wow, Im actually suprised - Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

RIJIMMY · 03-30-2011, 10:48 AM

I didnt think this would be that bad, I guess its all fox new's fault

President Obama’s approval rating hits a new low
By Holly Bailey

*

After a brief resurgence earlier this year, President Obama's poll numbers are back in the dumps. A new Quinnipiac Poll released Wednesday finds Obama's approval rating at the lowest point in his presidency, thanks in part to voter angst over the economy and his handling of the situation in Libya.

Just 42 percent of those polled approve of the job Obama is doing, compared to 48 percent who disapprove, according to Quinnipiac. And in a bad sign for his upcoming 2012 re-election campaign, 50 percent of those polled say he doesn't deserve another term in the White House.

In January, Obama's approval rating was at 48 percent—the highest number it had been in more than a year, though still dramatically lower than his 59 percent approval rating recorded in June 2009.

What's to blame for the president's slump? For one thing, 60 percent of voters disapprove of Obama's handling of the economy, while just 34 percent approve--the lowest number of his presidency.

Meanwhile, Obama appears to have taken a hit over Libya. According to Quinnipiac, just 41 percent approve of Obama's handling of foreign policy—a new low. Asked specifically about Libya, 45 percent disapprove, even as voters are virtually split on whether intervening in the crisis was a good idea.

The number that is sure to cause most concern for Obama's campaign advisers is where the president stands with independents, a voting bloc that was crucial to Obama's win in 2008 and stands to be pivotal again in 2012.

While Democrats and Republicans are literally opposites when it comes to Obama-- 81 percent of GOPers disapprove, while 80 percent of Dems approve—indy voters have often been more split. But in recent months, the group has increasingly soured on Obama. According to Quinnipiac, 50 percent of independents now disapprove of the job Obama is doing.

Another cause for concern is likely to be Obama's standing with women, another pivotal part of the president's coalition of support. The poll finds female voters literally split over Obama—44 percent approve, 44 percent disapprove. Meanwhile, Obama continues to struggle among men, who disapprove of Obama 52 percent to 41 percent.

Piscator · 03-30-2011, 11:16 AM

The wild card is who will be the GOP candidate running against him. Unless anything changes for him, this will be the biggest influence in voter decisions (hopefully sending him back to Illinois/Chicago with all of those great politicians they have already).

RIJIMMY · 03-30-2011, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piscator

The wild card is who will be the GOP candidate running against him. Unless anything changes for him, this will be the biggest influence in voter decisions (hopefully sending him back to Illinois/Chicago with all of those great politicians they have already).

I dont think there is anyone for the repubs that will beat him. pretty sad.

The Dad Fisherman · 03-30-2011, 11:29 AM

Unfortunately........The Evil Known is Better Than The Evil Unknown.

mosholu · 03-30-2011, 01:24 PM

If the economy keeps crawling upwards without a pick up in momentum and the Republicans can find candidates for Pres and VP that will not make middle of the road voters sick casting their vote they will stand a good chance of winning.

Piscator · 03-30-2011, 01:26 PM

Romney? not that he is middle of the road but not a Palin or Newt either. Trump?

RIJIMMY · 03-30-2011, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piscator

Romney? not that he is middle of the road but not a Palin or Newt either. Trump?

Romney will get tore to hell over MA healthcare. Then the open minded libs will tear him up on his religion.

Trump - he's a celebrity, like Palin, but I dont think anyone can seriosuly consider him running the country.

there is no one.

fishbones · 03-30-2011, 01:50 PM

I'd like to see Bobby Jindal run, but it looks like he's going to seek re-election for governor. He's bright, young and has a great background story. He could possibly get some support from younger voters that the Republicans typically don't get.

RIROCKHOUND · 03-30-2011, 02:03 PM

Except that Jindal had that horrible deer in the headlights State of the Union response.... And as a scientist, Jindal's handling of aspects of the BP spill were questionable, but I understand he was tyring to do something, he just did the wrong things!

Romney: good fiscal sense, he can backpeddle all he wants from Romney Care, but he can't escape it. I could give a #^&#^&#^&#^& about his religion.

Palin. Bachman. Fail.

Newt: "I worked so hard for my country it caused me to run around on my wife" Way too many Skeletons

Huckabee: Making too much money
Pawlenty Who?
Trump: So it's unpresidential to be called 'Dude' by Jon Stewert on Comedy central, but it's OK to be roasted? Too bad, b/c his current model/wife would be a smoking hot first lady.

One interesting thing I heard was that Christie might just wait till the fall while all of the above duke it out and then step in....

zimmy · 03-30-2011, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

I'd like to see Bobby Jindal run, but it looks like he's going to seek re-election for governor. He's bright, young and has a great background story. He could possibly get some support from younger voters that the Republicans typically don't get.

The socialist who bailed out the failed chicken processors w/ 50 million in taxpayer money?

justplugit · 03-30-2011, 02:16 PM

Chris Christe, Gov. of NJ, would pick up right where the voters
left off in Nov wanting to cut spending, lower the debt and having a smaller government.
The man says what he means, means what he says and takes no crap
from anybody.
Problem is he is not well enough known, yet.

RIROCKHOUND · 03-30-2011, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justplugit

Chris Christe, Gov. of NJ, would pick up right where the voters left off in Nov wanting to cut spending, lower the debt and having a smaller government. The man says what he means, means what he says and takes no c rap from anybody.
Problem is he is not well enough known, yet.

Yes, he is well known enough.

The problem in a national level, how much would he get done while fighting with the house and senate...

RIJIMMY · 03-30-2011, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justplugit

Chris Christe, Gov. of NJ, would pick up right where the voters
left off in Nov wanting to cut spending, lower the debt and having a smaller government.
The man says what he means, means what he says and takes no crap
from anybody.
Problem is he is not well enough known, yet.

while I agree on the surface, he hasnt been around long enough to show results. he may be cutting costs, but at what expense? from what I've read, crime is running rampant, and hes cutting cops.
Im for fiscal responsibility but we need our basic services covered.
jersey is a long way from washington and the challenges of a global crisis. I believe Christie has said he is not ready

Back to the thread topic - is anyone suprised by O's results? Much lower than I thought.

PaulS · 03-30-2011, 02:31 PM

The problem with Christy is he's been caught in too many lies - Not major type lies but constantly saying "I never was told that" or "That's not what I said" type of lies where people produce emails or tapes of him saying it. He's smart in that in his union battles he doesn't demonize the unions, just their benefits which I think appeals to NJ voters compared to the Wisc. gov.

fishbones · 03-30-2011, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Except that Jindal had that horrible deer in the headlights State of the Union response.... And as a scientist, Jindal's handling of aspects of the BP spill were questionable, but I understand he was tyring to do something, he just did the wrong things!

I guess you didn't actually listen to what he said. If you did, you'd see that he was pretty much on point with everything. Yes, his delivery was very choppy. I wouldn't judge his qualifications based on him being uncomfortable his first time addressing the entire nation live following the President's big speech. Lot's of pressure there. If looking comfortable and being smooth while giving speeches made you a good President, Obama wouldn't even have to campaign for 2012. He'd be a shoe in.

fishbones · 03-30-2011, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zimmy

The socialist who bailed out the failed chicken processors w/ 50 million in taxpayer money?

Cpt. Crunch, is that you? Welcome back to the site. I though you had a lifetime ban?

RIROCKHOUND · 03-30-2011, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

I guess you didn't actually listen to what he said. If you did, you'd see that he was pretty much on point with everything.

Like, stimulus is bad, unless it is coming to my state...

I don't judge him on that. I think voters will.

fishbones · 03-30-2011, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Like, stimulus is bad, unless it is coming to my state...

I don't judge him on that. I think voters will.

You have to remember that when he made that speech, Obama was going to save the country with the stimulus package. In hindsight, Jindal proved to be right about it being a waste. He also said that more government intervention was going to be bad for the country, which has been the case so far.

I'm not saying Jindal is a great Presidential candidate right now, but he looks pretty good when compared to some of the others. His approval rating in his home state is excellent, and the skeletons in his closet are much more easily explained than some of the other Republicans'.

RIROCKHOUND · 03-30-2011, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

You have to remember that when he made that speech, Obama was going to save the country with the stimulus package. In hindsight, Jindal proved to be right about it being a waste.

But he still put his hand out. Other gov's rejected the money and associated projects (like Christie w/ the tunnel) even if the merit might have been there...

I agree with RIJ, I've yet to see a viable candidate emerge....

fishbones · 03-30-2011, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

But he still put his hand out. Other gov's rejected the money and associated projects (like Christie w/ the tunnel) even if the merit might have been there...

I agree with RIJ, I've yet to see a viable candidate emerge....

If I remember correctly, and that's a big if, Jindal rejected provisions for a big chunk of stimulus money. The money he accepted was for schools and jobs, and was used for those things.

Again, I don't think he's the ideal candidate, but I think he'd have a better chance than some of the other choices. And remember, a lot of people didn't think Obama was a viable candidate back in 2008.

As for "taking the evil you know over the evil you don't know", I'd take a chance that anyone else could only be an improvement.

mosholu · 03-30-2011, 03:42 PM

I like a lot about Christie's message but a year or two in public office, by the time of the election, is not a lot of experience or a record to evaluate whether he would be a good president.

spence · 03-30-2011, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

As for "taking the evil you know over the evil you don't know", I'd take a chance that anyone else could only be an improvement.

People were saying the same thing about Bush in 2004.

The GOP has some good people to work with but there's a good chance the party will rip itself apart rather then appeal to the middle. A number of the best candidates are an election cycle away from being ready.

I think if the economy continues to slowly improve and none of the foreign situations deteriorate Obama has a decent chance at re-election. Libya is certainly a wild card that could help/hurt considerably.

If the trend come election season isn't down, independent voters are going to give Obama a lot of slack for enduring a very challenging presidency.

-spence

RIROCKHOUND · 03-30-2011, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

If I remember correctly, and that's a big if, Jindal rejected provisions for a big chunk of stimulus money. The money he accepted was for schools and jobs, and was used for those things.

He rejected money to extend unemployment. Not sure if he refused anything else. but he's still a pol: ThinkProgress Jindal takes credit for stimulus, presents constituents with jumbo-sized stimulus check.

fishbones · 03-30-2011, 04:11 PM

Really Bryan? Think Progress is your source? I didn't think even you were liberal enough to use that as a source.

I wonder what the people he represents would have done if he rejected the entire stimulus that was available? He played it pretty well by playing both sides of the fence. Maybe he's a better politician than you think? By the way, he rejected about $98 million.

RIROCKHOUND · 03-30-2011, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

Really Bryan? Think Progress is your source? I didn't think even you were liberal enough to use that as a source.

.

No, but I can google too

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

I wonder what the people he represents would have done if he rejected the entire stimulus that was available? He played it pretty well by playing both sides of the fence. Maybe he's a better politician than you think? By the way, he rejected about $98 million.

I seem to recall a good bit on the Daily show about this, where Jindal 'rejects 2.8 Billion in stimulus, but accepts 2.7 Billion in stimulus' suggesting the 98Mil was essentially a token rejection, but I don't have time to look it up before I need to finish up and get out of the office.

justplugit · 03-30-2011, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

while I agree on the surface, he hasnt been around long enough to show results. he may be cutting costs, but at what expense? from what I've read, crime is running rampant, and hes cutting cops.

If your talking the City of Camden your right as the city cut 50% of
the police force, but not so in the rest of the state. Crime in NJ started
rising in 2008 under Corzine.
He's turning budgets back to individual cities where they detremine how to
live within their means. Home rule.

I agree about experience, but he's has an excellent record as 10 years
Freeholder and 6 years as NJ Attorney General. Right now or soon two years as Governor sure beats a community organizer with a year or so as a jr Senator.