Author Topic: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread  (Read 45127 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #100 on: April 27, 2011, 10:53:52 AM »

THIS is what you're resorting to complaining about?  THIS?

Every friggin' president in history has shut down traffic with his motorcade.  THIS is what you're mad about?  Dude?

Please tell me where in bama's schedule he is trying to address oil prices?  Between 35,000 dinners and oprah appearances?   

Fuck him - he is a disgusting grifter, communist, and marxist ape, piss and shit be upon him him forever.   

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #101 on: April 27, 2011, 10:59:11 AM »
Please tell me where in bama's schedule he is trying to address oil prices?  Between 35,000 dinners and oprah appearances?   

Fuck him - he is a disgusting grifter, communist, and marxist ape, piss and shit be upon him him forever.   

so youre mad about his policies, and not his travel plans and their effect upon traffic?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #102 on: April 27, 2011, 11:02:52 AM »
so youre mad about his policies, and not his travel plans and their effect upon traffic?

 ::)

go vote for him in 2012 - you deserve him.   

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #103 on: April 27, 2011, 11:21:01 AM »
::)

go vote for him in 2012 - you deserve him.   


sheeeeeeeeit, i'm getting my ron paul tattoo :)

and i'm gonna ninja kick every "republican" who votes for any other candidate in the primaries.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #104 on: April 27, 2011, 11:27:49 AM »

sheeeeeeeeit, i'm getting my ron paul tattoo :)

and i'm gonna ninja kick every "republican" who votes for any other candidate in the primaries.

Have you ever attended a Ron Paul event?

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #105 on: April 27, 2011, 11:30:04 AM »
Have you ever attended a Ron Paul event?

nope.  cant wait til he gets to my area!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #106 on: April 28, 2011, 12:13:13 PM »
Obama Approval At Lowest Level Ever In Pennsylvania, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds
Quinnipiac University Poll ^ | April 28 2011 | Quinnipiac




President Barack Obama's job approval rating in Pennsylvania is a negative 42 - 53 percent, an all-time low and a major drop from his 51 - 44 percent approval February 17, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. Pennsylvania voters say 52 - 42 percent he does not deserve a second term, his worst showing on that measure also. In a mythical matchup, he gets 40 percent to an unnamed Republican challenger's 41 percent in the 2012 presidential race.


(Excerpt) Read more at quinnipiac.edu ...


garebear

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 6491
  • Never question my instincts.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #107 on: April 28, 2011, 12:30:01 PM »
::)

go vote for him in 2012 - you deserve him.   
I'm going to vote for him and there's not a GD thing you can do about it, punk.
G

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #108 on: April 28, 2011, 12:31:30 PM »
I'm going to vote for him and there's not a GD thing you can do about it, punk.

And my vote for bettlejuice/vandersloot/madoff/trump/BTK Killer/Springer will cancel out your vote for the ObaMessiah.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #109 on: April 28, 2011, 03:01:58 PM »
NYC hecklers distract Obama
Politio44 ^ | 04/28/11 | MATT NEGRIN


________________________ ________________________ _______-


It seems that no matter where President Obama raises money these days, he can’t avoid getting heckled.

Audience members interrupted Obama a handful of times at a 1,300-person fundraiser Wednesday night, speaking loudly enough to briefly derail him from his planned remarks.

The first interruption came at the very beginning of the New York City fundraiser, from a few people in the audience. But their objections were “inaudible,” according to the White House’s official transcript.


(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...


________________________ _______________________


Good - this jerkoff and grifter needs to be heckled EVERYWHERE he goes.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #110 on: April 28, 2011, 03:04:37 PM »
Obama’s Approval Remains at All-Time Low for Second Week in Row, Says Gallup
Thursday, April 28, 2011
By Terence P. Jeffrey



President Barack Obama (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

(CNSNews.com) - President Barack Obama’s weekly approval rating remained at its all-time low for the second straight week, according to the Gallup poll.

In the week of April 11-17 and again in the week of April 18-24, 43 percent of the Americans polled by Gallup said they approved of the job Obama was doing as president.

That matched the all-time low for Obama’s weekly approval in the Gallup poll. Previously, Obama had earned a 43 percent approval rating in the back-to-back weeks of Aug. 16-22, 2010 and Aug. 23-29, 2010.

Obama’s weekly approval rating peaked at 67 percent in the week of Jan. 19-25, 2009—the week he was inaugurated.

Gallup publishes approval ratings for the president on both a daily and weekly basis. The daily approval number is based on a three-day average. The lowest three-day average approval the president has ever received is 41 percent. Obama’s three-day approval rating has hit that nadir five times—including for the three-day periods of April 12-14, 2011; April 13-15, 2011; Oct. 21-23, 2010; Aug. 16-18, 2010; and Aug. 15-17, 2010.

For the three-day period ending yesterday, Obama’s approval rating was 42 percent, one point above its all-time three-day low.

Gallup typically asks more than 3,000 people per week whether they approve or disapprove of the job the president is doing. Last week, the polling firm asked 3,037 people of they approved or disapproved of the job Obama is doing, and the week before that it asked 3,614.

The complete weekly trends in Obama's approval rating since the beginning of his presidency is available on the Gallup website here.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #111 on: April 28, 2011, 08:05:31 PM »
Obama Administration punishes reporter for using multimedia

649



The hip, transparent and social media-loving Obama administration is showing its analog roots. And maybe even some hypocrisy highlights.

White House officials have banished one of the best political reporters in the country from the approved pool of journalists covering presidential visits to the Bay Area for using now-standard multimedia tools to gather the news.

The Chronicle's Carla Marinucci - who, like many contemporary reporters, has a phone with video capabilities on her at all times - pulled out a small video camera last week and shot some protesters interrupting an Obama fundraiser at the St. Regis Hotel.

She was part of a "print pool" - a limited number of journalists at an event who represent their bigger hoard colleagues - which White House press officials still refer to quaintly as "pen and pad" reporting.

But that's a pretty Flintstones concept of journalism for an administration that presents itself as the Jetsons. Video is every bit a part of any journalist's tool kit these days as a functioning pen that doesn't leak through your pocket.

In fact, Carla and her reporting colleague, Joe Garofoli, founded something called "Shaky Hand Productions" - the semi-pro, sometimes vertiginous use of a Flip or phone camera by Hearst reporters to catch more impromptu or urgent moments during last year's California gubernatorial race that might otherwise be missed by TV.

The name has become its own brand; often politicians even ask if anyone from Shaky Hand will show at their event. For Carla, Joe and reporters at other Hearst newsrooms where Shaky Hand has taken hold, this was an appropriate dive into use of other media by traditional journalists catering to audiences who expect their news delivered in all modes and manners.

That's the world we live in and the President of the United States claims to be one of its biggest advocates.

Just the day before Carla's Stone Age infraction, Mr. Obama was at Facebook seated next to its founder, Mark Zuckerberg, and may as well have been wearing an "I'm With Mark" t-shirt for all the mutual admiration going back and forth.

"The main reason we wanted to do this is," Obama said of his appearance, "first of all, because more and more people, especially young people, are getting their information through different media. And historically, part of what makes for a healthy democracy, what is good politics, is when you've got citizens who are informed, who are engaged."

Informed, in other words, through social and other digital media where videos of news are posted.

The President and his staffers deftly used social media like Twitter and Facebook in his election campaign and continue to extol the virtues and value. Except, apparently, when it comes to the press.

So what's up with the White House? We can't say because neither Press Secretary Jay Carney nor anyone from his staff would speak on the record.

Other sources confirmed that Carla was vanquished, including Chronicle editor Ward Bushee, who said he was "informed that Carla was removed as a pool reporter." Which shouldn't be a secret in any case because it's a fact that affects the newsgathering of our largest regional paper (and sfgate)and how local citizens get their information.

What's worse: more than a few journalists familiar with this story are aware of some implied threats from the White House of additional and wider punishment if Carla's spanking became public. Really? That's a heavy hand usually reserved for places other than the land of the free.

But bravery is a challenge, in particular for White House correspondents, most of whom are seasoned and capable journalists. They live a little bit in a gilded cage where they have access to the most powerful man in the world but must obey the rules whether they make sense or not.

CBS News reporter, Mark Knoller, has publicly protested the limited press access to Obama fundraisers, calling the policy "inconsistent." "It's no way to do business," wrote Politico's Julie Mason, "especially [for] a candidate who prides himself on transparency."

A 2009 blog by the White House Director of New Media states that "President Obama is committed to making his administration the most open and transparent in history."

Not last week.

Mason referred to the San Francisco St. Regis protest as "a highly newsworthy event" where "reporters had to rely on written pool reports..."

Except, thanks to Carla's quick action with her camera, they didn't.

I get that all powerful people and institutions want to control their image and their message. That's part of their job, to create a mythology that allows them to continue being powerful.

But part of the press' job is to do the opposite, to strip away the cloaks and veneers. By banning her, and by not acknowledging how contemporary media works, the White House did not just put Carla in a cage but more like one of those stifling pens reserved for calves on their way to being veal.

Carla cannot do her job to the best of her ability if she can't use all the tools available to her as a journalist. The public still sees the videos posted by protesters and other St. Regis attendees, because the technology is ubiquitous. But the Obama Administration apparently wants to give the distinct advantage to citizen witnesses at the expense of professionals.

Why? Well, they won't tell us.

Some White House reporters are grumbling almost as much as the Administration about Carla's "breaking the rules." I can understand how they'd be irritated. If you didn't get the video because you understood you weren't supposed to, why should someone else get it who isn't following the longstanding civilized table manners?

The White House Press Correspondents' Association pool reporting guidelines warn about "no hoarding" of information and also say, "pool reports must be filed before any online story or blog." While uploading her video probably was the best way to file her report, Carla may have technically busted the letter of that law.

But the guidelines also say, "Print poolers can snap pictures or take video. They are not obliged to share these pictures...but can make them available if they so choose."

Then what guidelines is the White House applying here? Again, we don't know.

What the Administration should have done is to use this incident to precipitate a reasonable conversation about changing their 1950's policies into rules more suited to 2011. Dwight Eisenhower was the last President who let some new media air into the room when he lifted the ban on cameras at press conferences in 1952.

"We've come full circle here," Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Pew Foundation's Project for Excellence in Journalism told me today. "A newspaper reporter is being punished because she took pictures with a moving camera. We live in a world where there are no longer distinctions. The White House is trying to live by 20th century distinctions."

The President's practice not just with transparency but in other dealings with the press has not been tracking his words, despite the cool glamour and easy conversation that makes him seem so much more open than the last guy.

It was his administration that decided to go after New York Times reporter James Risen to get at his source in a book he wrote about the CIA. For us here in SF who went through the BALCO case and other fisticuffs with the George W. Bush Attorney General's prosecutors, this is deja vu.

Late today, there were hints that the White House might be backing off the Carla Fatwa.

Barack Obama sold himself successfully as a fresh wind for the 21st century. In important matters of communication, technology, openness and the press, it's not too late for him to demonstrate that.

Posted By: Phil Bronstein (Email, Twitter) | April 28 2011 at 04:48 PM
Listed Under: SF Politics

Share   | Email

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #112 on: April 28, 2011, 08:23:52 PM »
Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

Obama to donors: Give me $5
Politico44 ^ | 04/28/11 | MATT NEGRIN
Posted on April 28, 2011 10:56:46 PM EDT by ColdOne

President Obama is asking supporters if they can spare some change.

“I will be direct: Can you step up and make a donation of $5 to get us started?” read an email signed by “Barack” to his fans on Thursday.

In the letter, sent hours after Obama returned from a parade of fundraisers in New York City, Obama said he has “not nearly” accomplished everything he wants to do as president. “But that's a reason to work harder, not to let up,” he wrote. “That's why we're building this campaign now. And you have to take ownership of it.”

“The stakes are even higher this time,” Obama said.

Here’s the full text:

“Friend --

If it were easy to do the big, meaningful things we believe will make our country better -- if it were quick -- someone would have done those things long before any of us showed up.

(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...

TOPICS: Politics/Elections; Click to Add Topic
KEYWORDS: Click to Add Keyword

Hey! FReepers!
Help Fill The Tank!
How About It? Huh?
It Ain't Askin' Too Much
Ya Know....
Click The Pic To Donate!
[ Report Abuse | Bookmark ]

1 posted on April 28, 2011 10:56:47 PM EDT by ColdOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: ColdOne
"Obama said he has “not nearly” accomplished everything he wants to do as president. "
Considering where his loyalties clearly lie, that is one frightening declaration.

2 posted on April 28, 2011 10:59:36 PM EDT by TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: ColdOne
Nonsense.


3 posted on April 28, 2011 10:59:47 PM EDT by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
Comment #4 Removed by Moderator
To: TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
Truly! It takes longer than two years to destroy the US and make us all serfs.


5 posted on April 28, 2011 11:00:52 PM EDT by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: ColdOne
I’ll give 5 bux if I can kick him in the face in exchange..


6 posted on April 28, 2011 11:01:06 PM EDT by max americana (FUBO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: ColdOne
I can promise 5 kicks to A$$.


7 posted on April 28, 2011 11:02:04 PM EDT by MtnClimber (Osama and Obama both have friends that bombed the Pentagon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: ColdOne
“The stakes are even higher this time,” Obama said.
Yeah. Because now there is no doubt that every one of the worst fears about what he'd be like as president have been proven true to anyone willing to see it.

8 posted on April 28, 2011 11:02:14 PM EDT by TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
"Obama said he has “not nearly” accomplished everything he wants to do as president. " That stood out to me as well. Very disturbing.
9 posted on April 28, 2011 11:04:10 PM EDT by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: ColdOne
Sorry, my last $5 went into MY GAS TANK!



FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #113 on: May 01, 2011, 09:55:49 AM »
Obama mocking the faked moon landing conspiracy?   How rude.

Obama Mocks Trump's Presidential Ambitions
Saturday, 30 Apr 2011

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is mixing mixed comedy with some early campaigning at the White House Correspondents' Association annual dinner, focusing mainly on Donald Trump.

With Trump in attendance, Obama said the billionaire businessman has shown the acumen of a future president, from firing Gary Busey on a recent episode of "Celebrity Apprentice" to focusing so much time on conspiracy theories about Obama's birthplace.

After a week when Obama released his long-form Hawaii birth certificate, he said Trump could now focus on the serious issues: "Did we fake the moon landing? What really happened in Roswell? And where are Biggie and Tupac?"

Trump chuckled.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Obama-Correspondents/2011/04/30/id/394685

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #114 on: May 01, 2011, 10:03:55 AM »
Bama was a rude jerkoff as always.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #115 on: May 01, 2011, 06:13:05 PM »
Drudge - NYT MONDAY: Dem strategists believe Obama faces 'tougher-than-anticipated' re-election
drudgereport ^ | Sunday May 1, 2011
Posted on May 1, 2011 7:59:47 PM EDT by Bigtigermike

NYT MONDAY: Dem strategists believe Obama faces 'tougher-than-anticipated' re-election...developing

(Excerpt) Read more at drudgereport.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #116 on: May 11, 2011, 03:46:49 AM »
Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

Bin Laden death now part of Obama's re-elect message
Los Angeles Times ^ | 5-10-2011 | Peter Nicholas
Posted on May 10, 2011 9:09:58 PM EDT by bimboeruption

Reporting from Austin, Tex.—

Osama bin Laden, mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, is now an applause line in a presidential campaign speech.

Bin Laden’s name came up a couple of times in Obama’s address Tuesday evening at a fund-raising event in Austin, Texas.

Early in Obama's appearance, someone shouted out, “Thank you for getting Bin Laden!’’

Obama said that was a “case in point’’ – a reason for voters to let him “finish what we started.’’

Later, Obama ticked off what he described as his administration’s accomplishments: lifting the ban on gays in the military; bringing troops home from Iraq.

And then: “And because of the extraordinary bravery of the men and women who wear this nation’s uniform and the outstanding work of our intelligence agencies,’’ Obama said, “Osama bin Laden will never again threaten the United States.’’

The crowd roared.

While the president has basked in the success of the operation, Bin Laden's sons released a statement Tuesday criticizing the administration, saying the U.S. broke international law in killing an unarmed man.

In Washington, Vice President Biden, coming off another round of deficit talks, was asked by reporters whether Bin Laden's killing at the hands of the U.S. military was illegal.

"Are you kidding?" Biden replied.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...

TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Click to Add Topic

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #117 on: May 11, 2011, 04:54:25 AM »

Economy's still O's Albatross
Sorry, Bam: You're no Bubba
Last Updated: 1:27 AM, May 11, 2011


Posted: 11:11 PM, May 10, 2011

More  Print Charles Gasparino
Last week was great for President Obama -- from nabbing Osama bin Laden on Sunday to good news on jobs on Friday. Republicans I speak to around Wall Street are even predicting that he's now a shoo-in for re-election in 2012 -- recovering just as Bill Clinton did from his own early screwups.

Not so fast. First, the "bin Laden bounce" is fading fast, down to 3 points in one poll. More important: If Obama is to follow in Bill Clinton's footsteps, he'll need a lot more weeks like the past one. And he's not likely to get them -- because his policies have always been more anti- growth than Clinton's.

 
REUTERS
Building zero confidence: Obama's policies have been far more hostile to growth than Clinton's.
Reminders of the folly of Obamanomics are everywhere, from continued high unemployment to $4-a-gallon gas.

Sure, the economy is finally recovering from the after-effects of the 2008 banking collapse that Obama inherited. The Labor De partment reported that the private sector created 268,000 jobs in April, the third straight month of sizable gains; meanwhile, the stock market is moving toward 13,000 -- levels not seen since before the bottom fell out of the financial sector. But the economy is far from surging.

When Clinton won in 1996, unemployment was around 5 percent and heading lower -- thanks to the Internet and tech revolutions that were creating millionaires by the day. What do we have now?

* A government-driven "green energy" agenda that doesn't create nearly enough jobs, but offers tax breaks to companies like GE, which turn around and expand in China.

* Near zero-percent interest rates that let banks make billions by trading bonds instead of making loans to small businesses.

* Inflation, particularly in commodities like oil -- the result of those low interest rates and the president's no-drilling policies.

* An unemployment rate edging higher -- to 9 percent, up from 8.8 percent, as people who'd given up looking for work start trying again. And many who do find a job have to settle for lower pay than they had before the Great Recession.

Forget Clinton's 5 percent unemployment; I haven't found a private- sector economist who thinks we're heading below 7 percent anytime soon. According to several estimates, the economy must create a whopping 7 million jobs just to get to prerecession levels.

President Obama will tell you (and does, every chance he gets) that he started off in a deeper hole: A massive financial crisis and waves of unemployment. But Ronald Reagan inherited a mess back in 1981 -- massive inflation, high interest rates and an economy stricken by the malaise of the Jimmy Carter years. With help from Paul Vol cker at the Fed, Reagan had a massive recovery going by 1983.

Sorry: The nation's still paying economically -- and Obama's paying politically -- for the utter recklessness of his policies, from his decision to socialize medicine rather than focus on creat ing jobs to his failed "stimulus" program that did little more than transfer $800 billion to state and local coffers so the pay and benefits would keep flowing to public employees.

Obama's building zero confidence about the future, too. He's back to insisting on the end of the Bush tax rates after next year -- promising higher taxes on "millionaires and billionaires," meaning small businesses and families that make $250,000. And his plan to supposedly cut $4 trillion in spending over the next 12 years doesn't add up -- everyone knows it's just a pose, so he can pretend to be responsible as he fights Republican efforts to make real cuts.

As his no-drill policies help push up energy prices, his only answer is more politics -- bashing the oil companies and threatening special tax hikes on them, as if that wouldn't push up prices. For all this and more, the economy will be an albatross for Obama all the way to November 2012. He might yet win -- the weak Republican field is itself fumbling to come up with a growth agenda. But don't start the re-election parties just yet.

Charles Gasparino is a Fox Busi ness Network senior correspondent.



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/economy_still_albatross_AnbNrr0MpExxUdyc97jlgK#ixzz1M2nWcaIq

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #118 on: May 11, 2011, 11:10:57 AM »
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com           PRINT

The Campaign Spot

Election-driven news and views . . . by Jim Geraghty.

About    |    Archive    |    E-mail    |    Log In to Comment

Latest AP Poll Sample Skews to Democrats by 17 Points

By Jim Geraghty

Posted on May 11, 2011 8:55 AM






Wow! The AP poll has Obama’s approval rating hitting 60 percent! And 53 percent say he deserves to be reelected!

And on the economy, 52 percent approve of the way Obama’s handling it, and only 47 percent disapprove! He’s up 54–46 on approval of how he’s handling health care! On unemployment, 52 percent approval, 47 percent disapproval! 57 percent approval on handling Libya! Even on the deficit, he’s at 47 percent approval, 52 percent disapproval!

It is a poll of adults, which isn’t surprising; as I mentioned yesterday, you don’t have to be a registered or likely voter to have an opinion on the president.

But then you get to the party ID: 46 percent identify as Democrat or leaning Democrat, 29 percent identify as Republican or leaning Republican, 4 percent identify as purely independent leaning towards neither party, and 20 percent answered, “I don’t know.”

For contrast, the AP’s immediate preceding poll was 45 percent Democrat, 33 percent Republican; the likely-voter pool in October 2010 was 43 percent Democrat, 48 percent Republican. The poll’s total sample in October 2010 split 43 percent Democrat, 40 percent Republican.

With a poll sample that has a 17-percentage-point margin in favor of the Democrats, is anyone surprised that these results look like a David Axelrod dream?

(Interestingly, George W. Bush is at 50 percent approval, 49 percent disapproval, even in this sample wildly weighted in favor of the Democrats.)

UPDATE: Notice that in Gallup’s polling, party ID remains pretty stable. In roughly 40 polls since mid-2009, Democrats and Republicans have both ranged in the 40s with leaners. During that time, the split has never been larger than 7 percentage points. Their most recent split, from late April, is 31 percent Republican, 36 percent Independent, and 32 percent Democrat; with leaners, it’s a 46-46 split. Of course, the OBL kill could have prompted more Americans to self-identify as Democrats. Some pollsters are okay with dramatic shifts in their party ID from poll to poll; they see respondents’ party self-identification as flexible, even fickle, changing from week to week and month to month. I am a skeptic of this notion, and before buying into dramatic changes in the party identification of the voting public, prefer to see the phenomenon confirmed through changes in behavior – i.e., voters changing their party registration.

PERMALINK
 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #119 on: May 12, 2011, 07:17:36 AM »
Obama pressures US companies to up hiring
The Hill ^




Obama pressures US companies to up hiring By Jordan Fabian - 05/12/11 09:23 AM ET

President Obama this week pressured U.S. companies to increase hiring, saying that conditions in the economy and job market are improving.

Speaking at a economic town hall event broadcast Thursday by CBS News, Obama countered a Republican claim that uncertain economic conditions are driving high unemployment. When asked about outsourcing, Obama said some jobs are not coming back, but that the private sector needs to start creating new industries that can grow jobs.

"I think a lot of employers are feeling good about the economy," he said. "The issue here is not uncertainty … they need to start placing their bets on America."

Obama is looking build confidence in the jobs market and follow up on a stronger-than-expected April jobs report while addressing an issue that is certain to dominate his reelection landscape in 2012.

April's jobs report showed that businesses added 268,000 jobs in a month, an unexpected boost for a White House that was expecting lower numbers.

But Obama is still showing signs of vulnerability on the economy, the issue the public ranks as the most important. The unemployment rate ticked back up to 9 percent, and polls show that the public does not approve of his handling of the economy, despite giving him a higher job approval rating overall.

Obama explained that layoffs by state and local governments are helping drive the high unemployment rate, underscoring his push for greater private-sector hiring. The president credited his policies for helping to create better hiring conditions, saying that he signed tax cuts for small businesses.

But Republicans have indicated they are ready to stake the 2012 election on the economy, arguing that Obama's policies have done more harm than good.

"If the economy is the issue, which I do believe it will be, there's no chance this president gets reelected," Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said in an interview with The Hill.


________________________ ________________________ ______________

Ha ha ha ha ha ha    lllmmmfffaaoooo.

"Barack Quixote"

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #120 on: May 12, 2011, 07:19:07 AM »
we're in a depression.  we're stuck in 2-3 quagmire wars.  giggity.

obama is pushing amnesty.

and he's at 51% on Gallup today.   WTF.  Seriously, he could club baby seals on NBC primetime every night for the next 18 months and still own 44% approval.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #121 on: May 12, 2011, 07:24:41 AM »
we're in a depression.  we're stuck in 2-3 quagmire wars.  giggity.

obama is pushing amnesty.

and he's at 51% on Gallup today.   WTF.  Seriously, he could club baby seals on NBC primetime every night for the next 18 months and still own 44% approval.

Again: 

95% ers who will vote based solely on racial allegiance
65% of hispanics for the same reason and because many are on welfare and dickface is promising amnesty.
35% of guilt ridden whites
80% of govt workers
95% of gays
100% of the hippies, enviro nazies, drug addicts, dopers, etc. 


Its simple math.  We are 50% nation now -   50% parasites - 50% producers.   

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #122 on: May 12, 2011, 07:29:21 AM »
Its simple math.  We are 50% nation now -   50% parasites - 50% producers.   

What was the national breakdown 20 years ago?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #123 on: May 12, 2011, 07:30:42 AM »
What was the national breakdown 20 years ago?

Probably 65 - 35     60 -40.


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #124 on: May 12, 2011, 11:19:00 AM »
Why Obama's Not a Lock
By Joe Klein Thursday, May 12, 2011

The most telling moment in Barack Obama's 60 Minutes interview came when Steve Kroft asked for his reaction after he saw the photo of Osama bin Laden, shot in the head. "It was him," the President said. And that was all he said. Now, this was a classic TV how-did-you-feel question, and Obama had a range of possible options. He could have gone all political, "I thought of the families who had lost loved ones ..." Or graphic, "Well, it was pretty ugly, but ..." Or excited, "Oh. My. God." Or religious, "Thank God." Or triumphal, "My first thought, actually, Steve, was 'Hasta la vista, baby.' " But, of course, this is Barack Obama, more Gregory Peck than John Wayne. And the same taciturn, hyperdisciplined quality that is so frustrating when he seems unable to connect with the economic anguish of the American people came across as just right, perfectly Midwestern — Kansas, not Hawaii, much less Kenya.

A few days earlier, five of the Republican candidates for President gathered in South Carolina for their first official debate. It was a weird show, newsworthy only because Congressman Ron Paul came out in favor of legalizing heroin, cocaine and prostitution. Many of the more serious (Mitt Romney, Mitch Daniels, Newt Gingrich) and less serious (Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich) Republican candidates weren't there — and so it would be unfair to compare the Republican punytude with the massive presidentiality of Obama during his strongest week. (See pictures from inside Obama's Situation Room.)

Three relevant observations can be made, however. First, Paul's willingness to go off the libertarian deep end, without a blink, says something about the ideological extremism that has overwhelmed the Republicans in recent years. Paul is certainly further out than most, but all sorts of loony notions have become accepted wisdom in the Republican Party — about taxation, about the science of climate change, about the utter perfection of markets. Which leads to the second observation: even the serious Republican candidates aren't very. Romney refuses to take credit for his greatest accomplishment as governor of Massachusetts — a universal health care plan that works. There are grounds to hope that Indiana's Governor Daniels and former Utah governor Jon Huntsman will not make fools of themselves, but it is hard to imagine either of them prospering by challenging the conventional Limbaugh wisdom of the party, and Daniels has already gotten into trouble by proposing that there should be a truce on "social issues" like abortion and homosexuality.

But my third reaction to the Republican debate cuts in the opposite direction. By depriving the Republicans of the birth-certificate and tough-on-terrorism issues in a single week, Obama may ultimately force them to spend most of their time discussing the weakest point of his presidency: the economy. My colleague Mark Halperin has observed that when Trump talks about something other than the President's birth certificate (or himself), he strikes some very resonant chords. He wants to slap tariffs on the Chinese, and he's mad as hell about gasoline prices (and wants to seize the Iraqi oil fields). This is the other side of the President's reserve: he won't demagogue those issues, or even talk about them very much. (See "The Awkward Republican Coalition.")

I came into presidential politics with Jimmy Carter, and I'll never forget his staff's derision of a certain washed-up actor-extremist from California named Ronald Reagan. Similarly, I remember the Democratic Party's despair in 1992, especially after Bill Clinton was linked, lubriciously, to a lounge singer named Gennifer Flowers. Carter had brought Israel and Egypt together. George H.W. Bush had beaten Saddam Hussein and retaken Kuwait; his popularity rating stood at 90%. But both Carter and Bush were beaten by a bum economy.

Obama could lose too, even to someone who seems silly to fusty opinionators like me. He could lose if he keeps playing on the Republican field — deficits — rather than in the arena preferred by most Americans: the sputtering economy. He needs some big, new, easy-to-understand economic initiatives. He could lose if he doesn't remind the public that he cut their taxes, as promised, and their Medicare drug bills. He also has to prove that, despite the bailouts, he's not Wall Street's sucker. (See "Bin Laden is Dead. Now It's Time to Fix the Economy.")

There is a grand history of populist loudmouths like Trump making an early impression in presidential campaigns: Pat Buchanan, Pat Robertson and Howard Dean all had their moments. And so did John McCain, who lost his shot in 2008 when the financial crisis came and he didn't know how to react. Obama was calm under fire then, and ever since. It is why he's likely to be re-elected: we prefer Presidents who are adults over those who are angry. But he is certainly not a lock.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2070953,00.html?hpt=Sbin