Speaking of expectations - what's up with Obama's poll numbers?

Just a couple of weeks ago his average was right about even, or maybe slightly more approval than disapproval. Right now his RCP avg. is -5%.

His Gallup numbers just fell 4%.

And here I was thinking everyone was all focused on New Hampshire and Tebow.

It is because he is out on the road with his crybaby act again. Obama's constant whining is getting old and the polls show it. In the words of my 85 year old neighbor "That Barrack Obama, doesn't he ever shut up" is taking hold with most Amercians

That might be it Rocco.

It sure is something.

And whatever it is he's doing it really must be something to draw attention away from the circus that is the Republican primary.

Well at least he has the State of the Union Address.

Of course we are the brokest nation in the history of the world, we continue unabated to blow through $4 billion new debt every day, and he is now asking for another $1 Trillion in debt ceiling.

But unemploynet is only at 8.5%, so he got that.

"That Barrack Obama, doesn't he ever shut up" is taking hold with most Amercians

LOL, my wife, who hates politics and is about as neutral as they come has the same sentiment! Just sick of his voice.

Obama / Biden 2012. The Clean, Clear and Best Choice.

Stepford wife - that's good. I like to call her "Helmet Head". Last cycle I called Lynn Cheney - "Bobble Head".

Last cycle I called Lynn Cheney - "Bobble Head".

Speaking of the Dick - his daughter the Lizzard, is fondly referred to as the spawn of Satan around these parts! ;o)

The apple didn't fall far from the evil tree!

well,another 45 minutes before we start hearing the Exit polling they refused to use in Iowa. any predictions?

I spent half the time listening to CNN YECH! if you listen to them, you would think mitts has it sewed up already, and Huntsman has second locked in, with santy being third. so I moved over and watched some CNBC at least they know that there is someone called Dr Paul and he has SOMETHING to do with this race....

Spanky, there you go again..

Of course we are the brokest nation in the history of the world, we continue unabated to blow through $4 billion new debt every day, and he is now asking for another $1 Trillion in debt ceiling.

Please prove what you claim. If you actually research and stop listening to the hate mongers on FOX you would know that we are far from being the brokest nation in the world. Despite our problems we are still the wealthiest nation on the planet by far. The unemployment rate has gone down, albeit not as much as we might like but down nevertheless, and you would discover that the spending rate has gone down under Obama as compared to Bush and the unfunded war spending, making the military-industrial complex rich, that happened during his (Bush's) terms.

Yeah - finish strong, eh Niod?

Like Obama and his proclivity to climb the money ladder. Surrounding himself with fat cat Wall Streeters is just not enough. Now apparently he has instituted a minimum net worth requirement for his Chief o' Staff.

I mean Rahm was certainly no slouch - dude pulled in around $16 million for the Street. But Daley, that guy flat out raped and pillaged. Huge and fat stacks.

But Lew? That cat is just ridiculously good at making money. Hundreds of million a year is good work if you can get it.

So good for Obama. Sure he is a multi millionaire, but nothing wrong with not wanting to hang out with the riff-raff.

Now, if he can only fix those approval rating and poll better against such a terribly weak candidate like Romney. Funny how his numbers against Romney mirror his approval ratings. You'd think Romney being so weak and all Obama would just blow him out.

Like I said earlier, now MSM will pick a number, a "threshold" that Mitt must surpass, probably that 50 percent Newton hopes he is denied.

Mitt won't just be running against the rest of the field, but the media's EXPECTATIONS.

If he "wins" with less than a majority (51%+) it will be spun as a "loss' by some segments of the media, liberal and conservative.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Spanky my tangential thinker, happy new year! How've you been?

Just wanted to let you know about the Republican primary in New Hampshire tonight. Looks like Mitt is going to win, but the media will be playing numbers games to keep things interesting.

I am sure that if you had known about tonight's contest, you would have had some worthwhile insight about the candidates, as they're an interesting and diverse group, eh?

Hey Danger thanks for the shout out [tangential thinker at least implies thought.

Mitt's gonna win, the whole thing is over, but funny thing is the more negative they go on Mitt, the more I like him.

I certainly am no Mitt fan, but #1 - ABO. But this whole firing people thing is silly.

As a fiscal conservative that wants the government cut way, way back you better believe folks are going to have to get fired. That Mitt, who only tends to do what's popular fired people is great.

I have had to di it. It sucks when it's employees, but occasionally needs to be done. When it's vendors or service providers that can't cut it?

No problem.

And say danger, but was this not the part last time when Hillary started crying?

Like I said earlier, now MSM will pick a number, a "threshold" that Mitt must surpass, probably that 50 percent Newton hopes he is denied.

Mitt won't just be running against the rest of the field, but the media's EXPECTATIONS.

If he "wins" with less than a majority (51%+) it will be spun as a "loss' by some segments of the media, liberal and conservative.

...which would make it no different than the Democratic Primaries in 2008. The question was asked time and again by the punditocracy..."Why can't Obama seal the deal?" They'll play the expectation game...whatever.

Of course, with New Hampshire, this is Romney's "back yard". He has a home in the state.

Tangential thought is better than none at all, but now that I have you focused;

She didn't actually cry Spanky, can't believe that you'd give the "people magazine" version of an incident, but I don't know what you read in your spare time lol

I once had to fire/lay off 28 employees in ONE day, including a girl I had um, "dated". It is not an easy thing to do if you are possessed of a heart and mind, but I did it because it was MY job.

The government will continue to GROW despite all rhetoric to the contrary and I could show you graphs and pie charts to prove it but Ross Perot has the whole thing in his garage...

Face it, for some reason many Republicans don't want Mitt as the nominee. I don't get it as he is a "traditional" (he waited his turn) Republican standard bearer, with even better HAIR. Even here in LIBERAL NYC, most of my Conservative friends are backing ABR. Newton has a lot of support in the city, go figure!

Noid,

Many feel that the media "sealed the deal" for the President in 2008, carrying him to the nomination over SS Clinton...

Which large primary states did the President WIN in 2008?

NY?

Ohio?

Texas?

California?

Pa?

Mass?

He won Illinois...

Some would argue that he never really did "seal the deal" and that is why there's a

Hillary for VP PR push in the weekly op-eds strategically placed from democratic operatives...

dangerfield,

I see your point. I do not see, though, and if the democratic operatives were truthful, the president changing running mates unless he is very far behind in the polls. It would look weak, IMO, to change now.

And truthfully, I think Hillary will use any down time between when she leaves State and 2016 to decide whether to run for president. Her favorables are up now, but then again, she is not in the public eye as much.

Danger - I will thank you not to belittle my leisure time reading. Ms. Spanky stocks up on all the good ones whenever we go to the river or desert - OK!, People, In Touch....

Keeps me in the know, you know.

Sure the conservative don't want Mitt. I don't want Mitt. But in the end none of us want more Obama. Just like all the hillary supporters eventually came to the Obama party.

The gov will continue to grow, until it can't. And sadly that is coming pretty quick. I think the president elected in 2016 will be a Ron Paul type, as dictated by economic circumstances, which will be bleak.

Take a look at the ghost of Christmas future - Cali. Brown is taking the pipe and bleeding red ink. Cuts are coming THIS year. Big cuts.

Her favorables are up now, but then again, she is not in the public eye as much.

--------------------------------------------------

Except for the President, Boehner, and maybe Mitch McConnell, Secretary Clinton is the most visible political figure in the nation...

Hillary Clinton has been the most admired woman in America for2 decades now, her "favorables: are the highest of any politician from either party.

------------------------------------------------

Dec 27, 2011 6:33pm
Obama, Hillary Clinton Named 'Most Admired' in Gallup Poll

Clinton tops the list of most admired woman for a record 16th time,

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/obama-hillary-clinton-named-most-admired-in-gallup-poll/

Hillary Clinton is more popular than Obama - and is now America's favourite politician

Clinton is thought of favourably by nearly two-thirds of Americans, according to the Bloomberg National Poll.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2038283/Hillary-Clinton-Americas-popular-politician-One-wish-President.html#ixzz1j6TM0ywA

The SS is in the NYT and on the PBS NewsHour almost daily.

2016 is a long time from now, but I for one hopes that she decides to give us another chance...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Would you rather look weak and win or look strong and lose?

Dangerfield,

If push came to shove, I would do what it takes to win.

And Mrs. Clinton's exposure now is as SecState, not really as a politician. But, like you, I hope she does give us a chance again in 2016.

Just like all the hillary supporters eventually came to the Obama party.

I wouldn't take that one to the bank...

As to the "dire" circumstances of the economy...

If things don't markedly improve over the nest FOUR YEARS(Jeez!) I can see a Rand Paul or Paul Ryan being a viable candidate, but I have lived through and prospered through several (Ford/Carter/Reagan) recessions and know that it only takes a few years of sustained growth to go from "a crushing burden on our children" until

"The debt clock faithfully recorded the increasing U.S. debt until 2000, when the prosperity of the 1990s created enough revenue to reduce the federal budget deficit and debt."

http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/USA-National-Debt-Clock.htm

I walked past that clock every day for YEARS Spanky, and never thought I'd see the day when they turned it off, but it came.

So I have faith in the American people, the American worker and good ole Yankee ingenuity that we will recover and reverse the trend just like we have ALWAYS done before.

I am reminded of a song lyric by the great John Prine, as that seems to be my theme o' the day. The song is called "Dear Abby" and I dedicate this verse to you and all whose political fortunes (or preferences anyway) are bound to our continued economic impotence...

You have no complaint
You are what your are and you ain't what you ain't
So listen up Buster, and listen up good
Stop wishing for bad luck and knocking on wood

http://www.cowboylyrics.com/lyrics/prine-john/dear-abby-10853.html

Have a great evening...

Excellent dangerfield. Have a wonderful evening.

Mitt will either a right wing extremist as his running mate like McCain and meet the same fate as McCain or he will pick a moderate and force the extremists to vote for Paul thus splitting the GOP vote and giving Obama an even bigger victory. Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic Candidate in 2016. If the GOP is smart they'll run someone like Huntsman rather than some loon like most of what aspire to be POTUS in their party today.

Dollared -

That's pretty funny. Except that it's actually "cemetery" registries.

He who lives in glass houses shouldn't throw tombstones.... :)

Good points all Ms. Amy. I actually agree with you but the wierd thing is will be that Mr. Obama is still going to get embarassed in November no matter how weak the field.

Amy -

You say Michael Douglas, I say George Clooney:

"There's a scene in the movie Up in the Air in which George Clooney's
character, a corporate hatchet man who flies around the country firing people on
behalf of his merger masters, turns to his eager young apprentice and explains
why he's able to avoid romantic entanglements:

"You know that moment when you look into somebody's eyes and you can feel
them staring into your soul and the whole world goes quiet just for a
second?"

She answers, "Yes."

And Clooney's character, Ryan Bingham, replies with hollow certainty, "Right, well I don't."

Ladies and gentlemen, meet former Gov. Mitt Romney, the "Up in the Air" candidate. Romney's Bain Capital was the living embodiment of the Up in the Air ethic: form an investment group, take over the businesses, and fire the workers to pay off the investors. The human wreckage that resulted was merely collateral damage."

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/laura-chapin/2012/01/10/mitt-romneys-i-like-being-able-to-fire-people-problem

Amy,

Whistling through the graveyard, or the foolish hubris of underestimating your opponent? Pick one, because the third choice is far less flattering....

The President is going to need all the luck and help he can get to win a 2nd term, so keep in mind that the country is pretty much split like this;

40% will vote Republican 100% of the time

40% will vote Democratic 100% of the time.

The remaining 20% are volatile, unpredictable, generally up for grabs, and most important, tend to favor "new and shiny" over "seen that before".

This is going to be a hard fought election and neither side should be gloating or doing their end zone dance just yet...

Joanne-

Great movie! I love the scene where when the "fire-e" talks suicide and the apprentice runs out, Clooney follows her outside and reassures her that they never actually kill themselves. She asks, "so you check on that, follow-up?"

Clooney: Oh God No!, what good could that possibly do?...

Michael,

Pick a candidate. Who do you want to see win the nomination? Since you're so sure that candidate will win in November, who do you think it should be?

Poor Amy. . .

That "weak" candidate? Beating Obama among all voters- by six points among independents

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/documents/77700213/download?secret_password=251zi07zcogpxd4yny4h

That's CBS- and their house effect for democrats is well known.

Michael1969,

I know it's hard for a racist that wants to disturb people with black face images. But you best get over the upcoming ass whooping that is coming. Romney is looking so weak, I'm thinking Obama will take 40 states. The economy is improving and gathering steam. The Republicans wrecked the economy and the budget the last time they controlled everything. Facts don't lie. We came SO close to Great Depression II. Auto sales are way up according to GM. Oh yeah, we still have GM and Chrysler too. Romney, being a good corporate cannibal would never have saved them. He would have sold off the parts to some private equity group that would have eventually sold the remnants to China or S. Korea. I think Romney's new nickname should be either "vulture" or "chop shop".

Da Noid

Michael,

Pick a candidate. Who do you want to see win the nomination? Since you're so sure that candidate will win in November, who do you think it should be?

Great question Noid!

Kinda makes me happy my caucus isn't until Feb. 7 (MN).....I'm a putz that way...lol

Anyway, the best to win the general elction would be Romney. I don't think Huntsman could do it......too blurry between him and Obama.

My personal choice would be Bachmann (hot AND brainy!) but she's out so my choice lies with Perry. That being said he doesn't stand a chance so I guess my right arm will be pulling the lever for Romney.

P.S. - Make no mistake, if Romney wins Republican primary, November will be a blowout

Hey NoJoe,

is that part of this poll?

Poll: 58% of Republicans want more presidential choices

There is no candidate in the GOP field who more than one third of Republican primary voters say they would enthusiastically support if he were the nominee. Rick Santorum does best in terms of enthusiasm, with 33 percent saying they would enthusiastically support him. (Roughly one in two say their support for Santorum would either come with reservations or simply result from the fact that he is the GOP nominee.) Santorum is followed by Newt Gingrich, whom 29 percent would enthusiastically support, and Romney, whom 27 percent would enthusiastically support. They're followed by Rick Perry at 17 percent, Ron Paul at 15 percent and Jon Huntsman at 12 percent.

---------------------------------------------------

and for my democratic friends, the next paragraph...

Despite their dissatisfaction with the field, Republicans are more enthusiastic than Democrats about the 2012 presidential election. Forty-one percent of Republicans say they are more enthusiastic than in past elections, compared to 21 percent of Democrats and independents.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57355532-503544/poll-58-of-republicans-want-more-presidential-choices/?tag=stack

So there you have it. Selective reading and willful blindness will allow everyone here to

"hear what they want to hear and DISREGARD the rest"

NoJoe is that why YOU posted a link to the pdf file?

dangerield: "The remaining 20% are volatile, unpredictable, generally up for grabs, and most important, tend to favor "new and shiny" over "seen that before".

True, perhaps.....but then again - Romney? Gingrich? Santorum? Paul? Haven't we seen 'em all before?

FYI - In the interest of full disclosure, I haven't actually seen that movie yet, just trailers - but now I really want to!

P.S. -Hey, that was MY Paul Simon quote earlier today!

Of course given where our Amy's man Obama finds himself she must have to admit that Obama is a weak president, right?

Again, he currently loses the head to head with Mitt, who as Amy notes is so weak.

But putting aside the relative weakness of the republicans, Obama's own numbers are terrible. 42% approve, and more importantly 70% wrong track.

I wonder if Amy would care to address those numbers?

Somehow I suspect she is too busy doodling 'Ms. Amy Obama' on her Trapper Keeper.

LMAO @ 'Ms. Amy Obama' on her Trapper Keeper.

P.S. -Hey, that was MY Paul Simon quote earlier today!

Not running in the general election Joanne...Are you old enough to remember when George Bush's SON(!) George Bush, ran against Al Gore in 2000? I clearly remember the ridicule and hubris; Gore would eviscerate Bush and win in a LANDSLIDE. Why did that pesky 20% break so evenly? You have to play it like you're behind or tied no matter what or risk the consequences...

Check the thread...you had your VERSE

I had mine...Actually used it here before, as I really do find that many here really do seem to see and hear selectively.

Spanky wants Amy to ANSWER his questions about her guy's 'weakness", but didn's ANSWER me as to why the Republicans want anybody but Mitt?

See, it's always easier to be on the handle than the barrel...;)

... and just for the fun of it Rodney-

I get no respect. The way my luck is running, if I was a politician I would be honest.

Ah, George Clooney. Please do not tell Mr. phinephancy, but I think he (Clooney) is still "hot"!!!

ideology,

I wouldn't do that, look at what they are doing to Dr Paul for being honest....

ISTV-

So, you caught that one when I "dropped" it, or just found it?

Ah danger - the hearts want what the heart wants. Let's say we give it two or three weeks then see how the Romney love is doing?

Conservative concern for Romney is very different than the position Amy took, but I suspect you know that. We recognize the weakness, the obama-ites do not. Well actually they do just about everywhere else but here.

Amy contends that Obama is just dreamy, and that the republicans are weak.

yet Obama can't muster above 45%, or 30% that think we are on the wrong track.

But then I guess it's easy for Amy to do an end zone dance. You got to be mighty nimble to walk over those hot coals for Obama.

dangerfield,

just my memory leaking.

lol!...

Nope, dangerfield. I posted the link to the poll, with the cross tabs. Without that information, any discussion of any poll is meaningless. By the way, I had not seen the poll you mention- this was part of the monthly approval/disapproval numbers for CBS.

No selective reading required.

As to your poll- I'm disappointed Daniels did not run- and the reasons behind it. That said, I will go all in for Romney. He's a bit more socially conservative than I like, but he's a heck of a lot more fiscally conservative than Obama.

Believe me when I tell you, this nation cannot afford another four years of this level of fiscal profligacy.

Regardless of who gets the republican nomination, be prepared for a lot more partisan attacks from the WH. Be prepared for senate leader reid ignoring house passed legislation and be prepared for the house to write legislation with inane points that they will negotiate away to the senates inane points.

Obama set the stage for gridlock in his first two years, I expect gridlock will continue this year.

A continuation of beltway gridlock with a slowly improving economy would show us all that government actions are really inconsequential for effective and continual private sector job creation. The wild cards here will be europe, china or military conflict.

Good point phinep.

By November 2012 we will have chugged along - $4 billion per day, $120 billion per month = $960 billion in new debt.

So that terrible, horrible debt number of $15 Trillion will be $16Trillion.

Surprise!

Oh and Obama didn't 'handle' anything last itme. He promised hope and change. Rainbows and unicorns.

This time he has a record. You know - 'President Downgrade' and all.

In fact has he done anything to reduce the debt?

Spanky,

I take it you do not understand my term of surprise. I mean something completely off today's radar. Or if not off the radar, something very unexpected - some examples, an attack by Iran on Israel or visa versa. The collapse of the European Union. A terrorist attack. Please, try and use your limited imagination and get off the "I hate liberal, especially Obama" song.

And, FYI, your constant stalking of Amy is getting embarrassing. Do you have a crush on her?

phine,

Your proposition of a "surprise" is intriguing indeed. Leads to the question - what sort of surprises would help the incumbent, and which would benefit the challenger?

what sort of surprises would help the incumbent, and which would benefit the challenger?

Would it be a surprise if we knew?

Mark,

That is a tough one to answer. One, it would depend on the challenger. Huntsman would be tough on a foreign affair type of surprise, but Obama has shown his own strength there. Markets, banking, again, I don't know. Guess that what makes it the "surprise"!!!

I will say, though, getting through without a surprise is preferable. Surprises usually mean bad things for innocent people.

Ah, yes, Michael, a known surprise is perhaps not so surprising, surprisingly.

phine,

I'm with ya in regards to getting through without surprise. Times are tough enough.

Michael,

Since you seem to have all the snark and answers, and appear to like "Batman" films, then "riddle me this", the collapse of the finanacial markets in September, 2008 led to the defeat of McCain - due to his response to it. Do you agree?

Two things floating around at the top right now,

#1 Iran, we drew two lines in the sand, told Iran they will provoke a response, doing anything to develop a nuke, block the strait.

#2 FED, right now we are printing money hand over fist as fast as the presses will print without breaking, once the world figures out just how much cash we have floating around, the money exchange bubble will break causing massive inflation here, Japan (like they need more inflation). and China.

I sure as hell hope I am wrong but those would be the top of my "List"

Egilman,

Any military involvement with Iran would be a nasty surprise of the unwelcome kind. Though political benefit can be (and is) derived from any situation the thought of a candidate advancing due to war (regardless of who started it) with Iran is just repulsive.

The EU is in no way settled, and keep an eye on our Russian friends. Potential for surprises abound around the globe.

How about some nice surprises? Really good news. Good news that nobody tries to spin in an attempt to make the other guy look bad.

phinephancy-4252115

Michael,

Since you seem to have all the snark and answers, and appear to like "Batman" films, then "riddle me this", the collapse of the finanacial markets in September, 2008 led to the defeat of McCain - due to his response to it. Do you agree?

Absolutely not....In my humble opinion, '08 had nothing to do with McCain and everything to do with the then "rock star" Obama and the hatred/tiredness of GW Bush.

People just wanted something new. They were nervous about a tumbling economy and war.....along came a very charming guy promising "Hope and Change". You can hardly blame the libs for their misguided thoughts and votes.

2008 was over in the spring of '08 when Hillary and Obama were still clashing. It was bound to be one of 'em.

McCain was one of the dullest votes I have ever had for President.

Michael,

You just answered all my questions about you. Thank you.

Why gosh phinep - you got me.

I actually have a crush on Amy, Feisty and especially Bev. But this is no mystery, as I have expressed this many times.

But me thinks it is you who may have missed the point - Obama didn't handle anything last time. He was just not Bush, and was the blank slate.

problem for him now is he has shown what he can do and what he is about. Matter of fact I was reading an article on his polling numbers among 'waitress moms' and blue collar workers.

Very interesting stuff that. But then again so was the one about Soros saying the Europe picture is far worse than our own financial collapse in '08.

So phinep - you good with him asking for another $1 trillion?

Oh, GOOD things well lets see this is difficult....

#1 Campaign, Democrats and Republicans get together around a giant campfire and toast s'mores and sing Kum By Yah and congratulate each other on running toe good race. (too much to ask huh?)

ok, on a more serious tone,

#2 governing the country, Boehner and the republican leadership could see some of the wisdom of the democrat positions on some things and that the democrat leadership, Obama and Biden can see some of the practicality of the republican side of things. (would be a nice change now wouldn't it?)

If the teams were as good at self-analysis as they are critiquing their opponents, the blog and the state of the Union would be vastly improved...

Egilman,

If number two happened it would really be the Mayan 2012 prediction! LOL.

But it is a great thought..................

dangerfield,

I am trying to do better. Truly.

phinephancy-4252115

Michael,

You just answered all my questions about you. Thank you.

Not sure what that meant but okie dokie....I have no secrets.

If number two happened it would really be the Mayan 2012 prediction! LOL

lol

Michael, the reason McCain lost besides Obama being the better candidate is that Bush screwed up so badly that many people were fed up with the GOPers and McCain selected a right wing radical extremist as his running mate. The election might have been closer or McCain might actually have won were it not for Bush and Palin.

phine - your jealousy over amyb is showing, if amyb wants to write inane posts she is asking for whatever she gets, especially if she refuses to reply.

At least for once your post 7 had room for political discussion.

BTW - I would hardly say that obama was in a position to handle any 2008 sept/october surprise better than anyone else. He wasn't POTUS and his time in the senate during 2008 was mainly in getting the leg up over hillary and running for POTUS.