Ok, maybe I’m going a bit overboard here with this USA/Gallup poll, but if I’m not, I’m buying a cabin in the woods.
I would post the actual poll, but I can’t figure out how to do it on my wife’s Mac. So, here goes:
The poll asked people how they would prefer to tackle state budget deficits:
Cutting state program? 48% oppose, while 47% are in favor.
Cutting pay or benefits for govt. workers? 53% oppose, while 44% are in favor.
Raising taxes? 71% oppose, while 27% are in favor.
Hmmmm…either the people responding to this poll are in on some super-secret way to take care of budget deficits or they have trouble with anything more complicated than sleeping. There are no other options than those offered folks. Now I understand why cutting spending isn’t as easy as it should be. Oh, if you want the pretty graph, along with some others, here you go.
A recent NPR poll has added additional support to the theory that the mid-term elections, at least in the House, could result in a significant shift in power. First, the poll:
To gauge what voters are thinking in House districts where surveys show the races will likely be tight in November and a switch in party control is possible, Democratic firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies conducted a poll of 1,200 “likely” voters in 60 battleground districts that elected Democrats in 2008 (one of the seats is vacant) and 10 districts now represented by Republicans.
So, the focus was on some of the so-called battleground districts. The results were telling, especially considering it was a NPR poll. While some have argued that the mood out there is “anti-incumbent,” others have argued it’s specifically “anti-democrat incumbent.” This poll supports the latter assertion. Interestingly, 44% of those polled favored their incumbent, against 37%. That 44% figure is strongly buttressed by Republicans though, since a majority of likely voters in those districts with Republican incumbents supported re-election, while a majority of likely voters in districts with Democratic incumbents desired new blood.
While this is only one poll of many, it further supports the conventional wisdom that 2010 may be a repeat of 1994. This should be an interesting summer.
The one-time sexual icon of my childhood (he didn’t always like dudes…right?) said we gotta’ have faith. Should we always take the Father Figure literally though? Lefty columnist Greg Sargent hopes so. He explains how Barry can renew his followers’ faith in his ability to competently perform tasks beyond simply finding his keys.
As many commentators have noted, the Gulf oil spill may pose a serious threat to one of the most important aspects of Obama’s presidency: his effort to restore public confidence in government as competent, as a trustworthy agent of genuine and lasting reform.
Well that was a mouthful. The Washington Post released a poll today that reveals a few things: 1. polls are dumb. 2. People hate BP and want the government to fire-bomb it. 3. People find the federal government to be incompetent in completing any task other than fire-bombing BP. In other words, the poll was about as useful in providing previously unknown perspectives as one asking whether I like butter. But I digress…
The poll finds that more people support the Democratic vision of government than the Republican one. Asked which party has “better ideas about the right size and role of the federal government,” 45 percent of respondents picked the Democratic Party, versus 40 percent who picked the GOP.
I haven’t seen the actual poll, but if the only question asked about the respective parties’ “vision of government” is the question set forth in the second sentence of the foregoing paragraph, color me unconvinced.
But the actual performance of the federal government gets dismal ratings. Only 28 percent of respondents approve of the government’s handling of the spill, versus 69 percent who disapprove. And it gets worse: Only 27 percent trust the government to make the right decisions about the spill, barely more than the 20 percent who trust BP to do the same!
I’m shocked, SHOCKED to learn that an overwhelming majority of the American people find the Federal response to a disaster to be generally crappy.
So what does the public want? For the federal government to bring its boot down on BP’s neck. An astonishing 64 percent say it should bring criminal charges against the company, and 51 percent strongly favor this.
Yep, the American people hate BP too. As an aside, it always amazes me when I read things like this. Over two-thirds of the American people want criminal charges brought? Isn’t that a little premature? Newsflash to that two-thirds: it’s not the scope of the disaster that determines criminal charges; it’s the intent of the actors.
So why is this poll worthy of mention in a national newspaper? Because it gives Mr. Sargent the opportunity to offer H.O.P.E. to his president and the Obamatrons.
And, fortunately, there still remains decisive action Obama can take: aggressively tackle the larger underlying problem by getting serious about taking on entrenched interests and rallying for real and lasting energy reform. That would do far more to dispel the “Obama’s Katrina” meme than cursing on TV will. It’s not too late.
“Obama’s Katrina” is not so much a “meme” as it is sweet sweet karma. The Dems rode Bush so hard after Katrina that Kanye decided he hated black people. Now Obamarama gets to enjoy some similar criticism. In fact, I’m going to start selling t-shirts that read “Barry hates sea turtles!”
President Obama’s approval rating has hit a new low of 46%. Some of his biggest supporters, like Maureen Dowd and James Carville for example, are now criticizing him. A recent CBO report has the healthcare bill failing to achieve its primary purpose of reducing healthcare costs. The jobless rate still lingers just south of 10%. The bloom is off the rose. President Obama has proved himself to be the shockingly inexperienced community organizer that far too few Americans realized when they voted for him. His presidency has been such a disaster in fact, that his illegally offering Joe Sestak a job in exchange for his dropping out of the Pennsylvania Senate race has been largely swept under the rug.
So, in light of the foregoing, what does the President do? He continues the same tired act of lying and blaming. In a speech he is scheduled to give in Pittsburgh, PA today, Mr. Obama will say the following:
We must build a new, stronger foundation for growth and prosperity – and that’s exactly what we’ve been doing for the last 16 months.
This new foundation is also based on reforms that will make our economy stronger and our businesses more competitive – reforms that will make healthcare cheaper, our financial system more secure, and our government less burdened with debt.
Every single assertion made by the President here is wrong. And they’re not those “gray area” or “give it time” sort of assertions. They’re simply wrong. And at this point, most people know it. The interesting thing is: Obama knows it too. The problem is, he went all in a while ago on his “transformational” agenda, and he can’t back peddle now. So what does he do? Well, first he calls out the Republicans, who, before the election of Scott Brown, were in such a minority that they barely existed.
Some of you may have noticed that we have been building this foundation without much help from our friends in the other party. From our efforts to rescue the economy to health insurance reform to financial reform, most have sat on the sidelines and shouted from the bleachers. They said no to tax cuts for small businesses; no to tax credits for college tuition; no to investments in clean energy. They said no to protecting patients from insurance companies and consumers from big banks.
Mr. Obama hasn’t “rescued the economy.” The “health insurance reform” hasn’t cut costs, controlled premiums, or improved medical care. “Financial reform?” Would that mean the bill that doesn’t even address the cause of the collapse: the government compelling banks to lend to risky borrowers? “Tax cuts for small business?” Are those the cuts that haven’t passed yet because they’re part of a proposed 2011 budget that would increase the deficit to a record $1.56 trillion? “Tax credits for college tuition?” Meaningless. “Investment in clean energy?” This must be referring to cap and trade, that would further kill the economy.
Then the President does what he does best: he passes the buck.
For much of the last 10 years, we tried it their way. They gave tax cuts that weren’t paid for to millionaires who didn’t need them. They gutted regulations, and put industry insiders in charge of industry oversight. They shortchanged investments in clean energy and education; in research and technology. And despite all their current moralizing about the need to curb spending, this is the same crowd who took the record $237-billion surplus that President Clinton left them and turned it into a record $1.3 trillion deficit.
Yep, the Republicans and Bush spent big. No denying that. But Mr. President, you’re in charge now, and have been for 16 months, and every single thing you’ve done has only resulted in spending more than Bush. And the “lack of regulation” that the President presumably asserts lead to the largest oil spill in American history? That’s the same lack of regulation that existed for 16 months under his watch. That’s the same lack of regulation that lead to the firing of the MMS Director that he appointed in the first place.
The President’s arrogance is becoming legendary. In the face of unmitigated failure, he keeps pushing distortion. Fortunately, with every day that passes, it appears the American people are ignoring the form and seeing the substance.