« | »

AP Poll: Obama Hits New Low On Economy

From a highly concerned Associated Press:

AP Poll: Obama at new low for handling economy

By Liz Sidoti, AP National Political Writer
August 18, 2010

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama earned his lowest marks ever on his handling of the economy in a new Associated Press-GfK poll, which also found that an overwhelming majority of Americans now describe the nation’s financial outlook as poor.

A frustrated electorate could take it out on the party in power — Obama’s Democrats — in the November elections.

Eleven weeks before the Nov. 2 balloting, just 41 percent of those surveyed approve of the president’s performance on the economy, down from 44 percent in April, while 56 percent disapprove. And 61 percent say the economy has gotten worse or stayed the same on Obama’s watch.

Still, three-quarters also say it’s unrealistic to expect noticeable economic improvements in the first 18 months of the president’s term

We feel a new media talking point being born. And it would seem that, indeed, the AP is channeling Mr. Obama:

"The truth is, it’s going to take a few years to fully dig ourselves out of this recession. It’s going to take time to bring back 8 million jobs," the president said Tuesday while campaigning for Democratic candidates in Seattle. "Anybody who tells you otherwise is just looking for your vote."

So Mr. Obama and the rest of the Democrats were lying to us during the 2008 campaign? They were just “looking for” our votes?

A whopping 81 percent of people now call the economy poor or very poor, up from 72 percent in June, and just 12 percent say it has improved in the past month, compared with 19 percent in June. Both are record measurements since AP-GfK started asking those questions

Notice how far down in the article the AP buried this revelation.

Obama is suffering in other areas, too.

Just 34 percent now call him an above average or outstanding president, down from 42 percent in January. And 28 percent call him average, while 38 percent say he’s even worse

So most people now say Mr. Obama is a ‘worse than average’ President. If this were Mr. Bush, you can bet the AP would have phrased this a little more directly.

Also, more people disapprove of his performance on the following issues than approve: the federal budget deficit, unemployment, health care, taxes and immigration.

Notice that all of these items usually rank quite high on people’s lists of priorities.

Conversely, he’s viewed more favorably than not on his handling of terrorism, the environment, relationships with other countries and education.

Similarly, apart from terrorism, these items are seldom important to most voters. And that he gets high marks for his handling of terrorism is simply hard to believe.

About equal percentages of people view him positively and negatively on Iraq, Afghanistan, energy and gas prices

Again, if this is true, it is simply due to the tireless work of Mr. Obama’s myrmidons in the media. For in actuality he has been disastrous in these fields as well.

But in any case, Mr. Obama will be unfazed. For as Mr. Gibbs informed us back in December, the White House considers polls to be akin to a 6 year old scribbling with a crayon.

In fact, that seems to be their view about what used to be called ‘the will of the people’ in general.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, August 18th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

11 Responses to “AP Poll: Obama Hits New Low On Economy”

  1. bill says:

    I wonder what it would be without the journOlistas helping him out with lies 24/7

    And what is the poll bias?

    Beware journOlistas bearing polls to fool people.

  2. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    Polls mean nothing; all you have to do is ask the right question. For instance, 39% think the economy has improved, but 81% think the economy is poor or very poor. People are stupid. The actual facts (i.e. $1.2 Trillion deficit, again, 10% unemployment, socialized healthcare, failure with Iran, DPRK, China, Russia, Pakistan…) are more damning to Obama then what a handful of over sampled democrats think. However, the truth will never see the light of day in the MSM as long as the president has a D after his name.

    • TwilightZoned says:

      “However, the truth will never see the light of day in the MSM as long as the president has a D after his name.”

      That, my friend, is a true and very sad reality.

  3. JS says:

    The fact is the only thing that Obama has done above average on is the WoT. The reason is because he has continued most of Bush 43’s policy on WoT, and in Pak and AfPak he has doubled down. It has yet to be seen how this will play out, but in this regards I am not surprised people mostly give him good marks on it.

    On the other hand, he is a failed President in almost every other presidential metric.

  4. Liberals Demise says:

    Guess who he’ll blame this on? Does it matter?

    Vacations, campaigning, golf, vacation, golf……….the only thing he has done proficiently.

    Off topic:
    Anyone remember Plugs Biden saying that their administration needed 18 months for the Stimulus Package to work. Last year sometime……well, it has been 18 months Joe. You didn’t lie to us did you?

  5. proreason says:

    “Anybody who tells you otherwise is just looking for your vote.”

    Like many, I’m constantly searching for things to admire about Obamy.

    After 3+ years last, I’ve finally found something.

    His chutzpa is unmatched.

  6. Petronius says:

    Whether Nerobama’s handling of the economy has been successful depends on how you define the underlying political aims.

    The big spending programs have been advertised as an experiment in Keynesian theory (or Keynes as he is interpreted by Liberal politicians) to stimulate the economy and promote growth and job-creation. The stimulus programs have not produced their advertised results. In terms of Keynesian economics, the spending has been a complete failure.

    However, a good case can be made that the true goal has actually been to damage the economy, to accumulate power in big government, and to redistribute public money to political pals. Here the spending programs have been a great success.

    In the name of Keynesian theory, we have spent trillions of dollars that we do not have, money borrowed from China and other foreign investors, or money created by the Fed out of thin air, purportedly to stimulate the economy and promote job-creation. The cost of interest to service the debt thus created, not to mention the cost of paying back the debt itself, will far surpass the benefits of the stimulus, which have been imperceptible.

    We have had the $800B American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, TARP, TALF, Cash for Clunkers, Quantitative Easing, the payoff to the United Auto Workers, bailout of State employees’ unions, bailout of Greece, stimuli for housing and mortgages, extensions of expired unemployment payments, and so forth.

    The Federal government has spent more money on stimulus and bailouts, in percentage of GDP terms, than it spent on the Gulf War, Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Vietnam War, the Korean War, and World War I combined.

    The spending has not worked. Unemployment has not declined. Sustainable economic growth has not occurred. There has been no discernible improvement in economic conditions anywhere. The economy remains stuck in stagnation, on the cusp between slow growth and double dip recession. Some aspects of the economy look even worse than ever.

    But two things have changed. One is that a massive public debt burden has now been added to the economy and saddled onto the backs of the American taxpayers. The other is the tremendous growth in big government and in the power held by Nerobama and his regime, including massive wealth transfers.

    Furthermore, the future debt costs associated with funding these stimulus programs will generate problems greater than the problems the stimulus was originally designed to address. Greece is one example of how this future might unfold. Zimbabwe is another.

    Unless the government turns on the printing presses, any increase in government spending is inevitably going to require tax increases greater than the amount of spending, because the cost of paying back the borrowed funds plus the cost of interest on the debt is going to surpass the temporary boost (if any) given to the economy. The result is a big net loss to the economy.

    In due course, the cost of debt is going to lower our GDP. It is going to place a heavy strain on American businesses. It is going to handicap the Federal government’s ability to function and respond to foreign crises. It is going to lower the American standard of living, bringing poverty and ruin to millions of people.

    But then that was the plan all along, wasn’t it?

    • proreason says:

      The most favorable view of Obama is that he is a well-intentioned liberal who has been isolated by his cabal and is implementing policies that he believes in his heart and thinks are actually working.
      – In this case, he is an idiot and a fool.

      The next most favorable view is that he is a committed zealot who remains committed to his ideology, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
      – In this case, he denies the most fundamental principle of the country, government by and for the people.

      The next most favorable view is that he is a Manchurian who is a front-man for his masters.
      – In this case, he is a puppet.

      The least favorable view is that he is a cynical politician who cares not a whit what he does, what the people want, or the the pain that his actions inflict.
      – In this case, he is the worst criminal in US history

      Personally, I think he is an idiot and a fool who denies the country’s most fundamental principal while fulfilling his role as a the worst criminal puppet in US history.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »