem party happy, but they’ll not make Obama any more popular with the Janes and Joes in the middle…

Mew

acat on June 23, 2009 at 8:46 AM

$4.00 per gallon will be bad enough but watch the price of diesel fuel. Last year at about this time it was $5.00 per gallon.

So what?

I defy you to name one thing in your house that has not been moved at some point by burning diesel fuel.

I can tell you from personal experience that $5.00 per gallon for any more than a short period is devastating. It is an expense that is exceedingly difficult for the transportation sector to pass along, let alone absorb.

That fact will go through the economy like s*** through a goose.

turfmann on June 23, 2009 at 4:51 PM

This is good analysis, but I wish Obama’s numbers would just tank. I can’t understand how anyone thinks he is doing a decent job! I feel so out of touch with others when his numbers stay so high while he does such stupid things…

petunia on June 23, 2009 at 6:42 PM

This is good analysis, but I wish Obama’s numbers would just tank. I can’t understand how anyone thinks he is doing a decent job! I feel so out of touch with others when his numbers stay so high while he does such stupid things…

petunia on June 23, 2009 at 6:42 PM
——-

There’s a couple factors. Some people are completely not-in-the-loop and won’t start paying attention until the excrement is most of the way through the fan. Some will never admit a mistake. The biggest groups, I think, are those who are taking a “give him a chance” stance, and the people who are emotionally invested in not admitting Obama is a disaster.

Give it time. It’s early days for America to wake up. (although the gutless D.C. wing of the Republican party have no such excuse – no guts no glory, DC!)

Mew

acat on June 23, 2009 at 7:55 PM

Ideally for Democrats, unemployment would start to decline by February of 2010, which would provide enough time before the elections to recoup whatever losses they would suffer between now and peak unemployment. However, few economists seem to be predicting such an early unemployment peak, so that is a longshot.

Ideally for Democrats, they would pursue policies that are conducive to increased employment. But then they wouldn’t be Democrats. I think it’s hilarious that they’re counting on the business cycle to save them, after they’re doing their best to screw it all up.

ddrintn on June 24, 2009 at 8:44 PM


You must be logged in to post a comment.