If the Administration had not endlessly tried bipartisanship, what would Obama's approval rating be?

[onehandle]

Poll question: If the Administration had not endlessly tried bipartisanship, what would Obama's approval rating be?

President Obama's approval rating is back up to 50%. What could it have been if he had spent the last two years swinging a flaming sword and calling out the opposition for their shit instead of begging Republicans and Blue Dogs for scraps?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[onehandle]

4. Why? Being bold and aggressive won back the House for the GOP.

President Obama should have been more President Teddy Roosevelt.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. what you said.

exactly.

[emulatorloo]

7. The GOP won back the house by FUCKING EVERYTHING UP and blaming Obama for gridlock

In otherwords, they obstructed, and they blamed Obama for the results of the obstruction.

That was the 2010 plan.

OTHO now they have won the House, they are clueless about how to govern.

[phleshdef]

9. Yet their approval ratings are still in the lower gutter.

[MadBadger]

13. Being Bold and agressive? Your post makes me vomit

Jobs and scaring the shit out of people is how they win.

[treestar]

19. Vague

This language is just bare of any substance.

Why is being "aggressive" even so good? Of course Republicans are aggressive. That's why they are hateful. They don't think of others. Just what they want. That type of person is always aggressive.

[Warren Stupidity]

24. Democratic leadership: spineless whusses.

No message no core beliefs and a punching bag for the right. Yes it is probably wishful thinking that a different approach would have different results, but it is hard to imagine a worse outcome than the shellacking we just got.

[ProSense]

2. 90 percent.

They would love him for sounding tough. He should have done nothing but grandstand, and the Republicans would simply have voted with him to help make him the greatest and most loved President ever.

Or....he would have got have been loved for getting nothing done. So I say 90 percent.

[harun]

28. > 90%

[emulatorloo]

3. First: most people want the parties to work together. That is why Obama promotes bipartisanship

On the other hand he did call them out on obstructionism at town halls etc. That stuff does not get reported on the cable news outlets.

The surrogates (Dem Sens Like Sherrod Brown and Reps like Weiner) are the ones who are to call the Republicans out for their obstructionism,

It is difficult because none of the media outlets other than MSNBC allow Democrats to talk and complete a sentence

Republicans were quite good at messaging - Creating the gridlock, but pointing the finger at Obama. That was pretty much their strategy - FUCK UP EVERTHING and then blame Obama and the Democrats. It worked well for them in 2010 elections.

[onehandle]

5. Yeah, those last few weeks waving the 'keys' metaphor did wonders.

The other 22+ months were chock full of 'pretty please' while the GOP laughed in his face.

Get your keychains, cheap.

[emulatorloo]

8. If you think the only thing Obama did at town halls was wave a key ring

Then you watch too much cable news or spend too much time in the DU bubble.

[Uzybone]

10. +1. Too many people are spoon fed by cable news and blogs

They don't read or investigate, they just regurgitate what their favorite blogger/cable news talking head says.

[Hello_Kitty]

15. Yeah, we totally missed how the President rallied a massive Dem vote in 2010.

Which allowed us to keep both houses of Congress and even increase seats...

Oh wait...

[emulatorloo]

17. Who is claiming the Dems won in 2010?

Nobody.

[Hello_Kitty]

14. Well whatever he did was really successful in the 2010 midterms.

Not.

Maybe we're not the only people who need to get out of a bubble? :shrug:

[emulatorloo]

16. Let's talk about the "Republican Party of No" strategy to win in 2010 one more time.

McConnell has been pretty up front about this.

Strategy: Obstruct everything so nothing gets done, then paint Obama as ineffectual.

Repeating: Make sure nothing gets done, and blame Obama/Dems for getting nothing done.

That was the strategy for winning back the Congress in 2010 and it worked.

Mostly because we have a media that never bothered to actually report on what they were doing. Instead the media took their BS at face value and ran with it. Even though Obama/Dems got a lot of things done, the media narrative followed the Republican narrative.

On the other hand, now they have the House. So far Let's Read The Constitution.

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Odd that - they just voted in the party of NO.

So I guess these same 'mosts' mostly didn't vote.

[Uzybone]

11. 300%

if you add the votes of Kenyans, anchor babies and ground zero muslims.

[emulatorloo]

12. LOL - n/t

[treestar]

18. Less than 30%

Outside the DU bubble or the left wing bubble, the idea of bipartisanship is not so hated.

[vaberella]

20. America would have to be Progressive to reward failure.

I mean seriously. Do you honestly believe that Obama would be given any credit if he didn't go bipartisan and achieved nothing? Nothing would have gotten done if he didn't go bipartisan because he would have been progressively shot down. His first two years would have been seen as ineffective.

[T Wolf]

21. Do you honestly think that anyone outside the Obama-loyalists view the last two years

as being chock full of accomplishments?

The Dems were trounced BECAUSE the perception out there is that they (and he) have done nothing of value for the majority of people.

The minor gains have not been brought to the public's attention.

And the media are blasting the discontent 24/7/365. Who is getting blamed for the continuing bad economy - not the pukes and not Bush. Obama and the Dems are. Fairly or not, that is the reality.

Those that supposedly want "bipartisanship" are not thrilled with the "accomplishments" - not by a long shot. Add in the reich-wingers and the fuckin' liberals and who other than the ignorant are happy with him?

[emulatorloo]

22. Gallup Dec 26-Jan 2 - Obama Job Approval 81% among Democrats

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

Liberal Democrat 85%
Moderate Democrat 78%
Conservative Democrat 73%

I do agree with some of your analysis, as to the perception that Republicans and media are pushing.

[great white snark]

23. Yes. Everyone but the ignorant see all Obama has done these past 2 years.

I'm sure you've seen the lists.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

26. Considering how "partisan" some people accuse President Obama and Nancy Pelosi of having been

during the previous two years, would his approval rating not been lower? Not saying that I agree with their characterization of either of them but having been a more *partisan* POTUS would not have necessarily guaranteed higher approval ratings (or any accomplishments) IMHO. :shrug: Besides, not being a *partisan* POTUS was what President Obama EXPLICITLY ran on in 2008 and he didn't make it conditional on whether or not the other side was interested in the same thing either. Unfortunately, I think that too many moderates and "independents" bought the Fox News/Republican propaganda that both Obama/Pelosi/Reid were hyper-partisan zealots and poor John "hell no!" Boehner, Michelle "freedom vs. tyranny" Bachmann, and Mitch "hostage-taker" McConnell and John "let's start over with a clean sheet of paper" and "DADT works just fine" McCain were attempting to be bipartisan and look out for "the people" but had a bunch of crap rammed down their throats by President Obama and the Dems during the past two years. Oh puh-leeze!!!:eyes: Of course, everybody has forgotten Bush's hyper-partisanship every second of every day of his (P)residency? Did Biden unload the F-bomb on the floor of the Senate to a Republican Senator? To quote John Boehner, "HELL NO"!!!!!

[boppers]

27. He would have been impeached, or a coup d'etat would have taken place.

The US is not a totalitarian dictatorship, regardless of the wishes of some.

[Exilednight]

29. If Obama would have passed measures that had real impacts that were

tangible, then people would of fully approved. He would of held his current 50% approval rating, and probably would never have lost the 20% of progressive liberals that are currently upset.

Great policy equals great approval ratings.