● No Second Term For You! The Hill just did an interesting poll asking a broad range of questions. Only 31% of respondents think the country is better off than it was when Obama took office, while 52% say it is in a worse condition. Fifty percent say they are “very unsatisfied” with Obama’s stewardship of the economy, with another 8% saying they are “somewhat unsatisfied.” And the most interesting number. . . 54% think Obama does not deserve to be re-elected. Those are not good numbers for Obama.
● Women Have Turned: Obama’s biggest strength, indeed the only thing which has kept him competitive, has been that women view him much more favorably than unfavorably. In April, women supported him 57% to 39%, according the ABC/Washington Post. Now that same poll has found that women view him unfavorable by 46% to 50%. This is consistent with The Hill poll, which found that 51% of women (57% of men) think he does not deserve to be re-elected. This is really bad for Obama, particularly as it will be hard for him to win women back as he has little to offer them. It’s also worth noting that his collapse among women has occurred during the “war on women” smear by the Democrats. Whoops.
● Yes, But: If you’ve been watching the convention, then you will have seen that the Democrats are claiming Obama created 4.5 million jobs. Each of them has been repeating this number like it’s magic. Well, CNN just debunked the claim.
To get the 4.5 million jobs, what you need to do is start in January 2010, the bottom of the jobs recession, and look only at private-sector jobs between then and now. If you do that, you will see that there are indeed 4.5 million more jobs than before. BUT, if you go back to the start of Obama’s administration, you will see that the economy has only produced 300,000 net jobs since January 2009. In other words, Obama is excluding all the jobs lost just to play up the number of jobs created. Moreover, this figure does not count the number of government jobs which disappeared over the same period. When you go from January 2009 to the present and look at the total jobs figure, the economy is down 1.4 million jobs.
Finally, CNN points out that according to the liberal-leaning National Employment Law Project, the jobs that have been created have been low-paying, low-stability jobs such as retail and food services, which have accounted for about 3/4 of all new jobs. These are exactly the kinds of jobs the Democrats claimed should not be counted when they appeared under Reagan or the Bushes.
It’s amazing CNN would point this out. Maybe there’s hope for them yet? In any event, the poll numbers certainly give me further hope that Obama is finished.
Thoughts?
98 comments:
>>These are exactly the kinds of jobs the Democrats claimed should not be counted when they appeared under Reagan or the Bushes.>>
Like Mr. Nicklaus says about his sport, you can always count on the modern libs to be consistently inconsistent.
The poll numbers make sense. I think it's amazing Obama hasn't trailed badly in every poll given the dismal state of the economy.
It's first thing in the morning, I haven't had any coffee (meaning i'm pretty sure i'm still asleep)and this is the first article I've read.
AWAKE! Very nice polls numbers to start my Thursday.
What a nice way to wake up! I hope you're feeling better Andrew.
First of all, Andrew, I command you to feel better! I mean it...don't make me make you eat chicken soup in your jammies with a warm blanket and fluffy pillows.
Now that I've done that, has anyone noticed the lack of Biden's presence at the convention. I don't mean his physical presence, I mean, the lack of the name Biden in the speeches, press etc. It is as if they didn't want to point up that Biden is still running on the ticket with Obama and may mean they see him as a liability.
I think first and foremost the problem is thinking any President creates jobs. Jobs are actually created by the guys who "didn't do that".
All the Whitehouse can effectively do is to implement policies that will make the economy more stable are lower the number of jobs lost.
These policies are as much the fault of congress as the executive. It really irks me to hear Dems wailing abount Bush's mess when the real damage was done by Barney Frank in 2006 when OFHEO came to congress to discuss Fannae Mae's adverse accounting opinion. They specifically told congress to raise the capitaiization rates for the Banks to 4% in order to stave off a future mortgage collapse. NakedEmporerNews has the CSPAN hearings on Youtube.
What did the democratically controlled Finance ccommittee do. Why they rightly rebuked the OFHEO auditors for being racist because we all know making it harder for people to get mortgages affects those with more melanin in their skin the worst.
And just two weeks ago I heard Obama talking about making it easier for the underpriveledged to get loans as a way out of the economic mess we are in....... God I pray the American Electorate has finally wised up to this stupidity.
Bev, Biden has been the invisible man at their convention. They must really know how he comes across.
Also, get well Andrew.
Bev, please do that. I really want to see that happen.
I knew the "4.5 million jobs gained" claim was bullcrap, but I hadn't looked into the numbers behind it. Once more, the Democrats reject as math as racist.
It will only work, if by "underpriviledged" he means people who can afford a mortgatge, but can't get them because of the economy like me...because anything else is what got us into this mess to begin with.
It's interesting that the revelation of Obama's involvment in the class action suit suing the mortgage companies to give minorities special consideration in loans didn't sprout legs. First, it actually is something that had his name on it besides his two book. That alone was a revelation. AND it was the class action that helped pave the way for the housing collapse.
T-Rav, Math is hard.
It just goes to show that you can't be the one complaining about negative campaigns while simultaneously running the most negative campaign in memory. What's truly sad for the Dems is that this is their week to push Romney/Ryan out of the headlines--which they've mostly done--and they are still seeing polls like these.
What's truly fascinating (to me) is that Dem strategists are already downplaying the significance (read: expectation) of a post-convention bump in the polls. In other words, they're already admitting there won't be one. To add to the intrigue, articles reflecting on Romney's post-convention bump are all over the map. Some say there was one, some say there wasn't, some broach the subject but don't talk numbers, and some simply use a Romney headline to talk about the DNC convention.
My personal favorite came last week from CBS News. The headline was "Romney aide downplays post-convention bump" but the article related no such thing. With no hope of context, the aide was quoted stating (as many have this election cycle) that the old predictors are out the window. This was placed against an earlier statement from the campaign which observed that the GOP convention should be a greater benefit to Romney than the DNC should be to Obama.
Obviously the two ideas have little to do with each other, and the one still remains to be seen. But it is characteristic of the media to find flip-flops in unrelated comments where they don't exist.
tryanmax, I think the bounce thing has been hilarious. It's like they're obsessed with how they will appear in the polls. I'll bet they eventually declare that he did get a bump whether he did or didn't, and then it will fade and they won't mention it again.
Eric, Being consistently inconsistent is indeed a liberal trait. Well said!
Anthony, I agree. It's about time the poll numbers catch up to all the other numbers too. I think Obama now losing women is basically the end of any chance he has to win. I also think it's fascinating that he lost women during their big push to get women to turn against the Republicans.
Patti, I'm glad I made your day! :)
Thanks DUQ. I've felt better, but I'm feeling better finally.
Thanks Bev! I'm working on getting better.
I totally agree about Biden. If you didn't know he existed, you sure couldn't tell from the convention.
Indi, Whether it makes sense or not, it has become fashionable to blame/credit the White House with job creation in the country. That's why both side use that argument. What I find interesting here is that CNN debunked the Democratic claims about jobs. I don't think that would have happened a few years ago.
Thanks Ellen. Didn't they even cut away from a speech gave? I recall something about that.
T-Rav, As you guessed, the claim is bunk. It's really minus 1.4 million.
Bev, We all know the housing collapse was the result of evil predatory lenders forcing people to take advantage of rules which let them take out loans then never wanted. All Obama was doing in helping that was trying to prevent it.
tryanmax and Doc, I agree about the bounce thing. It sounds obsessive. It sounds like they are really worried that Obama won't get a bounce and that the public will see him as finished at that point.
Frankly, I think he will get a bounce (about 3%) just because he can't go any lower at this point. But it doesn't mean anything. Bounces never do. Only slow, steady rises matter.
Indi and Andrew - CNN is really hurting in the ratings, so I think they are actually trying to become a credible news organization again.
Bev, I'll tell you, I am considering checking them out again. If they really are going to be unbiased, then I would be interested in that.
I just read that MSNBC's coverage of the Democrat convention was the most highly watched.
Coupled with the fact that Fox's coverage of the Republican convention was the most highly watched, its reasonable to conclude that only the intensely political (people who are not on the fence) are bothering to watch events which do nothing more than tell people what everyone already knows.
I think the only part of the conventions that ordinary people eventually become aware of are the unscripted, bizarre parts. Its too soon to tell if it will have legs, but the God and Jerusalem vote might be the most important moment of the Democrats' convention.
I think CNN is doing it wrong. Most people know that objectivity is a myth which is why networks like Fox and MSNBC that have unambiguously picked a side (CNN has picked a side, but they still tell themselves and anyone who will listen that they are impartial) have done better.
Anthony, that's a great point, and I think the Republicans garnered a whole bunch of "win" by having Clint Eastwood there. And if the Democrats' God vote doesn't shake off a few of those on the Christian left, nothing will. I'm thinking primarily of those who see gov't social programs as doing "the Lord's work." Well, if the DNC isn't doing it for the Lord, then who are they doing it for?
Apparently "you didn't build that" signs (like Clayton Williams') are showing up around WTX. It's amazing how many people have bought [1] TOTUS didn't mean what he said when he said that and [2] think that tax based infrastructure negates an entrepreneur's legitimacy in claiming he built his business (and in rebutting examples seriously argue that a bus driver should get credit for a kid's school success).
An fb friend had an excellent tear down of that premise that made me smile this morning...
tryanmax, as far as I can see, the "religious left" doesn't really care why or by whom "social justice" happens, as long as it happens...
I still think a large portion of the Convention viewers are watching on CSPAN which is not calculated into the # of overall viewers.
Ellen, isn't it though?
Incidentally, did anyone notice the total fiasco yesterday with the convention and the whole Israeli thing? I didn't watch it, but I caught a replay this morning. Talk about amateur hour. If I were Romney, I would be having that put into five different ads right now.
Anthony, I think that's right. I think that only the true diehards watch the conventions and the only thing the public will ever see are soundbites or the bloopers.
Anthony, I think the problem for CNN has been that no one believe them. I know they've tried to be neutral for some time, but they still have all the same poisonous personalities who spew liberalism. Why should I believe they are impartial just because they do a couple respectable stories when they still have a team packed with Clinton-loyalists?
tryanmax, My guess is that the religious folks who are part of the Democratic coalition are less concerned with the use of the word God in their platform than they are with the left wing social policies the Democrats promise.
rlaWTX, I don't follow you. Are those pro-Obama signs? I thought those were all anti-Obama signs?
and yes, the social justice crowd isn't really concerned about much else.
Bev, If you want to see the actual convention, that's the only way. Otherwise you get buried in commercials and talking heads.
T-Rav, That was a mess for them. And I'm sure Romney will exploit it. Whether it will change anything? Who knows.
Even if there were some truth to the Obamists' claims, the fact remains that any job growth is still by far the slowest at any time since the Great Depression. The big lie isn't going to work for him. 23 million unemployed simply don't care what numbers the Democrats toss around.
rlaWTX, there is that. Like I said, if it doesn't shake any off, nothing will. Besides, the end result was to add God back in, so that would be enough for the average Dem to turn a blind eye to the fact that He was ever taken out. Frankly, I find leftist Christians to be the most inexplicable creatures on Earth.
On the topic of God in the DNC platform, I find it almost hilarious how the Dems have spun it. Debbie WTF Schultz actually said that the changes were made "to maintain consistency with the personal views expressed by the president." I know I've observed before that it is impossible for liberals to have any political views that differ from their personal views. Apparently it can be leveraged both ways? Well, I believe it when I see it.
Lawhawk, That's the real problem. They can talk about whatever numbers they want, the reality is that lots of people are unemployed or underemployed, and lots more are worried about their jobs. These are not good times and people know that. And a number like 4.3 million (real or fake) won't give those people any comfort.
tryanmax, They've actually been dancing around all week trying to sort out what their positions are on various topics, like the question of whether or not things have gotten better.
tryanmax, that claim has already been blown out of the water. Whatever Obama's personal views (which are untrustworthy anyway), the changes have nothing to do with the WH's official position. Of course, Debbie also said there was no booing over the God/Jerusalem thing, so she's going to deny reality whenever it suits her.
T-Rav, If DWS says there was no booing, then I'm sure there was no booing. Right?
As an aside, I also a poll which showed that Obama has lost the youth vote.
All credit to fellow 1/21'er the Golden Bear, Andrew, and hope you're back at 100% sooner than later.
Doc, I just noticed that. Not only is the 18-29-year-old split for Obama down to 49-41, only 58% say they plan to vote this election, as opposed to 78% in '08. In other words, it fits the prez's definition of "doing just fine."
My 84 year old mother can even distinguish the attitudes of the "news" anchors on the MSM news shows. I cant get her to not watch CBS and ABC news at 6 and 7pm, but this morning she was relaying the observation that whenever the news anchor, Norah Odonnel mentioned Obama, her face lit up and she was all smiles and positive demeanor....no matter what she was saying. Whenever she mentioned Romney/Ryan, she was all downcast and monotone, almost sneering...no matter what she was saying.
It is this type of media "bias" that the average American is starting to observe more and more, and is finally seeing how their opinions have been formed and manipulated by just the newsreaders bias...not necessarily by WHAT they're saying, but HOW they say it.
Interesting observation by a sharp woman.
T-Rav, Debbie is a true propagandist. She repeatedly denies facts which are indisputable, and spreads venom left and right.
Doc, I saw that too. It's fascinating that group by group, Obama is losing his key supporters.
Thanks Eric! I hope so too.
T-Rav, Those were the numbers I saw too. It sounds like troubling times for Obama with all of his strongest supporters either abandoning him or just becoming demoralized. And with Romney not being a lightening rod for controversy, nothing will wake them up either.
Patriot, I hope more people are catching on. Bias takes many forms, from what facts they tell you or don't, to how they spin the facts, to even how they present the sides... word games, body language, mental gymnastics. It all matters.
Interestingly, on your point, George Stephanopholis (sp?) actually said this weekend he saw no bias in the MSM.
Hey, what about me? Don't I get any love? I was great!
Andrew,
The only interesting thing that is coming out of the DNC is the GOD and Jerusalem vote. It was deemed passed to put it back into the platform. Curiously that was the same term used prior during the ObamaCare legislation. And the Democrat Leadership deliberately did what their people didn't want.
Joel, I would read that along with yesterday's article as the Democratic Leadership not being as stupid as their followers. They know the value of appearing moderate.
Hey Bill, are you looking forward to seeing Monica Lewinsky's rabbi at the convention? Oh, the fun you two could have....
It's been fun watching the Democratic implosion over God and the Jewish population. I think it was Axelrod who recently quipped, "At least we're united." Yeah, right. Keep drinking the koolaid, Axe!
P.S. I think Clinton gives Obama some serious competition in the Egomaniac category. That speech last night? Pure torture.
Take care of yourself, Andrew! Hope you're feeling better.
DUQ,
I think you didn't get the point. Even during the DNC, the Democrat Leadership still goes against the will of it's people. Including GOD and Jerusalem in the platform is clearly going against the will of it's people.
Yes, it is a smart move, but the bigger picture is they always go against the will of the people.
Joel, I get that. I'm just saying that it means their leadership is smarter than their membership and knows how they need to present themselves to the public. I don't think they care at all what their membership wants.
In fact, Andrew said this once, that they can't deliver what their membership wants because then their members wouldn't need them anymore.
Bill, Welcome back from the wilderness. I'm sure we were all impressed. LOL!
Joel, That's pretty funny. But it doesn't surprise me. Their leadership knows that there are some lines they can't cross and they aren't going to let the party cross those... not publicly at least.
DUQ, That was indeed the point of yesterday's article -- that they understand PR... if not ideology.
T-Rav, That's a pretty funny coincidence. I remember someone pointing it out yesterday, but can't think of who. Maybe FOX?
Thanks X! I'm working on it. And yeah, Axelrod needs to lay off the KoolAid!
Joel, It's no so much that they go against their troops as a matter of principle, it's that they have their game plan and they aren't going to let the wishes of the rank and file interfere with that.
DUQ, That's true too. They can't ever deliver their promises or they will lose their supporters because the promises are the only reason they support the party.
Andrew, sorry - about the signs - I was reading the online comments on a local TV station's website. and the arguments against the signs that people had were ludicrous: [1] TOTUS didn't mean what he said when he said that and [2] think that tax based infrastructure negates an entrepreneur's legitimacy in claiming he built his business (and in rebutting examples seriously argue that a bus driver should get credit for a kid's school success).
I vote "yes" on fluffy pillows and chicken soup for Andrew. As long as we get pictures.
Re CNN: I'm wondering if the MSM will turn on Obama if they feel they can't drag him over the line? Media bias has come out into the open in this election and turning on their master at the last would go a long way towards image repair and future credibility - or at least some plausible deniability.
I guess I just can't get past the fact CNN actually admitted what they did. Maybe they figured since nobody watches, it wouldn't hurt, and it could boost their claim of being objective.
Everyone should check this article out. LINK.
Remember David Foster who made those ads for Obama about how bad things were when Bain took over his steel mill? He even spoke at the convention the other night and again slammed Romney.
It turns out Foster never worked for the steel mill. He was an AFL-CIO union organizer.
Add that to the list of false ads, along with the one about Romney killed my wife.
rlaWTX, Thanks for the clarification. I misunderstood you.
K, Just say no to pictures. :)
I think that's what's going to happen actually. I think the MSM is getting ready to grab some credibility once they are sure Obama can't win and they will blast him.
Jed, I'm not sure of CNN's motives at this point, but I think it's about gaining credibility.
Andrew, no worries - that's that I get for multitasking, I drop balls...
Andrew, I have no idea. I don't even remember where I heard it.
By the way, I would like to note that the media gushing over Clinton today is just disgusting. Between Chris Matthews raving that if Billy Jeff were on Mars, he could have sex with them right off the bat, and Rick Klein talking about how the audience was "moving, breathing as one," they've finally managed to outdo themselves.
Well, well, well! Andrew, I guess that guy is only a Union Organizer and negotiator. Hmmm. Very interesting. Of course, he is going to show that the BIG BAD COMPANY, Bain, destroy meek and mild workers because company is so MEAN. Never mind that Bain was that company's only hope.
The more I hear of Union workers, the more I am astonished that any company can operate with them. One thing I do hope Romney does is do away government unions, or at least do a heavy auditing.
rlaWTX, I know the feeling. I think multitasking has been rotting my brain. I'm noticing tons of typos these days where there ain't used to be no typos! :(
T-Rav, I don't recall where I heard it either.
I think the gushing over Clinton has been obscene, but then it was to be expected. He is their Reagan, even if they disagreed with everything he did.
I didn't hear the thing about Martian sex, but that sounds pretty messed up. The moving, breathing as one thing fits with the idea they're one big cult.
Joel, I too want to see him break government unions. There is no reason government employees should be unionized. And having done time working for the government, let me tell you that it's a mess because of union rules. You really can't fire bad people.
Andrew,
"And having done time working for the government...."
This makes it sound like you were in prison. Did you get your education and law degree from the prison library? Have I outed you by mistake? ;-)
Joel, It felt like prison, let me tell you. I could tell you amazing stories of people fighting with each other, people who literally did no work in three years, people who stole things left and right... and none of them got fired. My boss yelled at me and several others for working too hard because we were making everyone else look bad. And these people were earning six figures.
You could literally have fired 3/4 of that office and productivity would have gone up.
I just saw that they asked Romney if he would watch Obama's speech. He said no. I wish he would have said:
"Sure. He's the President for the next couple months and I want to see if he has any ideas on how to fix the problems he's caused and help people right now. I doubt it, but you can hope, right?"
DUQ, I heard that and I think it's a mistake. It makes Romney seem like he's not interested in communicating with the other side. Of course, the Dems really aren't interested in communicating with us, so I don't care; but a lot of people might. I mean, I'll end up throwing things at my TV, but I'll watch it.
DUQ and T-Rav, I agree. I think it would have been smarter for Romney to say he would watch it and then spin it. That makes him sound more respectful and more "aware." I mean, in the grand scheme of things this means nothing, but I would have liked to see him take a nice shot.
I especially like your idea DUQ of putting Obama on the spot for not doing anything to fix things now. That makes Obama sound political... why wait until after the election to act?
Is anybody watching the Democratic Convention? Talk about annoying. Can they ever tell say something without trying to blame a Republican?
Nightcrawler, I'm watching and I share your view. The really don't have anything to offer, do they?
I don't know how I'm going to make it through this crap-fest. Even looking over the "highlights" thus far makes me want to upchuck. (sigh) But I guess it's my civic duty or something.
T-Rav, I agree. I think it makes him sound more thoughtful, better informed and more open. BUt as Andrew says, this isn't a big deal.
T-Rav, It's hardly a civic duty.
It's not a civic duty, trust me. I'm watching The Shadow. It's amazing how much Alec Baldwin has gone from good looking normal human to stuffed corpse in about 10 years. I wonder what happened? Alcohol?
I wonder how soon Biden will be allowed to speak before they bring the net out.
So they let Biden out of the box finally? That was a mistake. Of course, having someone entirely incompetent be your lead before Obama probably will help a lot.
Well, that was thoroughly awful. On the other hand, it's the last acceptance speech I'll ever have to hear from Obama.
Obama: "Our problems can be solved."
The Public: "Yeah, in November."
I'm glad all of you watched the convention. LOL! I hope your lives are more enriched. Fortunately, I was ill so I didn't even try to watch.
Post a Comment