Author Topic: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread  (Read 45106 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #300 on: August 15, 2011, 07:05:59 AM »
12 unions tell Dems they'll boycott convention in N. Carolina
Charlotte Observer ^ | Aug. 13, 2011 | Tim Funk and Kirsten Valle Pittman


________________________ ____________________


CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Casting North Carolina as an anti-union bastion with "regressive policies aimed at diluting the power of workers," more than a dozen trade unions affiliated with the national AFL-CIO have told the Democratic National Committee that they will sit out the 2012 convention in Charlotte, N.C.



Coming on the heels of some liberals' complaints that President Barack Obama is giving in to Republicans, the unions' decision is another sign that key Democratic allies are unhappy with Obama and other party leaders as they gear up for a difficult election season.



It's also a signal that anything relating to Charlotte — from its besieged hometown bank to its lack of unionized hotels — will face scrutiny as the city eases into the national spotlight.


Labor unions have long played an integral role in Democratic conventions. And some big ones, including the National Education Association and the Service Employees International Union, still plan to be active participants when the Democrats come to Charlotte in 2012.


Local and state labor leaders also are still on board. The N.C. AFL-CIO helped lobby for Charlotte to be the convention site. On Friday, a leader of the Raleigh-based labor group called the national unions' decision understandable, but "shortsighted."



"I think the only way we're going to change things here is if people understand the struggles here. I'm encouraged that the Democratic Party wants to make investments here in the state," said MaryBe McMillian, secretary-treasurer of the N.C. AFL-CIO. "This convention is going to bring much-needed work for union members and thousands of unemployed North Carolinians." With new Democratic convention rules barring donations from corporations, federal lobbyists and PACs — including those affiliated with labor unions — the Charlotte gathering already was forecast to be less reliant than past conventions on big financial support from organized labor.



Still, the decision by the national unions — representing 2.5 million workers in the building and construction trades — reflects disappointment from labor activists who Democrats count on to get union members to the polls.



"There is broad frustration with the party and all elected officials, broad frustration with the lack of a union agenda," Michael Monroe, chief of staff of the AFL-CIO's building trades division, told The Associated Press. "People are looking for outlets to express that frustration." The decision by the building trades came after a vote by leaders of the unit's 13 affiliate unions, including the Laborers, Painters and Electrical Workers.



In a letter this week to Democratic Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the unions bemoaned the persistently high unemployment rate nationwide and the choice of Charlotte at a time when union members "face assault after assault" in Washington and in some state capitals.


"We find it troubling that the party so closely associated with basic human rights would choose a state with the lowest unionization rate in the country," Mark Ayers, president of the building trades unit, wrote Wasserman, who is also a congresswoman from Florida.


Those busy planning the Charlotte convention appeared unfazed — at least publicly — by the unions' action.


"We were proud to have the support of local labor leaders when we chose Charlotte to host the 2012 Democratic National Convention, including the N.C. AFL-CIO," Democratic National Convention Committee CEO Steve Kerrigan said in a statement. "The DNCC will continue to work closely with local and national labor leaders as we prepare for the convention next September." That reaction was echoed by former Mecklenburg County Commissioner Dan Murrey, who now heads Charlotte's host committee.


"We've been having frequent discussions with the local labor unions and the state representatives," he said. "They've been very helpful in the planning process and ... on getting the word out to people." Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx, who led Charlotte's campaign to get the convention, had no comment, deferring to party officials, said a spokesman.


There was also no comment from Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers, who is leading the local fundraising campaign for the convention. "His work in this effort continues," said spokesman Tom Williams. "Any actual status on numbers will be via the election (fundraising) reports." Despite the strong language in the unions' letter, at least one of the 13 says it is still considering whether to go.


"The Teamsters Union has not gone through our own internal decision process about the Democratic National Convention," said spokeswoman Leigh Strope.


Monroe of the AFL-CIO said the decision doesn't preclude individual members of the unions from running as delegates, and some of the unions apparently are still considering how to proceed.


But the angst could spread. The International Association of Machinists, which is not part of the building trades, said it also has decided to skip the convention after participating for decades.


"This is the union that came up with the idea for Labor Day and this convention starts on Labor Day in a right-to-work state," said IAM spokesman Rick Sloan. "We see that as an affront to working men and women across this country." Monroe said the unions are being careful not to use the term "boycott" because they don't want to damage Obama's re-election prospects. He said money is also a major factor, when unions are spending millions trying to beat back efforts by Republican lawmakers to diminish union rights in Wisconsin, Ohio and other states.


"It would be disappointing to our members to see us doing business as usual, diverting resources that we know are scarce when we should be laser-like focused on getting elected officials focused on the jobs agenda," Monroe said.



AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka warned earlier this year that unions would focus more of their energy and money shoring up local affiliates and less on boosting a single political party.


The choice of North Carolina earlier this year provoked immediate outrage among labor leaders, who said it was another indication that Democrats take union support for granted. But Democrats defended the decision, saying it's part of the party's push to win crucial swing states in the South, including a state that Obama carried in 2008.


Organized labor and Democrats had a similar squabble over the choice of Denver for the 2008 convention, where the gathering was held at the non-union Pepsi Center and the city had few unionized hotels. At one point, Teamsters President James Hoffa threatened to "blow up" the convention with picketing and protests if union issues were not worked out.


But the two sides ultimately struck a deal to staff the Pepsi Center with union employees.



________________________ ________________________ __

1968 all over again.   

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 #301 on: August 16, 2011, 06:50:52 PM »
Interesting article someone shared with me.  http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/obama-s-path-to-reelection-narrows-20110810

Among other things, it shows a state-by-state breakdown of Obama's decline in popularity.  He has dropped from 71.5 percent to 56.2 percent in Hawaii.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #302 on: August 16, 2011, 06:55:10 PM »
he is collapsing in NY as well. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #303 on: August 19, 2011, 10:21:53 AM »
Posted on August 19, 2011
Dem Rep: Obama Will Have "Very Tough Time" Winning Re-Election
Video | News | Weather | SportsThu Aug 18 18:13:00 PDT 2011

DeFazio says Obama lacks will to fight, may lose Oregon




http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/08/19/dem_rep_obama_doesnt_seem_to_have_an_ounce_of_fight_in_him.html




The Southern Oregon Democrat accused the President of lacking the will to fight for repealing the Bush tax cuts, and for caving in to Republicans on the ’fake crisis’ debt ceiling deal. view full article

Rep. Pete DeFazio (D-Ore.) slams president Obama in an interview with KGW in Portland.

From the KGW report:

Asked whether he thought the President had a shot at re-election, Defazio was skeptical.

“At this point it pretty much depends on how far out there the Republican nominee is. You know with a respectable--someone who is a little bit toward the middle of the road--Republican nominee, he’s going to have a very tough time getting re-elected,” said DeFazio.

He’s also not convinced the President will do well in Oregon.

“I believe Oregon is very much in play. I mean we are one of the harder hit states in the union, particularly my part of the state. I've just done six town hall meetings, have seven to go but people are shaking their heads and saying 'I don't know if I’d vote for him again.'” Defazio said.

Asked if he was surprised, the congressman shrugged.

“Not at all," DeFazio said. "One guy asked me, 'Give me 25 words what he's about and what he’s done for me.' I’m like, 'It could have been worse.'”

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #304 on: August 19, 2011, 03:19:32 PM »
Why Bam’s doomed
By JOHN PODHORETZ

Last Updated: 2:54 AM, August 19, 2011




Unless something extraordinarily dramatic comes along to change the course of the US economy and the sentiments of the American people in the next six months, Barack Obama is finished.

That conclusion is inescapable from the history of US presidential politics since 1945.

Obama is now below 40 percent in job approval in the Gallup poll. Yes, as the political scientist Larry Sabato points out, almost every president since FDR has fallen to that level. But of those seven presidents, five (Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush) went on either to lose the next election or to not run again.

The Truman story is complex: He was at 35 percent in 1946 yet won in ’48 -- but he fell back into the 30s in 1951 and opted against running for a second full term.

The exceptions are Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. But the essentials of those wins should terrify Obama’s supporters.

Reagan hit 35 percent in 1983. By year’s end, though, the economy had lifted out of a dreadful recession to growth at an annual rate of 4.5 percent. In ’84, it grew at a sizzling 7.2 percent. The unemployment rate fell from 10.2 percent in 1983 to 7.2 percent on Election Day 1984 -- and Reagan won 49 states.

Clinton hit 39 percent in September 1994, and was slammed with a GOP triumph in the midterm elections two months later. But by the end of ’94, the economy had grown 4.1 percent. Growth dropped to 2.5 percent in ’95, but bounced back to a healthy 3.7 percent in ’96. Plus, unemployment on Clinton’s watch fell from 7.5 percent in 1992 to 5.4 percent in ’96.

So how do things look for Obama? Bad -- in every particular.

Growth in the first quarter of 2011 was a shocking 0.4 percent. Second quarter: 1.3 percent. Forecasters are dropping their estimates of growth for the year to 2 percent -- and that seems extraordinarily optimistic.

Joachim Fels, of Morgan Stanley, said Wednesday that America was “dangerously close” to a recession, around the same time that the president was telling CBS’ Anthony Mason, “I don’t think we’re in danger of another recession.”

Oh? Yesterday’s horrible report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia indicates that manufacturing in our region “contracted sharply in August.” As The Wall Street Journal’s Kathleen Madigan reported, “Its factory-sector index . . . fell to -30.7 this month from 3.2 in July.” That index “has never been this low without the economy being in recession.”

The consequences of a double-dip recession are nightmarish for the nation and fatal to Obama’s hopes. Aside from everything else, unemployment would certainly rise from its current 9.1 percent just as the election year starts.

As we’ve seen over the last few years, even if the economy comes back, there’s no reason to believe the jobs picture will improve much. So Obama will be seeking re-election with the jobless rate far worse than the one he inherited -- and worse than it was in the previous year.

He’ll argue that he inherited a crisis. Fine, most voters won’t blame him for the fact that the unemployment rate rose to 10 percent after the 2008 meltdown. But if it returns to that level after dropping to 8.9 percent, he’ll have no convincing defense.

To sum up: History says that five of seven presidents whose poll numbers hit the 30s either lost or dropped out. The two who won were able to run on economic numbers that left the public optimistic about the future.

Not now. Gallup says just 11 percent of Americans are satisfied with the country’s economic condition. And they hold Obama responsible: Just 26 percent approve of the job he’s doing on the economy.

And just 23 percent of independents approve. But Obama needs a majority of independent voters to prevail next November; it’s extraordinarily difficult to see how he gets them.

The president is giving a speech after his vacation that will lay out a dramatic jobs and deficit-reduction plan. That’s nice.

But given the ineffectuality of his efforts thus far, his supporters shouldn’t hold out too much hope that he’s going to change the course of the world’s largest economy, which is heading toward the shoals again -- and is far likelier than not to run Obama aground for good.

jpodhoretz@gmail.com



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/why_bam_doomed_9F00LyaGY07dRoSiuxPRzI#ixzz1VW2LORgE


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #305 on: August 19, 2011, 03:36:05 PM »
Dismal poll numbers for Obama in PA
www.realclearpolitics.co m

Economy drags down approval numbers in Pennsylvania, a state the president would likely need to win a second term.
 
12:09 p.m. EDT, August 19, 2011



WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama, who political experts say will need a win in Pennsylvania to retain the White House, dipped to 35 percent approval among the state's registered voters, according to a Muhlenberg College poll released Friday.

The results come on the heels of a bad week in polls for Obama that showed him first dropping to 39 percent nationwide in Gallup's daily tracking poll. Then another set of Gallup results Thursday showed only 26 percent of Americans approve of how Obama is handling the economy.

These numbers are a huge blow to Obama who won the state handily in 2008, and a significant drop in just a few weeks from when Quinnipiac University polled Pennsylvania voters and found the president with 43 percent job approval.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
» Weather alerts and forecasts delivered to your mobile phone. Text WEATHER to 52270! Message and data rates apply. Text STOP Weather to quit, text HELP for info
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In the Muhlenberg surveys alone, Obama has dropped more than 10 percentage points in less than six months. In March, he held steady with 48 percent. In April 2009, a few months after he started and just after the stimulus bill was passed, Obama was at 61 percent approval in the state.

With unemployment hovering at 9 percent, Pennsylvanians seem pessimistic about the economy. Asked if Obama's policies have helped or hurt the economy, just 23 percent said helped, 41 percent said hurt and 32 percent said his policies haven't made a difference.

If there is any silver lining in the poll for Obama, it's that 31 percent of Pennsylvanians say their vote in November 2012 will depend on who the Republican candidate is. And Obama still slightly edges out an anonymous GOP contender 36 percent to 31 percent.

The poll of 380 registered statewide voters was conducted Aug. 11 through Thursday and has a 5.5 percent margin of error.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #307 on: August 20, 2011, 10:39:18 AM »
Bump for 240





Why Bam’s doomed
By JOHN PODHORETZ

Last Updated: 2:54 AM, August 19, 2011




Unless something extraordinarily dramatic comes along to change the course of the US economy and the sentiments of the American people in the next six months, Barack Obama is finished.

That conclusion is inescapable from the history of US presidential politics since 1945.

Obama is now below 40 percent in job approval in the Gallup poll. Yes, as the political scientist Larry Sabato points out, almost every president since FDR has fallen to that level. But of those seven presidents, five (Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush) went on either to lose the next election or to not run again.

The Truman story is complex: He was at 35 percent in 1946 yet won in ’48 -- but he fell back into the 30s in 1951 and opted against running for a second full term.

The exceptions are Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. But the essentials of those wins should terrify Obama’s supporters.

Reagan hit 35 percent in 1983. By year’s end, though, the economy had lifted out of a dreadful recession to growth at an annual rate of 4.5 percent. In ’84, it grew at a sizzling 7.2 percent. The unemployment rate fell from 10.2 percent in 1983 to 7.2 percent on Election Day 1984 -- and Reagan won 49 states.

Clinton hit 39 percent in September 1994, and was slammed with a GOP triumph in the midterm elections two months later. But by the end of ’94, the economy had grown 4.1 percent. Growth dropped to 2.5 percent in ’95, but bounced back to a healthy 3.7 percent in ’96. Plus, unemployment on Clinton’s watch fell from 7.5 percent in 1992 to 5.4 percent in ’96.

So how do things look for Obama? Bad -- in every particular.

Growth in the first quarter of 2011 was a shocking 0.4 percent. Second quarter: 1.3 percent. Forecasters are dropping their estimates of growth for the year to 2 percent -- and that seems extraordinarily optimistic.

Joachim Fels, of Morgan Stanley, said Wednesday that America was “dangerously close” to a recession, around the same time that the president was telling CBS’ Anthony Mason, “I don’t think we’re in danger of another recession.”

Oh? Yesterday’s horrible report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia indicates that manufacturing in our region “contracted sharply in August.” As The Wall Street Journal’s Kathleen Madigan reported, “Its factory-sector index . . . fell to -30.7 this month from 3.2 in July.” That index “has never been this low without the economy being in recession.”

The consequences of a double-dip recession are nightmarish for the nation and fatal to Obama’s hopes. Aside from everything else, unemployment would certainly rise from its current 9.1 percent just as the election year starts.

As we’ve seen over the last few years, even if the economy comes back, there’s no reason to believe the jobs picture will improve much. So Obama will be seeking re-election with the jobless rate far worse than the one he inherited -- and worse than it was in the previous year.

He’ll argue that he inherited a crisis. Fine, most voters won’t blame him for the fact that the unemployment rate rose to 10 percent after the 2008 meltdown. But if it returns to that level after dropping to 8.9 percent, he’ll have no convincing defense.

To sum up: History says that five of seven presidents whose poll numbers hit the 30s either lost or dropped out. The two who won were able to run on economic numbers that left the public optimistic about the future.

Not now. Gallup says just 11 percent of Americans are satisfied with the country’s economic condition. And they hold Obama responsible: Just 26 percent approve of the job he’s doing on the economy.

And just 23 percent of independents approve. But Obama needs a majority of independent voters to prevail next November; it’s extraordinarily difficult to see how he gets them.

The president is giving a speech after his vacation that will lay out a dramatic jobs and deficit-reduction plan. That’s nice.

But given the ineffectuality of his efforts thus far, his supporters shouldn’t hold out too much hope that he’s going to change the course of the world’s largest economy, which is heading toward the shoals again -- and is far likelier than not to run Obama aground for good.

jpodhoretz@gmail.com



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/why_bam_doomed_9F00LyaGY07dRoSiuxPRzI#ixzz1VW2LORgE



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #308 on: August 24, 2011, 11:53:06 AM »
Magellan Poll: Obama in trouble but no Republicans lighting up Florida
2012 election, Polls — posted by scottpowers on August, 23 2011 4:44 PM




A newly-released public opinion survey from Magellan Data & Mapping Strategies finds that Florida voters are unhappy with Barack Obama and do not think he should be re-elected.

All three leading Republicans — Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann — also got low marks, but all three would beat him head-to-head right now, according to the poll. Magellan did not ask voters about other GOP presidential candidates such as Orlando-based Jon Huntsman.

The poll, of 723 likely 2012 general election voters in Florida, fielded August 16th, 17th and 18th, was performed by Magellan Data & Mapping Strategies, a Louisville, Colo.,-based research firm that usually gets hired to do polling by Republican candidates and committees.

Magellan’s survey also finds low opinion of U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida. While the poll did not ask voters specifically about any of the Republicans wishing to face Nelson – Adam Hasner, George LeMieux, Mike McCalister, Craig Miller or Marielena Stuart – voters said they’d likely vote GOP in the 2012 general election.

Magellan reported the poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.6 percent. The results were weighted based upon past Florida voter turnout demographics.

“Barack Obama and his team have a lot of work to do with Florida voters to hold on to the state’s 29 electoral votes in 2012,” Magellan stated in a press release.

The survey found 40 percent of voters had a favorable opinion of Obama and 55 percent had an unfavorable opinion. What’s more, 37 percent said they believed Obama should be re-elected, while 57 percent said he shouldn’t be.

Romney’s favorable-unfavorable numbers were 38 and 40; Bachmann’s 33 and 43; and Perry’s 33 and 30.

Despite the luke-warm feeling for the Republicans, the surveyed voters said matchups would have Romney beating Obama 49-39, Bachmann winning 43-42 and Perry 46-39.

The poll had “Republican Candidate” beating Nelson 43-38.


http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_politics/2011/08/magellan-poll-obama-in-trouble-but-no-republicans-alighting-florida.html




Deicide

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22921
  • Reapers...
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #309 on: August 24, 2011, 12:16:36 PM »
Magellan Poll: Obama in trouble but no Republicans lighting up Florida
2012 election, Polls — posted by scottpowers on August, 23 2011 4:44 PM




A newly-released public opinion survey from Magellan Data & Mapping Strategies finds that Florida voters are unhappy with Barack Obama and do not think he should be re-elected.

All three leading Republicans — Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann — also got low marks, but all three would beat him head-to-head right now, according to the poll. Magellan did not ask voters about other GOP presidential candidates such as Orlando-based Jon Huntsman.

The poll, of 723 likely 2012 general election voters in Florida, fielded August 16th, 17th and 18th, was performed by Magellan Data & Mapping Strategies, a Louisville, Colo.,-based research firm that usually gets hired to do polling by Republican candidates and committees.

Magellan’s survey also finds low opinion of U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida. While the poll did not ask voters specifically about any of the Republicans wishing to face Nelson – Adam Hasner, George LeMieux, Mike McCalister, Craig Miller or Marielena Stuart – voters said they’d likely vote GOP in the 2012 general election.

Magellan reported the poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.6 percent. The results were weighted based upon past Florida voter turnout demographics.

“Barack Obama and his team have a lot of work to do with Florida voters to hold on to the state’s 29 electoral votes in 2012,” Magellan stated in a press release.

The survey found 40 percent of voters had a favorable opinion of Obama and 55 percent had an unfavorable opinion. What’s more, 37 percent said they believed Obama should be re-elected, while 57 percent said he shouldn’t be.

Romney’s favorable-unfavorable numbers were 38 and 40; Bachmann’s 33 and 43; and Perry’s 33 and 30.

Despite the luke-warm feeling for the Republicans, the surveyed voters said matchups would have Romney beating Obama 49-39, Bachmann winning 43-42 and Perry 46-39.

The poll had “Republican Candidate” beating Nelson 43-38.


http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_politics/2011/08/magellan-poll-obama-in-trouble-but-no-republicans-alighting-florida.html




I hate the State.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #310 on: August 25, 2011, 07:26:26 AM »
Published: Thursday, August 25, 2011, 6:00 AM
Updated: Thursday, August 25, 2011, 8:06 AM



TRENTON — Nearly half of New Jerseyans polled by Rutgers-Eagleton Institute don't think President Obama deserves to be re-elected to a second term.

According to a poll released today, only 43 percent of those polled think Obama deserves another term while 47 percent don't think he deserves to be re-elected in 2012, an increase from 39 percent when asked the same question by Rutgers in February.

“The continuing economic climate, coupled with voter frustration at Washington, has created feelings of discontent that are clearly hurting the president’s chances for re-election,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and political science professor. “The dramatic decline in support for Obama comes mostly from independents. Even so, it doesn’t seem Republicans are particularly happy with their options.”

snip

"It seems possible this is a direct repudiation of his approach to the debt crisis and the economy," Redlawsk said. "Most independents want at least some tax increases on the rich to help fix the deficit, and many may feel Obama has failed to follow through on his own demands for increased revenues. Given more independents were against rather than for the debt ceiling agreement, this seems one likely reason for Obama’s decline in New Jersey.”



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #311 on: August 25, 2011, 11:03:31 AM »
AFL-CIO president slams Obama for weak, ‘little nibbly’ labor policies
The Daily Caller ^ | 8/25/11 | Neil Munro




The AFL-CIO is distancing itself from the Democratic Party, redirecting its funds to build its own permanent political organization, and pressuring President Barack Obama to embrace a big-spending program for job creation, Richard Trumka, the union’s president, said today.


The storied labor federation’s level of support for Obama in 2012 will be decided early next year, and will partly depend on whether Obama abandons his current strategy of promoting “little nibbly things,” such as a patent-update law, Trumka told a press breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. “That’s not going to get the job done,” he said. “Everybody knows that.”



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


________________________ ________________________ __

I guess they are taking cues from the Tea Party 

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 #312 on: August 26, 2011, 09:59:31 AM »
Schoen: If Election Held Today, Obama Would Lose
Friday, 26 Aug 2011
 
Political analyst and Democratic pollster Doug Schoen tells Newsmax that President Barack Obama is in “deep trouble,” and if the election were held today he “would be a one-term president.”

But Schoen also says it is too early to anoint current Republican front-runner Rick Perry as the GOP nominee for 2012 because “anything can happen in this election.”

Schoen is co-author, along with pollster Scott Rasmussen, of the book “Mad As Hell: How the Tea Party Movement Is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System.”
 
Three polls over a recent 8-day period have shown Texas Gov. Perry enjoying a significant lead over former front-runner Mitt Romney, with two of the polls putting Perry ahead by double digits.

In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, Schoen was asked what he thinks of the poll results considering that Perry has been formally in the race for only about two weeks.

“I think it shows how dissatisfied the Republican electorate is with the other seven or eight candidates, and how they’re looking for a fresh face to take on President Obama,” he says.

Questions have been raised about Perry’s ability to garner support among moderate Republicans. Schoen comments: “In the primaries he doesn’t really need moderate Republicans because the bulk of the voters are conservative, but in the general election he’ll certainly have to broaden his appeal.”

One recent poll pitting Obama against Perry shows the two in a dead heat. Schoen agrees that Perry is a “formidable” candidate, but cautions: “I think this poll reflects more the weakness of Obama than the strength of Governor Perry. It remains to be seen if Perry develops the kind of broad-based appeal he’ll need to win the presidency.

“Right now it looks like a Perry-Obama race, but a few months ago it looked like Donald Trump was the front–runner, then Mitt Romney, then Michele Bachmann, so anything can happen in this election.”

Schoen was asked, given Perry’s strong showing so far, if it is too early to say Obama is in trouble.

“I think Barack Obama is in deep trouble,” Schoen declares.

“At this point he is being hurt and hurt seriously by the weak economy. He’s going to have a jobs speech in September. He’s going to talk about revitalizing the economy. It’s anyone’s guess if that will make an impact. But as we sit here today, bottom line, I think you’d have to say the economy is a dramatic drag on his presidency.

“I think he would be a one-term president if the election were held today.”
Angry that Democrats are ignoring union issues, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka has announced that the nation's largest labor federation is cutting its ties with the Democratic Party and President Barack Obama heading into 2012, and instead it will set up a super PAC to pick and support its own candidates.

Asked if this is a huge blow to Obama, Schoen responds: “Absolutely. Obama needs to get labor back and I think he’ll be courting them furiously in the weeks and months to come.”

As to what lies ahead for the crowded Republican field, Schoen tells Newsmax: “I think the field is weak. If they have a contentious primary, which looks increasingly likely, it could paint the Republicans as an even more divided and arguably extreme party than they’ve been seen as already.

“President Obama is weak, and I think what he is counting on is that Republicans will be weaker and less well regarded than he is.

Schoen opines that Sarah Palin won’t enter the presidential race, and says Michele Bachmann is “fading.” He adds: “Perry has hurt her badly and she will be out of the race if she doesn’t win Iowa.”

Schoen co-authored an op-ed piece in Thursday’s Wall Street Journal predicting that a third-party candidate will enter the race. Asked if such a candidate can win the general election, Schoen says: “Yes, I think a third party can conceivably win.”

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/schoen-obama-election-perry/2011/08/26/id/408793

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #313 on: August 26, 2011, 11:01:18 AM »
Again - Obama spent the first 1 1/2 and on health care.  he owns this.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #314 on: August 28, 2011, 01:40:30 PM »
Back down o 38 on Gallup today.   56 disapproval.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #315 on: August 28, 2011, 01:47:23 PM »

Return to the Article

August 28, 2011
Battlegrounds of Resentment

By Salena Zito
STAUNTON, Va. – Whether it is called General Lee Highway, as in Virginia, or Molly Pitcher Highway, as in Pennsylvania, the lives and economic strain along U.S. Route 11 tell of a country’s disappointment with Washington – specifically, with President Obama.

The north–south highway, created in 1926, extends more than 1,600 miles from New York to Louisiana. It is one of those blue lines you find on a gas-station road atlas, obscured by the bold red lines of the dominant interstates.

Woodrow Wilson’s home is along this road in Virginia, James Buchanan’s in Pennsylvania.

In between those presidential homes is a very critical battleground in next year’s election, along with a whole lot of resentment that began building early in 2009.

“I used to be a Democrat,” said a quiet older gentleman who declined to give his name, sitting with his wife outside Wilson’s home. “I come from a long line of Democrats. I have to say I couldn’t be more disappointed in this president’s job so far.”

Not so long ago, populist-Democrat rhetoric was popular here and farther up the road, in West Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania.

Americans along such roads all across the country are struggling economically. They are consumed with uncertainty. And they have tuned-out the president.

Obama had a rocky start with American voters outside major cities almost immediately, according to Chris Kelley, a political science professor at Miami University of Ohio.

“Think back again to 2009 – where did he begin to get in trouble?” Kelley asks. “By engaging in hyper-government activism to reform health care, save the environment, make government transparent, while rarely to never talking about jobs.”

This led many to view him as out-of-touch, disconnected, aloof.

Now, Democrats’ strongholds in states such as Pennsylvania and Virginia are quietly walking away from him.

Out here, the sting of dissatisfaction pulls people away from Obama. Yet it doesn’t exactly pull them to the far right; many have settled comfortably at center-right.

Washington’s blame-rhetoric could push Middle America further right, however.

Late last week, the president hit a new low in Gallup’s tracking poll, with 38 percent approval. He blamed “certain” members of Congress for that slide in popularity.

“I have to say, I am tired of the constant blame on everyone but himself,” said John Dattilio, strolling here on a summer evening with his wife and children as they balanced melting ice cream cones.

Obama took to pointing fingers when his poll numbers started to slip last fall.

So far, he has blamed the stagnant economy on ATMs, ditches, Slurpees, corporate-jet owners, the Tea Party, Republicans, Japan’s earthquake, the Arab Spring, the Arab Summer, George Bush, and “fat-cat” Wall Street something-or-others. The kitchen sink may be next.

His numbers are tumbling in the critical battleground states of Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and New Hampshire – states he must win in 2012.

RealClearPolitics crunched the numbers based on the electoral-college vote: Total from states giving Obama 51 percent or higher approval, 166; from states at 49 percent or lower, 320.

A presidential candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win.

Here is what White House strategists don't get: As Americans struggle with uncertainty, they believe Obama is not providing real solutions – and they also believe he is part of the partisan bickering, or is using his “bully pulpit” to instigate it.

Here is what strategists on both sides don't get about the 2012 election: It is not the same as the 2010 midterms.

That previous cycle was a collective outcry to lessen the power of one party and to halt the president’s policies. The next cycle is personal; it is about your home, your pocketbook, your family, and ensuring your future is less uncertain.

When an earthquake hit the Eastern Seaboard last week, presidential spokesman Josh Earnest said of Obama, who was golfing at the time: “(He) didn't feel the earthquake today.”

Sort of a telling metaphor for this presidency.

One reason why the president vacations on tony Martha’s Vineyard, which only the upper class can afford, and not in back-roads America, is that up there you can maintain the everything’s-alright bubble and the crowds adore you.

Out on U.S. Route 11, not so much.


Salena Zito is a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review editorial page columnist. E-mail her at szito@tribweb.com
Page Printed from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/08/28/battlegrounds_of_resentment_111117-full.html at August 28, 2011 - 01:46:53 PM PDT


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #316 on: August 29, 2011, 03:10:50 PM »
One in four Democrats wants to dump Obama
by Byron York Chief Political Correspondent
Follow on Twitter:@byronyork

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/one-four-democrats-wants-dump-obama



A new poll by CNN and ORC International finds that 27 percent of Democrats would like to see their party nominate a candidate other than Barack Obama for president in 2012.

In response to the question, "Do you think the Democratic party should renominate Barack Obama as the party's candidate for president in 2012, or do you think the Democratic party should nominate a different candidate for president in 2012?" -- 72 percent said they wanted to see Obama renominated.  But 27 percent, slightly more than one in every four, said they wanted to see Democrats nominate a different candidate.  One percent had no opinion.

The poll was taken August 24-25.  In a survey taken in early August, 28 percent of Democrats said they wanted a different candidate.  Polls taken in July and before showed Obama in a stronger position, with no more than 22 percent saying they preferred a different candidate.  The current poll is based on interviews with 463 Democrats and has a margin of error of 4.5 percent.

The new poll is another indication of Democratic unhappiness with the president, but it does not mean Obama will face a challenge in his party's primaries.  Despite the complaints of a few liberals like Sen. Bernard Sanders, the odds of a Democrat opposing the president appear to be something less than zero.  But the new poll is still a matter of concern to Democrats, because it is yet another indication that there is significant disillusionment with the president within his own party.  Whether those disaffected Democrats will come around to supporting Obama next year is an open question -- and perhaps the most worrying of the president's re-election bid.



________________________ ______________________


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #317 on: August 30, 2011, 03:35:04 AM »
Poll: Obama loses ground with white voters, women, liberals
164
 
EmailPrint
By MAGGIE HABERMAN | 8/27/11 6:02 PM EDT Updated: 8/29/11 8:20 AM EDT

The AP has moved some cross-tabs on President Obama from its latest poll, and they signal some low points with his 2008 coalition as the GOP moves closer to picking a general election candidate.

He's lost ground according to the AP-GfK data, with white voters, women, liberals and younger voters, in surveys taken just after the debt-ceiling debate.

Continue Reading
The key figures are:

* Just 36 percent of white voters approve of the job he's doing, while 59 percent say he should lose in November 2012. That's down from 56 percent after his first three months in office, ,and he is upside-down with this group in every region except the Northeast.

* Three in ten white independents say he should get a second term, and 41 percent of them say he "understands the problems of people like them."

* Liberals who say Obama is "very well" described as a "strong leader" went from 53 percent to 29 percent.

* Women, who had fueled a gender gap for the president with 68 percent approving of his performance after his first three months in office, are also moving away from him. Now, 50 percent of women say he should be re-elected, and less than half of all women approve of how he's doing in office.

The numbers will obviously shift as a general election begins, and younger voters and liberals are especially likely to move back toward him. But the former two are, depending on the GOP nominee, a bit of a tougher push.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #318 on: August 30, 2011, 05:59:29 AM »
Obama Weekly Average Approval Holds at Term-Low 40%
Gallup ^ | August 30, 2011 | Lydia Saad

Posted on Tuesday, August 30, 2011 8:18:59 AM by markomalley

PRINCETON, NJ -- President Barack Obama's job approval rating averaged 40% last week, tying his record-low 40% ratings for the two prior weeks that started on Aug. 8.




The Aug. 22-28 weekly average of Gallup Daily tracking includes Obama's worst three-day average approval rating thus far in his presidency: 38% approval and 55% disapproval from Aug. 25-27. Gallup suspended Daily tracking on Aug. 28 because of the hurricane conditions affecting much of the East Coast.

Obama continues to receive broad support from blacks (83%); however, this is the third consecutive week he has earned less than majority support from Hispanics, and the current 44% -- also registered the prior week -- is his lowest from this group. Whites' 32% average approval rating in each of the past two weeks is also a record low.




Majority Approval Isolated to Blacks, Democrats, Liberals

The last time Obama's average weekly job approval rating registered at least 50% among all Americans was May 30-June 5, 2011.


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


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #319 on: August 30, 2011, 07:33:55 AM »

Black leaders turn up heat on Obama
By: Glenn Thrush and Joseph Williams
August 30, 2011 04:35 AM EDT
 


If there’s anything close to a political certainty in 2012, it’s that Barack Obama will get more than 90 percent of the African-American vote.

But that doesn’t mean every black Obama supporter will vote for him happily — nor does it guarantee that turnout will approach the stratospheric levels of 2008, even though Obama needs a huge showing from his base to offset the expected loss of swing voters in states like North Carolina, Virginia and Pennsylvania.

With that in mind, prominent black leaders — fearing Obama is not only taking them for granted but avoiding them in public — have turned up the heat on the nation’s first African-American president, transforming all-in-the-family concerns into open criticism of the president at a time when they had hoped the completion of a monument to Martin Luther King Jr. near the National Mall would bring a moment of unity.

The leaders are tired, they say, of Obama dog-whistling his support for a broad black agenda rather than explicitly embracing the kind of war on racism, poverty and economic segregation embodied by King.

“You can spend a lot of time trying to win over white independents, but if you don’t pay attention to your base, African-Americans, if you have not locked up your base yet, you’ve got a serious problem,” said CNN contributor Roland Martin.

“African-Americans will vote for him again, 88, 92, 95 percent. The question is what’s the turnout? I’ll vote for you. But will I bring ten other people along, like I did in 2008? That’s the danger here for him. He doesn’t have the historical factor to lean on as much in 2012 as he did in 2008. … And the first step is that he has to be willing to speak to this audience, black people.”

In a striking turnabout for a president who has rewritten American racial history, Obama finds himself the target of criticism from the black cultural and political elite that has, for the most part, been leery of airing its disappointment.

The president is reportedly angry that African-American leaders aren’t crediting him for his hard-bought achievements that will especially help communities of color, including health care reform, aid to cities, student aid and protecting Medicaid.

“The whole thing is bull——. … We have met with [black leaders] more than any other group, and we are increasing our outreach,” said a person close to Obama.


But Rep. Laura Richardson (D-Calif.), who represents several predominantly black Los Angeles-area neighborhoods, brings up an issue that African-American leaders repeatedly raise when talking about Obama: They say he’s worried about being too closely identified with the community that gave him inspiration and bedrock support.

“I understand that you’ve got to be president for all people, but this administration has gone just too far; they really don’t even say ‘African-American’ or talk about [our] specific issues,” Richardson told POLITICO.

“The president is smart enough to know he’s the first African-American, and I think he’s concerned — I would say afraid — that people are going to think he’s favoring African-Americans.”

Obama had been scheduled to speak at the dedication of the King memorial last Sunday — the 48th anniversary of King’s “I Have a Dream” oration — in what was likely to be his most explicit civil-rights speech in months. With the ceremony postponed because of Hurricane Irene, Obama embarked Monday on a mini-media offensive aimed at his core supporters, taping an appearance on a black radio station in Chicago that he frequented as a young Illinois state senator. He also called in to syndicated host Tom Joyner, who has defended the president from criticism leveled by other black media personalities, including Tavis Smiley.

When Joyner asked him about the King memorial, Obama immediately shifted the conversation to King’s crusade for economic equality, something of a departure from his recent focus on budget-cutting and deficit reduction.

“I think it’s always important to remember that when Dr. King gave the ‘I Have a Dream’ speech, that was a march for jobs and justice, not just justice,” Obama told Joyner.

“And in the last part of his life, when he went down to Memphis, that was all about sanitation workers saying, ‘I am a man,’ and looking for economic justice and dealing with poverty. And so it’s not enough for us to just remember the sanitized versions of what Dr. King stood for; he made a real call for us to dig deep and be thinking about our fellow citizens and people around the world who are in desperate need and figuring out how we can help them.”

But in a series of town halls it held this month, the Congressional Black Caucus seemed to directly challenge Obama’s willingness to “dig deep” by more fully embracing a job-creation agenda.

On Aug. 16, as Obama discussed rural jobs before a nearly all-white audience in Peosta, Iowa, caucus members raised some pointed questions about where a president, who began political life as a Chicago community organizer, was spending his time.

“Our people are hurting,” said Rep. Maxine Waters, (D-Calif.), a former CBC chairwoman who hasn’t been shy about calling out Obama. “Unemployment is unconscionable,” she added. “We don’t know what the strategy is. We don’t know why this trip that he is on in the United States now, that he’s not in any black communities.”

A few days later, a riled-up Waters was even more direct, daring a top Obama aide to use the word “black” at an event in Miami. (The staffer did.)


“We want him to know that from this day forward … we’ve had it,” Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) said of Obama at the same event. “We want him to come out on our side and advocate, not to watch and wait.”

Richardson wants to see Obama do a black, urban bus tour: “There are three congressional seats in L.A., and I don’t think he’s visited any of them as president, not Watts, not Compton, not Long Beach, not Carson.”

Some of this criticism reflects long-standing grievances between Obama and the black establishment, and none of his critics are considering backing anybody else in 2012.

Smiley, the radio host who toured the country this summer to publicize a near-16 percent national black unemployment rate, has made no secret he’s less than thrilled Obama has refused to sit down for more interviews. Both Waters and Richardson initially backed Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primary. Conyers is such a consistent Obama critic, the president reportedly asked him to stop “demeaning” him in 2009.

Some Obama defenders say that what they regard as his reluctance to tout his work on behalf of blacks reflects an essential, if unfortunate, reality of America’s not-so-very post-racial politics.

“If the president were to start speaking directly to African-Americans about what he’s doing for them, what he has done for them as the first African-American president, that during a general election campaign … could have very adverse [effects],” Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed told MSNBC on Monday.

“I believe that black people understand that. I think they understand it well. … And I’d also like to talk to my friends in my own community who are raising these issues to make the point that if you weaken President Obama in the black community, you seriously hamper his chances of being reelected. A small depression among the African-American electorate could be devastating to this president. And I’d also like folks on the other side of the conversation to tell me who the alternative is that’s going to do such a better job for black people. Will it be Michele Bachmann? I mean, will it be Mitt Romney? Rick Perry?”

Harvard Law School professor Randall Kennedy, who studies race and politics, thinks Obama’s black support “has frayed a little bit around the edges, but I think only a little bit” and said Obama’s tricky racial balancing act saddles him with “burdens that other politicians don’t bear.”

Obama’s staff, including campaign manager Jim Messina and White House senior adviser David Plouffe, have privately predicted black turnout in 2012 will be comparable, or in some places even exceed, the rates in 2008.


But they are also clearly concerned about drift. Hoping to head off the dispute before it becomes a larger 2012 headache, Obama and his team are ramping up outreach efforts. On Monday, Democratic National Committee Executive Director Patrick Gaspard and Obama 2012 official Michael Blake convened a meeting and conference that included Roland Martin, veteran operative Donna Brazile, BET’s Debra Lee, National Urban League President Marc Morial and Ben Jealous of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

And the president will address the mid-September Congressional Black Caucus Foundation conference, a person familiar with the situation told POLITICO.

Andra Gillespie, an Emory University political scientist, said Obama simply isn’t paying enough attention to his African-American base — and that dog whistles beat total silence.

“In the last couple of months, I haven’t heard those dog whistles, but you certainly heard them in 2008,” she said. “You heard that he was signaling to African-Americans.”

Earl Ofari Hutchinson, a black political analyst, author and radio host, said that Obama needs to “reassert what King represented on civil rights but also on jobs and poverty.”

“There is a deep sense of frustration in the community, discontent on the part of some and an increasing sense of betrayal,” Hutchinson said. “But Obama also was the victim of overinflated expectations, and even though it’s not politically correct to say this, there was a perception that a black president has a special duty to do more for African-Americans.”

Still, even though African-American voters are increasingly displeased with Obama’s handling of the economy, they are sensitive to the possibility of aiding his Republican opponents.

“If I am out there calling the president names, I may win applause, but I am not going to win any bills that help people,” said the Rev. Al Sharpton, an Obama supporter. “We are raising a monument to King, we ought to be instructive on how Dr. King was in how we deal with President Obama.”

But Sharpton said Obama might be doing better if he was less willing to show Republicans the other cheek.

“I am a Christian preacher, and he is more forgiving than I am,” Sharpton added, laughing.
 
 
© 2011 POLITICO LLC
 
________________________ ________________________ _____________________



lmfao! 


what idiots.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #320 on: August 31, 2011, 05:24:32 AM »
2012 is President Obama's to lose

It may not matter who wins the Republican primaries: with the economy in the can, Any Other Candidate may beat Obama
 
Paul Harris guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 30 August 2011 21.54 BST Article history



Barack Obama's approval rating is bumping along in the low 40s – an ill-omen going towards the 2012 election year. Photograph: Carolyn Kaster/AP

For Democrats, the Republican field for 2012 looks like the gift that keeps on giving.

The candidates drawing the most attention – like Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul – are seen as far too extreme to stand a chance in a national presidential election. Meanwhile, the often assumed frontrunner, Mitt Romney, is a charisma-free zone who failed to win his party's nomination in 2008 and does not seem to have improved much. Scattered around these flawed leaders are strange fringe candidates – like Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain – and Sarah Palin, the Alaska governor turned reality TV star, who is more celebrity than politician. The one GOP name with a compelling personal history and potential for a broad constituency of support – Jon Huntsman – has fizzled into virtual obscurity.

How can anyone from this Republican slate win? It is a reassuring thought for liberals. It is also a potentially catastrophic and complacent one. For Republicans do not have to win the 2012 contest in order to capture the White House. They just have to watch Obama lose it.

If you stop looking at perceived Republican weaknesses and, instead, look at Obama's problems, then the picture for 2012 looks a good deal less rosy. And in America's virtual two-party system, there is only one winner when Democrats lose: Republicans.

Democrat problems are serious. First, there is the issue of disillusionment among Obama's base. While liberal activists – where disappointment and anger with Obama is acute – are far from representative of Middle American voters, they do provide the key organisation for "get out the vote" action on election day. No one thinks that effort will be anywhere near as large or enthusiastic as it was in 2008. Indeed, some labour unions already plan to boycott the Democratic national convention in North Carolina.

Second, there are the polls. At a time when Obama should be lording it over any of this GOP field, simply on the basis of incumbency and name recognition, he is far from dominant. Perry – whom liberals deride as an unelectable "George W Bush on steroids" – was beating Obama in the key state of Florida in one recent survey. So was Romney.

Other polls in other states have Obama ahead, but what is striking about them as how Obama's number often lurks in the 40s, which is hardly a ringing endorsement. Even Ron Paul – whom the Republican establishment itself derides – was within two points of Obama in one recent national Gallup poll and within a single percentage point in a Rasmussen study. These numbers do not show Republican strength. But they do reveal Democrat weakness – and that should be given equal weight in a two-horse race.

Then just look at Gallup's tracking of Obama's job approval ratings. Over the summer, a grim gap has emerged with now some 55% of Americans disapproving of Obama's performance compared to an anaemic 38% who approve. This is undoubtedly linked to fears over a double-dip recession and the terrible persistence of cripplingly high levels of joblessness in the economy.

Economic conditions are often the key deciding factor in elections. By that metric, Obama's prospects look grim and could get a lot grimmer.

All of this could lead to someone as seemingly unlikely as Rick Perry becoming the 45th president of the United States and the most powerful person on earth. Seemingly "no hope" candidates have certainly won before due to their opponent's poor performance. Just think of Bill Clinton. The obscure Arkansas governor, hampered by a sex scandal, emerged from a pygmy field of Democrats in 1992 to take on George HW Bush, the incumbent victor of the Gulf war. But Bush ran a dreadful campaign, got hit by an economic downturn and then sideswiped by Ross Perot. Clinton won with just 43% of the vote.

Or look at 2000. It pitted the experienced Vice President Al Gore against the folksy cowboy candidate of George W Bush. Bush did not run a great campaign. But Gore ran a terrible one, failing even to win his home state of Tennessee. What should have been a romp for Gore, narrowed down to Florida, and eventually, Bush won via a court decision. You can argue about that event until blue in the face, but what is inarguable is that Gore should never have let Bush get close.

So, Democrats surveying the GOP's current "carnival of crazy" – where Perry questions evolution and Bachmann sees Hurricane Irene as a sign from God on government spending – should not feel victory is assured. The GOP does not have to wrest the White House away from Obama; he might just give it away.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #321 on: August 31, 2011, 05:48:08 AM »
Quinnipiac: Obama Matchups With Romney, Perry In A Dead Heat
Talking Points Memo ^ | |August 31, 2011 | Kyle Leighton



A new national poll from Quinnipiac University shows that national races on both the presidential level and for Congress are in a dead heat as Washington prepares to return to work in September. Tex. Gov. Rick Perry now leads the GOP field in his quest for the presidential nomination, the first choice of 26 percent of Republican voters, followed by former frontrunner former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney at 20 percent, in what is now the fifth national poll Perry has taken the lead.

The poll also shows that President Obama, whose approval rating has been weakened by a slow economy and general disdain for Washington, is running very closely with both Perry and Romney. Obama leads Perry with 45 percent to the Texas governor's 42, and ties Romney at 45 percent. Both matchups are within the poll's margin of error and therefore a statistical dead heat.


(Excerpt) Read more at tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo. com ...


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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #322 on: September 01, 2011, 07:33:46 AM »
Gallup: Obama’s Approval Hits All-Time Low of 41 Percent Among Women
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
By Terence P. Jeffrey



President Barack Obama poses for a photo with summer school kids, Monday, Aug. 15, 2011, in Chatfield, Minn. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

(CNSNews.com) - Barack Obama defeated Sen. John McCain 56 percent to 43 percent among female voters in the 2008 presidential election, according to the network exit poll, and Obama’s job performance as president won the support of 70 percent of women early in his tenure.

But Gallup polling last week showed that only 41 percent of women now say they approve of the way Obama is handling his job as president. That is an all-time low--down from the previous low of 43 percent, which is what Obama’s approval had been among women in each of the previous three weeks.

Obama’s approval has dropped 11 points among women over the past three months. In the last week of May, according to the Gallup poll, the president’s approval among females was at 52 percent.

Obama’s approval among women peaked at 70 percent in the week of Jan. 26-Feb. 1, 2009, his first full week in office.


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 #323 on: September 04, 2011, 05:33:32 PM »
Dem: Obama wouldn't win Virginia today
By: CNN's Dan Merica

Washington (CNN) – Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said if the 2012 presidential election was held today, President Barack Obama wouldn't win Virginia, a state he carried in 2008.
Speaking on local Washington radio station WTOP Friday, Connolly said, "In my opinion, no, today he would not win the state."

But, with more than a year before Election Day, Connolly said Obama still has time to regain the momentum he had in the last election.

"The growing diversity, especially in Northern Virginia, has changed the polity of Virginia permanently," said Connolly on The Politics Program With Mark Plotkin. "There is no question in my mind that President Obama can make a comeback and win Virginia."

Prior to Obama winning Virginia in 2008, the state had not voted for a presidential Democrat since former president Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. The last time Virginia voted for a Democratic president two elections in a row was in 1944 and 1948.

Connolly said that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney would have the best chance of beating Obama in 2012 but that all White House hopefuls, including Obama, come with imperfections.

"I think that all of the Republican candidates, as does President Obama, have serious baggage," said Connolly.

Obama will visit Richmond, Va. on Sept. 9, the day after unveiling his jobs plan to a joint session on Congress.
– CNN's Peter Hamby contributed to this report.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/03/dem-obama-wouldnt-win-virginia-today/#more-173608

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #324 on: September 05, 2011, 08:13:50 AM »
Not to mention pa, nc, oh, fl, etc.