As Obama’s Popularity Falls; Republicans Inch Ahead in 2012 Race

[Psephos]

Source: Public Policy Polling

As Obama’s popularity falls, potential Republican presidential candidates’ popularity
rises. Every Republican candidate we polled this month saw a peak in favorability.

In individual horse race, the gap closed between Obama and his potential Republican
competitors this month. This is the first month since we began polling on the 2012
election that Obama is behind or tied with a majority of the Republican candidates. Mitt
Romney has the strongest lead 46:43, followed by Mick Huckabee 47:45.

The Republicans each found more support when matched against Obama than in
individual favorability ratings. While only 32% of voters have a favorable opinion of
Romney, 46% of voters choose him over Obama. Obama however, maintained steady
support throughout the poll, reflective of voters’ initial approval ratings. The consistency
suggests voters are reacting to their opinion of Obama, not that of the challenger.

Obama’s dropping approval ratings seems to be largely due to waning support amongst
Independents. In 2008, Obama won the support of Independents by an 8 point margin.
Amongst Independents this month, Obama lost to every potential challenger. For
example, Independents preferred Romney to Obama 48:35.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_715.pdf

---

The full poll results are posted at the link. For enquiring minds that want to know, the Obama-Palin matchup is tied at 46-46.

It's silly to draw conclusions about 2012 from a poll two years out. But it's not silly to consider ways to change those numbers.

[Axle_techie]

1. I don't have any love for Obama

But Palin scares the shit out of me. We need someone with at least an IQ in office.

[truthisfreedom]

6. I have loads of love for Obama. He can't help that the pukes are doing everything in their power

to destroy the Democrats and this country.

[Axle_techie]

10. You must have missed

the democrat majority in congress for the last few years. The Republicans may be doing everything in their power, but they have to have help.

I also find the priorities of the administration a bit skewed, but that is a matter for another thread

[Hekate]

12. Republican slur alert: That's not a "democrat majority," but a "Democratic majority."

I'm sure you didn't intend it, but it's all too easy fall into the trap set for us by the Repubs with their constant repetition of their chosen slurs. They managed to turn "Liberal" into a dirty word, now they're trying to rename our political party "the Democrat Party." Sounds trivial? Not once you hear the contempt with which Boehner utters the words.

Hekate

[Axle_techie]

19. sorry, Democratic majority then, no slur intended.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

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

[Axle_techie]

18. You are calling me a teabagger?

That makes you the one being teabagged, I guess.

Can't stand Rush, Hannity, or any other of the radicals. I think their zealotry has them blinded to facts.

[Doctor_J]

27. Uh oh. Someone's using Bonerspeak

are you sure you're in the right place?

[alstephenson]

30. That's crap and you know it.

You've heard about the filibuster, no?

[vaberella]

55. There are people still wondering why 60 votes are needed.

They forget the affect of a filibuster which Obama and Dems (who write decent bills) face when it comes to voting...by Repubs and other crappy Dems.

[dionysus]

49. "democrat majority". uh huh.

[Arkana]

63. "The democrat majority"?

Your slip is showing.

[Drunken Irishman]

2. Hard to take this poll seriously...

For starters, look at the break downs in each potential match-up.

I'm to believe 17% of blacks would vote for Newt Gingrich over Obama?

[No Elephants]

20. the Republican Party does include African Americans, especially neo theo African

Americans and income bracket African American Republicans. I don't know if it's 17%, but it could be. Besides, I don't think people of ay group vote solely on the basis of a candidate's membership in their particular group.

that said, ANYone who is not AT LEAST in the top 10% of wealth in America who votes Republican has been brainwashed, IMO.

[Drunken Irishman]

29. I want you to show me the last Republican candidate for prez who received 17% of the black vote...

And if some of you people would actually open the poll, you'd see 88% of blacks, in this poll, support Obama.

It does not pass the sniff test.

[karynnj]

22. That does seem pretty odd

In addition, no poll has shown anywhere near 46% of the population thinks Palin is a credible candidate. These polls would be troubling if they were replicated by other polls.

But, assume they are true. What should Obama do? My guess is that it is to continue doing what he thinks needs to be done - following his 2008 agenda. All those things were popular with the American people in 2008 - and in 2004. Obviously, the other (even more important) thing to do is to take measures that will get people back to work and get the economy working.

Both of these are also what he should do if he knew he was 30 points ahead every Republican.

The one different thing might be to take even MORE advantage of the power of the Presidency to speak directly to the country over the heads of the media. It has been clear in the last decade that much of the media is not our friend. (When John Harris says that 2008 had the most biased media coverage in his life time, you know that he is not even handed. His own book shows (apparently without his recognition) that 2004 was FAR more biased. In 2008, Palin actually initially got passes on several major gaps in her story and complete lies (She was always against the bridge to nowhere - refusing to take the money?) Her bad press was hard earned. How many times has a VP or a Presidential nominee said in a debate - that if they did not like a question they could use their time to speak of anything. As to McCain, he got a number of passes that no Democrat would have - using a Beach Boy song to make light of bombing a country is unbelievable.)

[uponit7771]

53. No Republican has had higher than 17% black vote in the last 2 generations

[vaberella]

56. Which is false. Far less Blacks will vote for Obama. And after Arizona--

The Repubs lost a good chunk of Hispanics.

[notesdev]

3. Nice, the President can't beat an obvious moron in a poll

much of this boils down to the fact that Congress can't be trusted to pass a bill without looting the public treasury for their buddies, and everyone on all sides knowing that Obama's signature can be counted on for any stinky piece of shit that passes both houses regardless of how bad it is

lemme know when the bulk of people here start to wake up to the fact that integrity DOES matter, I got a lot to contribute on that point but I'm tired of it being repeatedly censored

[StevieM]

4. It says that 46% voted for Obama in 08, 45% voted for McCain. So this poll IMO does not accurately

reflect that voters, since Obama beat McCain by 7 points.

Besides, let's see what the numbers are a couple years from now when the economy has had more time to recover.

[Drunken Irishman]

5. As I also pointed up thread, they have Gingrich getting 17% of the black vote...

Do you know the last Republican who got 17% of the black vote?

[sabrina 1]

13. That does seem very high. However, if you follow the minority

blogs, there are real signs of a lot of disappointment beginning to show. I heard one of those bloggers on NPR yesterday and was surprised at his criticisms of Obama's policies. I don't read them every day, but I have noticed a drop in support, a disillusionment among them recently.

I don't know why people assume that because someone is black they will automatically support bad policy, or caving to rightwing ideas. Most of the minority bloggers I have known over the years are extremely focused on issues. The historical significance of the first black president aside, they, like everyone else, care about their families and communities, and are not likely to support anyone who they believe is not fighting hard to implement policies that they promised to fight for. Healthcare was a huge disappointment, eg, especially the dropping of even the compromise, the PO on minority blogs. And if Democrats attack SS, those negative numbers will rise.

[Drunken Irishman]

14. Obama's approval among blacks in that poll is 88%

So just because the blogs you read show signs of a lot of disappointment doesn't mean jack shit in the real world. If I read Hillaryis44, I'd be under the impression Obama had absolutely no support within the Democratic Party (since, you know, they consider themselves Dems).

Beyond that, my point wasn't that blacks would not not (ugh, I hate using double negatives) support Obama because of him being black. My point was that blacks rarely ever vote Republican. Bush, one of the most anti-black politicians we've had recently, garnered only 11% of the black vote.

I'm supposed to believe Gingrich will bump that up six points? In the immortal words of Cher Horowitz - AS IF!

[Tarheel_Dem]

41. 17%? Never going to happen. I'm willing to bet that not 17% of....

African Americans even know, or care who Newt Gingrich is. We are, perhaps, the most loyal Dem constituency, and if some are hoping that we're going to abandon the first black president of the DEMOCRATIC Party....they should really think again.

[certainot]

17. a lot of new voters, many formerly apathetic, many young, are naive about

US politics and what a dem president can do and what a republican owned media enabled by a completely ignored talk radio monopoly that gets a free speech free ride from 1000 radio stations can do with all that coordinated uncontested repetition.

may expected super obama and expected all they had to do was vote and blog, and now all they do is whine and blame obama while obama and dems get lied about and threatened all day long by the same radio chickenhawk liars who gave us bush, iraq, this economy, and deny global warming to 50 million every week.

those 1000 radio stations need to be picketed and their local sponsors need to be asked WTF?, as they continue to blast americans with coordinated uncontested repetition of corporate think tank lies like paul reveres in reverse.

[sabrina 1]

28. Well, I don't listen to any of those morons, nor do I watch Fox.

I follow what politicians actually do by checking their records and watching what bills they sponsor or support.

Talk radio is not responsible for people's reaction to this administration's backing away from issues they were fully supportive of in the campaign. I understand that they would not get all of their policies passed.

What is looking very bad is that they did not even fight, in fact in some cases they went completely over to the other side without any kind of explanation. Offshore Drilling eg. Who advised the president to make those false statements about oil rigs not leaking eg, when it was well known that they do?

And I won't go into the whole HIR Bill again, but the complete flip flop on that issue, on mandated insurance, on even the compromise, the PO was simply stunning. These were all Republican ideas. And then, appointing Republicans to positions of power, like Alan Simpson. Is someone holding them hostage, because there is no other logical reason to appoint people like that or Pete Peterson, rightwingers and known enemies of SS, to any Commission.

Then there's the privatization of education, the strengthening rather than the reform of Bush's disastrous NCLB, written by and for Big Business.

And the choice of people like Tim Geithner, Bernanke, Emanuel, Summers, advisers like Rubin eg. Where are the progressives?

So no, talk radio cannot be blamed for these inexplicable choices. Even House Democrats are now expressing concerns about the positions they have been asked to take on issues that are so unpopular with their constituents they are afraid they may lose their seats.

[certainot]

31. ignoring talk radio is like ignoring a knife in the back because

would looks nasty.

it is the single most effective weapon the GOP has and it makes everything progressives do harder. it creates a made to order constituency for whatever the corporate think tanks need when they need it. the left has been porked repeatedly by the right wing talk radio monopoly and don't have a clue. almost all the political and media evaluation and strategizing the left does is done in a talk radio vacuum and is practically useless because of it. it reacts AFTER the right has already established the framing, the 'reality'. it decides what is and what isn't acceptable in politcs and media and it is because of that invisible rovian political 2x4 beating the crap out of progressive causes and candidates 24/7 while the collective left looks the other way that the dems compromise and need 60 votes.

the biggest political blunder in history, considering the time lost on global warming, has been the left's ignorance of the right's most effective political/media tool.

[sabrina 1]

34. Yes, I agree with you. I even tried to tell members of the Dem

leadership, (I had access to them through my job) that they should listen to what was being said on talk radio and on rightwing blogs and then they would understand where all the hate was coming from. But it was futile, they did not pay attention at a time when there was nothing but rightwingers on the airwaves and online for that matter. They thought television was where everyone was getting their news and everything they did was geared towards TV.

But now it is a little late, and the online left has done a fairly good job of countering them, along with shows like Maddow and Keith. The most effective way to go after them is to have more progressive talk radio.

[certainot]

36. well done, but the netroots is a real expression

of democracy in action - the radio monopoly is a serious threat to democracy- fixing it still needs to be a priority- those 1000 stations are the power centers for the hate, racism, and lies feeding the corporate obstruction. and radio broadcasts to an often captive audience with few if any alts for politics while driving or working in most parts of the country. and it can frame create and intimidate national media more effectively.

"email gate" and the van jones swiftboating are recent examples of the problems it and it alone can create. the illegal immigration issue is talk radio generated every election season, the teabaggers/screamers that enabled the blocking of a public option are basically limbaugh/hanity dittoheads repeating think tank generated propaganda. IMO it till needs to be a priority- it's going to make a big difference in nov.

and global warming can't wait for progressive radio struggling against an entrenched and well protected and subsidized monopoly.

progressives need to picket those stations and complain to their local sponsors, especially in blue areas. a clear case can be made that those stations are doing their communities a huge disservice - and it's not about balance or the free speech rights of conservatives- there is a purposeful coordinated attempt to spread lies, hate, racism, propaganda. there is no better place for dems to protest almost any issue.

they can't keep getting a free speech free ride - it's as if the left lets them put a soapbox on every corner of the country and they scream all day that our brothers are thieves and our sisters are whores. if we ignore it, pretty soon our neighbors believe it and we have to move.

[Tarheel_Dem]

45. Your "assertions" fail on so many levels. In one breath you say

"I don't know why people assume that because someone is black they will automatically support bad policy, or caving to rightwing ideas."

In another breath, you go on to "assume" that because of "what you read" on some obscure black blog, that it must be representative of the entire African American community? That's some eff'd up logic, right there. It's like saying whatever I type here on DU represents the whole of DU. :shrug:

"Healthcare was a huge disappointment, eg, especially the dropping of even the compromise, the PO on minority blogs. And if Democrats attack SS, those negative numbers will rise."

Disappointment for whom? Minorities, or these obscure bloggers you speak of? You have to make that distinction, because I've seen recent polling showing that a whopping 60%+ would not like to see HCR repealed, and I would "assume" that the number's even higher among blacks.

And just so you know, I am African American, and I couldn't disagree with your broad-brush assessment more. The Afro-Sphere only represents the Afro-Sphere, not Black America.

[dionysus]

58. they've punish obama for "caving in to RWers" by.... turning to NEWT?!

:rofl:

[Tarheel_Dem]

62. Is that the most ridiculous thing you've ever heard? Because she heard someone on NPR (no name)

say something (no link), but she remembered they were black, and they were dissatisfied with Obama. I guess if the only takeaway was the generic black person's angst with PO, that's all she needed to hear. But then you don't have to provide real proof, when you have such hard scientific anecdotal evidence. I have to wonder if the poster even recognizes the irony of her own post.:eyes:

If it turns out that he's a one termer, you can bet it won't be due to lack of support from blacks. And it won't be because of some crap we read on some obscure blog, in the Afro-Sphere.

"Blacks for Newt in 2012". Where do I sign up? :rofl:

[uponit7771]

54. I'm sure you've been told this before but disappointed does NOT equal to voting GOP

[dionysus]

57. so they run over to NEWT?!?!? seriously, your burning hope for his defeat is clouding your vision.

:rofl:

[Psephos]

7. In that question, 9% answered "someone else/don't remember."

Given Obama's troubles lately, it's not hard to imagine that the "don't remembers" are skewed toward him.

PPP is generally considered sympathetic to Democrats. I hope that most of the discussion on this thread centers on the information being reported, and less on trying to tarnish the messenger. No poll is perfectly accurate, but there is a wake-up message in this one, and it comes at a time in the election cycle when we can do something about it.

[Drunken Irishman]

8. Or they didn't vote...

Or they did vote for someone else.

Do you think Newt Gingrich would get 17% of the black vote against Obama?

This poll is shit.

[Beacool]

25. Hey Stevie, long time no see.

How are you?

:hi:

[StevieM]

37. Hey Bea! Good to see you again. I've been good! (eom)

[Beacool]

47. Glad to hear...........

;)

[earcandle]

9. I think this is not true. I think Obama is doing fine in the polls. He is making things work, but

not for those who are running the media, so of course they are
going to spread this horse manure around.

IMNSHO>>> 

[defendandprotect]

11. No one wants right wing in office, so I presume that many are going to

try to oust incumbents by moving from one party to the other?

Put one in -- move them out -- move to more progressive candidates when they can??

Think Canadians tried to do this -- ???

It's not as limited as targeting --

And targeting is the way that the right wing did it -- within both parties.

Not to mention that the right can only rise via political violence which has also

happened over the last 50 years -- in plein air.

[rasputin1952]

15. The GOP has no one to put out there....

besides, 2012 is a political lifetime away.

I don't find any of these polls credible, anything can happen in the next 2 years, and all the GOP offers is a return to bush/cheney disaster...dumbest stuff I've read in a long time.

[No Elephants]

21. Don't know about this poll. Do know that both complacency and despair are enemies in elections.

[newspeak]

23. that's funny

because on KO last night he said there was a poll that showed, I believe, that it was 43% still approved of Obama and Democrats, but only 26% approved of repugs. It looks like those interviewed are losing faith in both parties, but more so, with the repugs.

[Beacool]

24. It's way too soon to predict 2012.

Politicians go up and down in the polls like a roller coaster. Obama's popularity will depend on the economy, particularly the jobs factor. If unemployment is still as high as it is right now, he'll have problems.

:shrug:

[GoddessOfGuinness]

32. Exactly....I'm tired of hearing about 2012.

We need to get 2010 right.

[Beacool]

33. Yep!!!

;-)

[dionysus]

60. i got something for you Bea!

banky!!

:hi:

[Beacool]

65. I missed seeing it.

Thank you!!!

:pals:

[eowyn_of_rohan]

26. LIES & PROPAGANDA

They are working overtime to set the stage for another STEAL. CAN'T LET IT HAPPEN OR WE ARE COOKED

[county worker]

35. I can't buy this poll. I know people are stupid but not that stupid.

I can't accept that nearly half the population think Palin is as viable a candidate for the presidency as Obama is. Even if progressives hate Obama, they sure as hell aren't going to vote for Palin.

[and-justice-for-all]

38. Bullshit...

and why are we even discussing 2010?? what a waste of time.

[Zavulon]

39. Any poll that has Obama and Palin tied is too absurd to believe.

Further, although I know I'm going to get ripped for this, it never ceases to amaze me how much daily attention is paid to polls at DU.

I'm not even remotely happy with Obama after the green light to offshore drilling, a troop surge in Afghanistan, failure to close Gitmo and his "first-it's-not-a-tax-now-it-is" bullshit Republican health care plan, but the day I even consider voting for Palin is the day you read an article about me which concludes with the phrase "...he then turned the gun on himself."

[Tarheel_Dem]

40. You act as if this is something new in American politics. It's not!

Recent history shows that year two seems to be tough on a new president, and we know Bush II was an anomaly due to 911.

{snip}

Bottom Line

Obama is not alone in facing a challenging second year in office -- Bill Clinton (43%), Ronald Reagan (42%), and Jimmy Carter (40%) all were below the majority approval level in July of their second year. Of course, each of those presidents saw his party lose a substantial number of seats in that year's midterm congressional elections, though both Reagan and Clinton recovered in time to win a second term as president.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141131/Obama-Job-Approval-Rating-Down-Among-Independents.aspx

{snip}

Independents are nonideological problem-solvers. They are sick of Washington's harsh and cynical hyper-partisanship, but they do not have a split-the-difference approach to politics.

Independent voters are decidedly closer to Republicans when it comes to economic issues and closer to Democrats when it comes to social issues.

To put it another way, they are fiscally conservative but socially progressive with a strong libertarian streak. And it's on fiscal issues that independents are putting Obama on notice.

That's why liberals' increasingly strident insistence that Obama abandon bipartisan outreach is terrible advice for the president and the nation. In a burst of triumphalism, they seem to be echoing former House Majority Leader Dick Armey's advice to Republicans in the past --"bipartisanship is another name for date rape" -- despite the fact that it is exactly this hyper-partisan, play-to-the-base approach to politics that caused independent voters to abandon President Bush.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/27/avlon.obama.independents/

I think the lesson here is that you can play solely to your red-meat base if you like, but if you lose independents because they think your base is too extreme & hyper-partisan, YOU LOSE! You need look no further than the many failed Kucinich presidential runs to know that. You can see on both sides this urge to purge anyone who isn't far enough right or left, and independents obviously think the president is being pulled too far left. Historically, it's been the moderates who have been able to bring about concensus.

[DCBob]

42. One problem with this is that Presidential elections are still determined by the Electoral College..

and I suspect Obama is doing just fine when you tally up state by state. I also suspect he lost most of his support in the red states which wont matter. There might some controversy if Obama win the EC but loses the popular vote but tough.. them's the rules.

[Arugula Latte]

43. This seems to confirm that

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x378920

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141428/Obama-Highest-Half-Year-Approval-Ratings-Hawaii.aspx

[WI_DEM]

44. Time has a poll out at same time that gives Obama a 20-point lead over Palin.

and politico has a poll out today showing Obama leading Palin by double-digits, 14-points.

[WI_DEM]

46. Given the demos of this poll it seems more tilted towards conservatives, men and

in voting figures while Obama won in 08 by 8-points they have Obama leading by only one-point among 08 voters.

[krawhitham]

48. hmmm

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=379407&mesg_id=379407

[davidpdx]

50. According to Arirang News in Korea the 2012 Presidential Election has started

It's just so laughable, they showed a picture of Palin, Romney, Huckabee and Gingrich.

[saltpoint]

51. I'd expect a lot of atmospheric frustration in an economic

downturn.

I'd like to ask some of those dissatisfied independents how independent they think Mitt Romney really is. That would be an interesting response.

When an actual ballot is handed to actual voters I think President Obama wins a second term.

[saltpoint]

52. Also, a show-stopping melee in the back alley with

very sharp knives is currently getting underway in the Republican Party re their nomination.

It's still relatively tame at the moment here in the early going but it's gonna get real mean real soon.

Let's just see what kind of shape they're in after that alley fight.

[Greybnk48]

59. ((yawn))...next! n/t

[Aramchek]

61. you're right, this is damn silly

[AtomicKitten]

64. Pfft.

[ShadowLiberal]

66. Things can change a lot in 2 and a half years

Remember 1994? Bill Clinton and democrats were so toxic they lost both houses of congress. Then remember 1996? Bill Clinton easily won reelection.