Obama Is Losing His Base
by Big Dog on Dec 17, 2009 at 23:11 Political
Things are not going well for Barack Obama. His approval numbers have dropped faster than any president at this point in their service and his radical positions are stirring up opposition to him and his Democrat friends. Next November is shaping up to be good for Republicans if things do not turn around.
It is one thing for Obama to stir up conservatives but he is now at a low point in that he is losing the left. Admittedly, he is losing them because he is not being radical enough for them but if he goes in the direction they want he will lose a lot of seats in the next election. This might not matter to the base or to Democrats in safe seats who view the potential loss as the price for the agenda but those who might lose have different feelings about being sacrificial lambs. Sane people have to ask if the agenda is so good why would it cost seats?
Howard Dean is not happy with Obama. He has an axe to grind to begin with because he has been snubbed by this administration even though he was able to help the Democrats win a lot of seats. Dean feels he should have been the Secretary of Health and Human Services and though I disagree with his political views he is more qualified than Sebelius. I would think the fact that he is a doctor would be more beneficial to the position.
Dean said that they should scrap the entire health care reform plan and start over because it is not radical enough. I don’t agree but at least he sticks to his beliefs. I think it should be scrapped because it is too radical but we both think it should be scrapped. Dean also thinks that the Senate should use reconciliation to pass reform because they would only need a simple majority. I am not well versed on the process but I think what it can be used for is limited and if they do it a lot of things would have to be left out of the bill.
Dean also said he would support Obama when he runs for reelection but he will not do so “vigorously.”
Dean is not the only liberals who Obama is losing. Obama now has Markos Moulitsas (Kos), Ed Schultz, Keith Olberman and Arianna Huffington all expressing dissatisfaction with him and the health care takeover plan.
These people represent the far left liberal base. They are all so far to the left that they are holding the wall up and now they are not happy with Obama and the Democrats. Not very long ago these people would defend their politicians engaging in human sacrifice and in their eyes Obama could do no wrong.
Now it looks as if they are not happy at all because their politicians are not being radical enough.
I think they misread what the election was about.
It certainly was not a mandate to transform the country into a Socialist nation.
America is Souring On Democrats
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: dean, dissatisfaction, health care reform, Obama, radicals, senelius
Bigd: “Things are not going well for Barack Obama. His approval numbers have…>>
DAR
What a load.
***
“The latest Associated Press-Gfk poll shows the president’s popularity holding steady, with 56 percent of those polled approving of the way he’s taking care of the country’s business. His marks for handling the 8-year-old war in Afghanistan have jumped by double digits, with more than half now approving, since he capped a three-month strategy review by announcing a big troop increase.”
–AP, today
D.
—————
Bonus:
ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Nov. 12-15, 2009.
“Overall, which party — the Democrats or the Republicans — do you trust to do a better job in coping with the main problems the nation faces over the next few years?”
Democrats: 47%
Republicans: 31%
11/12-15/09
Polling report.
Dream on.
Right Darrel, keep thinking that
Here
You cite a poll of popularity. Job approval is not popularity.
President Barack Obama’s job approval rating has dropped below 50 percent in a second major poll in an indication he is suffering from the long healthcare debate and weakness in the economy, Gallup said on Friday.
Gallup said 49 percent of Americans approved of Obama’s job performance. A survey by Quinnipiac University on Wednesday had a similar finding, putting him at 48 percent support. Gallup via Atlas Forum
He can still be popular and not have a high approval. And who is he popular among?
Maybe you should also look at these
RCP Average 12/3 – 12/13 — 43.3(R) 41.0(D) Republicans +2.3
Bigd: “You cite a poll of popularity. Job approval is not popularity.”>>
DAR
I cited a poll of his job approval. Polling report has this listed under “job ratings” not “favorability.” Poll data is here:
Third one down.
The question:
“Overall, please tell me whether you approve, disapprove, or neither approve nor disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president.”
See also the Bloomberg poll directly beneath the above.
“Do you approve or disapprove of the job Barack Obama is doing as president?”
Approve: 54%
12/3-7/09
D.
You and Howard Dean agreeing on something? I never thought I’d see the day. Dean’s never been that accepted into the Demcoratic establishment anyway for some reason. Maybe it was the scream heard ’round the world? He was opposed in his chairmanship by Pelosi and others going in despite pulling it out. Clinton era Dems like Carville still ripped him even after his success. Then of course he didn’t get any part in the Obama administration as you pointed out. He must be the Rodney Dangerfield of the Democratic party. He gets no respect.
Certainly dissatisfaction over the economic conditions in the country and massive misinformation about the healthcare bill by Republicans everywhere aren’t helping the Democrats.
All the Democrats can do at this point is pass their healthcare bill so they aren’t called a complete failure, find something to unify around, and hope the economy continues to move in the direction it’s moving now and that we see many, many months of job growth instead of decline heading into the election.
The Democrats can turn a potential bloodbath by Republicans into an actual victory for Democrats if a few key factors work to their advantage. The erosion of the Democratic base and the opinion of the party hasn’t coincided with a jump in approval for the GOP. In fact it’s driving folks to call themselves independents. If the Tea Party movement fractures the GOP (a very strong possibility) then all bets will be off.
“His approval numbers have dropped faster than any president at this point in their service…”
You’re not telling the truth this time though. I have updated my graph to show the most recent Obama polling.
Gallop Job Approval had Reagan as high as 68% in May of his first year. Obama’s high point is about 64% in February. Reagan and Obama have followed close by for weeks with Reagan slightly ahead in December 49% to Obama’s 48%.
We’ll have to wait and see if an economic recovery boosts Obama into a 2nd term as it did Reagan or if stagnation dooms him Carter style.
Adam, Check these numbers out.
How gormogons.com constructs that graph is a mystery. The data is completely wrong and it does not match up with any verifiable approval data.
Take for instance his note that Reagan came in at something like 85% approval? According to what source? Reagan’s approval his first month in office was 51% and he peaked at 68% by May.
My graph is of actual data which I source at the bottom of the page.
If you don’t believe me then follow this link to a flash based comparison tool, click the Comparison tab and select Obama and Reagan. You will see my graph matches the USA Today tool a lot closer than the Gormogons graph does.
The approval drop is based on what pollsters have written about the drop.
You write about Republican misinformation, that is funny. What about Democrat misinformation? You know, illegals won’t be covered, abortion won’t be covered (what is the hold up with Nelson) that it will save money, and a lot of other things.
You call it misinformation but it is INFORMATION upon which people can base their support.
85% of people are satisfied with what they have, why overhaul the entire thing for 15%?
If a pollster says Obama has dropped faster than any president at this point in their service then they are wrong. You can see the numbers for yourself if you dare.
Bigd: “85% of people are satisfied with what they have, why overhaul the entire thing for 15%?”>>
DAR
Your favorite refrain, but so wrong.
“…85 percent of respondents said the health care system needed to be fundamentally changed or completely rebuilt,”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/health/policy/21poll.html
In a democracy people should get what they want, and the American people want fundamental change and/or “completely rebuilt.”
Careful readers will also note how your position is duplicitous here. You constantly complain about the deficit and trillions in unfunded mandates, much of this clearly due to out of control growth in medical costs, and then at the same time say we don’t need fundamental change to health care.
These positions are incompatible. The only way to get America’s unsustainable and growing costs of medical care down is by an overhaul.
D.
I linked to the graph. All you have to do is look.
And all you have to do is look at mine, and the 2nd one I listed. Feel free to look up the actual approval rating from another source if you don’t believe me. That graph you cite is completely wrong.
Your graph shows Obama with the highest approval in first month (Carter is not shown in first month) and lower than everyone at this time in his tenure. So how did he not start higher and drop lower in the same period of time?
By no metric can you say Obama’s approval numbers “have dropped faster than any president at this point in their service.” My graph doesn’t include Ford so we’ll need this one that does.
Using starting points (~Jan to Dec) Ford clearly declined further (21 points) than Obama (15 points).
Using high and low points Reagan clearly decline further (19 points) than Obama (15 still).
Well you are the one who called it popularity.
So what, the RCP running polls mean nothing and Bloomberg is the authority?
Bigd: “Well you are the one who called it popularity.>>
DAR
Actually, the AP article did. Best to go back and look at the actual poll question rather than rely upon the accuracy of a reporter.
Bigd:”…and Bloomberg is the authority?>>
DAR
The AP poll has him at 56%, Bloomberg 54%, lots of other polls put his job approval around 50%.
Considering the state the nation is in after Bush drove it into an iceberg, he is doing quite well.
D.
I did not say his numbers suffered the biggest difference from start to now. He is at the lowest of any person at this time in tenure.
Fox
He has dropped faster (to the low) than any other.
Fox is technically correct that 47% is the lowest of any recorded president at about day 318 in office. I don’t see the relevance of that though since there were plenty of days before day 318 that Clinton, Ford and Reagan were lower in approval than Obama. Reagan was at 49% by Gallup on that same day.
You said “his numbers have dropped faster” and after all this arguing I’m not sure entirely anymore what you even mean by that.
In fact Gallup for 12/14-12/15 has Obama at 51%, higher than Reagan’s 49% at 12/11-12-14. So again, Fox is correct but does it mean anything to say he was lowest that one week when he’s not lowest the next?
The bottom line is his approval is clearly low, but to say his approval is the lowest ever at a certain day, or that it’s dropped the quickest, just doesn’t make all that much sense.
No one said that we did not need to fix the system. I have offered a number of solutions that would cover the 12 million or so who are not covered (that is the true number) and would not overhaul the system.
Just so you know, we do not live in a Democracy. We live in a Republic. There is a difference. Article V of the Constitution.
A survey conducted jointly by the Kaiser Family Foundation, ABC News and USA Today, released in October 2006, found that 89 percent of Americans were satisfied with their own personal medical care, but only 44 percent were satisfied with the overall quality of the American medical system.
Fox
Bigd:”cover the 12 million or so who are not covered”>>
DAR
As you know, “…the number of Americans without insurance is actually closer to 36 million.”
Politifact.
And of course, dumping more people into the world’s most idiotic, upside down and inefficient health care delivery system, really doesn’t address the myriad problems.
Oh, and note. You were going on about health insurance companies only making a 2% profit. As if this has anything to do with how much they actually waste. Notice the percentage they are actually gobbling up:
“Insurers refer to spending on health care as a “medical loss.” The medical loss ratio currently averages 70 percent across the nation. Minnesota law sets it at 91 percent.
The Congressional Budget Office, however, determined that the 90 percent requirement that Franken and Rockefeller had pushed for amounted to nationalization of the industry. The CBO didn’t explain how it came to the seemingly arbitrary figure of 90 percent. Franken said he and Rockefeller met with the CBO chief Doug Elmendorf about his determination and came away uncertain of the reasoning. Elmendorf, who is not an elected official, deemed that 80 percent for small groups and 85 for large didn’t amount to nationalization.”
Schwarzenegger tried to pass a 85% rate in California but it was killed by the insurers.
I had breakfast with my physicist friend today who went in for a fairly minor overnight hospital procedure which turned into a three day event because of some nurses screwing up with a catheter. He just got the bill.
$87,000.
No need for an overhaul. Everything’s fine.
D.
Link for the above quote.
The country did not hit the iceberg until Democrats took control of Congress. Seems to always go to hell when they are in charge of Congress.
No, there are 36 million people uninsured but many of them can afford to have insurance and have chosen not to and some of them are illegals who are not entitled. The actual number who do not have it and can’t afford it is around 12 million.
Medicare wastes a fortune but it is covered by adding expenses to other bills, like the doc fix to the defense bill. The administrative costs are hidden as well and Medicare denies more claims than any private company.
Bigd: “some of them are illegals”>>
DAR
If you’d done your homework you would know that the 36 million referenced above *specifically* excludes illegals.
D.
——————
“Looking back to Obama’s statement, though, he said nearly 46 million Americans don’t have insurance. Actually, the census data include noncitizens. The Census Bureau breaks out that information and reports that 9.7 million of the uninsured are noncitizens. So the number of Americans without insurance is actually closer to 36 million.” –ibid
Like I said, there are about 12 million who do not have it and cannot afford it. Some people choose not to have it. That is called freedom. You are free to choose not to buy health insurance if you do not want it. The balance of the folks can buy it if they want it.
Bigd: “Some people choose not to have it. That is called freedom.”>>
DAR
No, it’s called irrelevant. People won’t be able (have the “freedom”) to mooch on the system and expect everyone else to underwrite their risk which is exactly what is happening right now (see Blake). Time for some “personal responsibility” in the area of people paying their own way.
D.
——————-
U.S. Uninsured Health Care Cost Put at $125 Billion
“The cost of providing health care for U.S. citizens who have no insurance will total $125 billion this year [2004], with taxpayers and private entities footing most of the bill, a report issued on Monday said.”
FactCheck, your favorite place says this about the cost of health care being pushed on others.
—Obama: [T]hose of us with health insurance are also paying a hidden and growing tax for those without it – about $1,000 per year that pays for somebody else’s emergency room and charitable care.
That figure comes from a study by Families USA estimating the effect on premiums of uncompensated care, which is care that is provided to the uninsured but not paid for. But that group advocates vigorously for wider government health coverage.The figure is not supported by the Kaiser Family Foundation or the Congressional Budget Office. Both have reported that uncompensated care actually leads to lower hospital profits, not higher premiums. KFF’s estimate of the amount of uncompensated care shifted to premium-payers works out to about $200 per family per year, not $1,000.—
200 a year is a hell of a lot less than what this is going to cost us if it gets through. Seniors will see their costs triple and the young will get socked with 2-3 times the amount in premiums. They have to get money from someplace.
The goal was to decrease the costs. It won’t happen.
And after this FUBAR of a bill passes, if it does, there will be still 30 million or so NOT covered by this, and people unconstitutionally forced into illegal taxation, but getting absolutely NO benefit?
It truly IS a Ponzi scheme, like MccAIN SAID.
No Darrel, you just propose the rest of us pay for the health care of others. That is what the bill will do, tax us to pay for everyone else.
I have to say I agree with Olberman on this one, if the government mandates we buy it say no.
It will not pass the SCOTUS. No one can force you to buy something to be an American in good standing.
Blake pays his own way or have you missed that all along?