Liberal CNN concedes: Obama approval rating below 50 percent
Lib Loo
Obama approval rating below 50 percent
December 4, 2009 5:44 p.m. EST
Washington (CNN) -- Support for President Obama has dropped below 50 percent
for the first time in a CNN poll despite high marks for his recently
announced Afghanistan policy.
Forty-eight percent of Americans questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp.
national survey released Friday said they approve of the job Obama is doing
as president -- a drop of 7 percentage points from a survey last month.
Fifty percent said they do not approve. The difference of 2 percentage
points between approval and disapproval falls within the range of the poll's
sampling error.
"The poll indicates that the biggest drop in approval comes from
noncollege-educated white voters," said Keating Holland, CNN's polling
director. "That's one indication among many that Obama's growing
unpopularity may be more related to unemployment and the poor economy" than
to factors such as his strategy for Afghanistan.
Six in 10 of those questioned said they favor Obama's move to send 30,000
more troops to that country. Two-thirds also support his plan to start
removing U.S. forces from Afghanistan in 2011 -- although the poll indicates
most Americans think that announcing such a date in advance was a bad idea,
and they are skeptical about whether conditions then will allow the United
States to meet that goal.
And support for Obama's policies does not translate into backing for the
war; a majority still said they oppose U.S. action in that country.
"That may currently be a reflection on George W. Bush rather than Obama,"
Holland said. "Two-thirds say they blame the former president, not Obama,
for the problems the U.S. currently faces in Afghanistan."
But the poll suggests the conflict eventually may become Obama's war, with
54 percent saying they will blame him for any problems the U.S. faces in
Afghanistan in 2011.
The poll was conducted Wednesday and Thursday after the president spelled
out his new Afghanistan policy in a prime-time address Tuesday night at the
U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York.
Several polls in late November indicated Obama's approval rating had dipped
this low even before this week's speech. Weekly averages of national polls
from mid-October through mid-November showed Obama's approval consistently
at 52 percent or 53 percent.
"But in the week before Thanksgiving, his average approval rating slipped to
49 percent -- solid evidence that something was going on before Obama
announced his Afghan policy," Holland said.
Obama's rating dropped 18 percentage points among noncollege whites, but 4
points among whites who attended college, a good indication the economy and
other domestic issues may be hurting the president.
Obama also dropped 15 percentage points among whites under 50, but 4 points
among older whites.
"That may partly be due to Afghanistan," Holland said, "but the young are
also the group hardest hit when unemployment rises. The same is true for
white women, whose approval of Obama dropped 12 points."
Obama is not the first president to drop below 50 percent in his first year
in the White House. President Reagan's approval rating dipped to 49 percent
in November 1981 and stayed below that mark for two years. President Clinton
also dropped well below the 50 percent mark by May 1993, the fastest fall on
record.
The CNN/Opinion Research poll was conducted by telephone, with 1,041 people
questioned. The survey's overall sampling error is plus or minus 3
percentage points.
Too_Many_Tools
Poor Loo....still soooooooooo bitter for losing.
Wanna bet that if the Presidental election was today your boy would
still lose?
Laugh..laugh..lauhg..
TMT
Buerste
"Lib Loo" <heez...@crazymother.kom> wrote in message
news:hfcq9c$6pc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/04/obama.approval.poll/index.html
>
>
> Obama approval rating below 50 percent
> December 4, 2009 5:44 p.m. EST
LIES! Anybody that doesn't love Obama and everything he does and everybody
around him is a racist liar! CNN has been bought out by Exxon and Bush with
stollen Nazi gold. Obama's approval rating is really 80%!
Jack G.
> "Lib Loo" <heezb...@crazymother.kom> wrote in message
You are a good example of a person who has taken drugs or your just
nuts.
Lib Loo
"Jack G." <jgra...@pioneernet.net> wrote in message
news:62710368-4324-42ec...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
He has taken pistachios.
HH&C
> "Jack G." <jgran...@pioneernet.net> wrote in message
See where all that red dye # 5 leads?
hal
<heez...@crazymother.kom> wrote:
>http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/04/obama.approval.poll/index.html
>
>
>Obama approval rating below 50 percent
>December 4, 2009 5:44 p.m. EST
Who cares? Those of us in the smart half always knew you people were
retarded.
Wes
I think his honeymoon is over. People are starting to figure out that national health
care is going to hurt those that produce. Cap and trade is going to kill our remaining
industry, and inflating our currency is going to wipe out our 401k's and savings.
The union types will continue to vote for him. That is where stimulus funds have been
directed. Anyone can create a government funded job, it takes someone with insight into
how the economy works to set conditions for the private sector to spend capital and create
jobs. For those that forgot, the private sector is where real revenue comes from.
Government workers paying income taxes is just a kickback.
Wes
--
One Big Assed Mistake America.
Buerste
"HH&C" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:32ccb757-c27b-469e...@m11g2000vbo.googlegroups.com...
****************************************
I won't buy the red ones and the natural ones are on sale often, they must
have had a good year.
Buerste
<hal> wrote in message news:4b1adcaf...@news.newsguy.com...
The other half thinks always thinks the other half is retarded. Which half
are you again?
HH&C
> "Buerste" <buer...@wowway.com> wrote:
> >"Lib Loo" <heezb...@crazymother.kom> wrote
> >> Obama approval rating below 50 percent
> >> December 4, 2009 5:44 p.m. EST
> ><snip>
>
> >LIES! Anybody that doesn't love Obama and everything he does and everybody
> >around him is a racist liar! CNN has been bought out by Exxon and Bush with
> >stollen Nazi gold. Obama's approval rating is really 80%!
>
He might have used an off-shore spelling.
But you are both correct.
Buerste
"Winston_Smith" <not_...@bogus.net> wrote in message
news:hpcmh5pt3usa463a0...@4ax.com...
>>> Obama approval rating below 50 percent
>>> December 4, 2009 5:44 p.m. EST
>><snip>
>>
>>LIES! Anybody that doesn't love Obama and everything he does and
>>everybody
>>around him is a racist liar! CNN has been bought out by Exxon and Bush
>>with
>>stollen Nazi gold. Obama's approval rating is really 80%!
>
How the hell did that get through my spell chucker?
hal
wrote:
If you have to ask, me explaining it to you isn't going to help
because you won't get it.
Spehro Pefhany
Your spell chequer is partial to German Xmas cake?
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
>
> "That may currently be a reflection on George W. Bush rather than Obama,"
> Holland said. "Two-thirds say they blame the former president, not Obama,
> for the problems the U.S. currently faces in Afghanistan."
Yeah - when are they going to stop blaming Dubya for Obama's decisions?
For the record, I'm no Bushist either, but thank GAWD we didn't get Al
Gore shoved down our throats! ;-)
Thanks,
Rich
Curly Surmudgeon
Which underlines the unacceptability of a 2-party lock on elections.
Time to implement a preferential tabulation system and abolish the
electoral college. My favorite is the Borda Count:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borda_count
But there are other preferential voting systems too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting
Gore, Bush43, Kerry, Quayle, Dole, Cheney, Clinton, Dukakis, Carter,
Bush41, Reagan, Nixon and Johnson are more than sufficient reason to
jettison the archaic electoral process in America.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 Run, John, Run! 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
> On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 11:24:16 -0800, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
>>>
>>> "That may currently be a reflection on George W. Bush rather than
>>> Obama," Holland said. "Two-thirds say they blame the former president,
>>> not Obama, for the problems the U.S. currently faces in Afghanistan."
>>
>> Yeah - when are they going to stop blaming Dubya for Obama's decisions?
>>
>> For the record, I'm no Bushist either, but thank GAWD we didn't get Al
>> Gore shoved down our throats! ;-)
>
> Which underlines the unacceptability of a 2-party lock on elections. Time
> to implement a preferential tabulation system and abolish the electoral
> college. My favorite is the Borda Count:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borda_count
>
> But there are other preferential voting systems too:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting
>
> Gore, Bush43, Kerry, Quayle, Dole, Cheney, Clinton, Dukakis, Carter,
> Bush41, Reagan, Nixon and Johnson are more than sufficient reason to
> jettison the archaic electoral process in America.
I agree that the system is rigged - and crooked at that! Taxifornicatya
has 55 electoral votes. If 27 electors vote guy A, and 28 vote guy B,
Then all 55 e.v.s go to guy B! If you were one of the guy A supporters,
they actually CHANGE YOUR VOTE!
That's just evil.
A straight popular vote would work, and wouldn't be too hard to implement,
with the sophicasted computer communications we've got these days. You
could use their Social Security numbers to guarantee one person, one
vote, which I guess they're even issuing to kids these days, and
shouldn't be too hard to verify.
Of course, it'd also have to include a paper trail, but look at the Lotto!
All the infrastucture is already in place!
And another consideration is keeping the ballot secret; lots of businesses
guarantee confidentiality, so that's already done, if you could trust the
election officials.
Cheers!
Rich
dca...@krl.org
> A straight popular vote would work, and wouldn't be too hard to implement,
> Cheers!
> Rich
A straight popular vote would not work.
Dan
Curly Surmudgeon
And it's much worse than that simplification. At the moment we are
limited to one of two preselected candidates, not our best choice, by
backroom dealers representing their corporate masters.
Then there is the Diebold issue and electoral integrity.
> A straight popular vote would work, and wouldn't be too hard to
> implement, with the sophicasted computer communications we've got these
> days. You could use their Social Security numbers to guarantee one
> person, one vote, which I guess they're even issuing to kids these days,
> and shouldn't be too hard to verify.
It will take much more than a straight popular vote. What do you do when
no candidate receives >50%? Correcting the system will require a top-
down complete overhaul. And a total elimination of private donors.
Which means election reform that neither party is willing to permit.
> Of course, it'd also have to include a paper trail, but look at the
> Lotto! All the infrastucture is already in place!
>
> And another consideration is keeping the ballot secret; lots of
> businesses guarantee confidentiality, so that's already done, if you
> could trust the election officials.
>
> Cheers!
> Rich
--
Buerste
<hal> wrote in message news:4b1bd42c...@news.newsguy.com...
The stuff you get isn't what needs to get got.
Buerste
<dca...@krl.org> wrote in message
news:a0514712-06b3-46b2...@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
Dan
How about a straight popular vote only by people that actually pay federal
income taxes? THAT would certainly change EVERYTHING!
Michael A. Terrell
So, you want to take away the right to vote from Disabled Veterans?
--
Offworld checks no longer accepted!
jk
>A straight popular vote would work, and wouldn't be too hard to implement,
>with the sophicasted computer communications we've got these days. You
>could use their Social Security numbers to guarantee one person, one
>vote, which I guess they're even issuing to kids these days, and
>shouldn't be too hard to verify.
>
I don't see it as that easy. Not until we have a national ID (if ever,
I don't really want one.)
>Of course, it'd also have to include a paper trail, but look at the Lotto!
>All the infrastucture is already in place!
>
>And another consideration is keeping the ballot secret; lots of businesses
>guarantee confidentiality, so that's already done,
Ha Ha Ha Not very funny...... lots of business have to admit
periodically that their security has been violated.
> if you could trust the
>election officials.
Can't trust any of them, sooner or later if your vote can be traced
back to you, it will. All it takes is one security lapse, one
dishonest worker, one stolen computer or one good hacker.
>
>Cheers!
>Rich
jk
jk
>
>
>How about a straight popular vote only by people that actually pay federal
>income taxes? THAT would certainly change EVERYTHING!
Just remember, that corporations are legally "people" to a degree, and
they do (ok some do) pay those taxes.
jk
Hawke
> Poor Loo....still soooooooooo bitter for losing.
>
> Wanna bet that if the Presidental election was today your boy would
> still lose?
>
> Laugh..laugh..lauhg..
>
> TMT
No, no, it's not that. He's got ODS, Obama Derangement Syndrome. He's an
Obama hater and is so filled with rage that he's incoherent. All he
can do is make post after post about how horrible Obama is. Even if
Obama brought us out of the great recession and ends both wars he'll
still be criticizing him. Like the guy in the AARP commercial says about
the AARP card except it's about Obama. Yep, this is one deranged guy.
Hawke
Hawke
Here's how you can tell. The smart ones voted for Obama.
Hawke
Hawke
I'll say. Aren't we fortunate we had Bush instead? Why, if Gore was
president we might have had a virtual collapse of our financial
institutions, and our real estate and stock markets, we might have had
tremendous unemployment, and we might have started two wars that we
still haven't won in nearly a decade. Yeah, it's sure a good thing we
elected Bush and avoided all that bad stuff that may have happened if
Gore was elected.
Hawke
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
Almost true. Libby Loo (Jerry, Basil Karlo, eskWIRED, et. al) has a
fetish for mothers, grandmothers and sisters. Occasionally, for variety,
he'll throw in some homosexuality but that's about it for his toolbox.
Buerste
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:mLidnc3UmamwyYDW...@earthlink.com...
You don't have to pay taxes on your pittance of VA benefits? How did Obammy
miss that? I told you I think all vets should get a million dollars for
every year of service...and that's NOT enough!
Too_Many_Tools
If the 2000 election hadn't been stolen by George Bush, thousands of
Americans and trillions of dollars would still be here.
The hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people would also be alive.
And George Bush would have made someone a piss poor dog catcher.
TMT
Buerste
"jk" <kle...@suddenlink.net> wrote in message
news:k9uth5hc4j845p2j7...@4ax.com...
No, consumers pay those taxes. And, because taxes are an operating expense,
profits are based on percentage of costs, consumers also pay the bump.
Foolish consumers! Liberals SCREAM "Tax Business!" not knowing that
business just passes it on. But, it must feel good and all liberals care
about is feeling good.
jk
No, The consumers do NOT pay those taxes in the sense of paying it to
the government, they just pay more than they might otherwise.
Using that same logic, my Employer pays my taxes, I just pass the cost
along in what I am willing to work for. So there are no taxpayers.
jk
Michael A. Terrell
Non service connected disability is $985 a month. That is about 50%
below the poverty level. People on welfare get more.
My military medical records are 'conveniently' missing, or I would
get $3800 a month.
Buerste
As an American citizen, I'm ashamed. I'm not sending you a check, but I'm
ashamed. (unless you really need a check)
Buerste
Your employer pays half of your total Social Security tax bill. He takes
that into consideration with his pay offering. Also taken from your pay is
the amount it costs to do all the employment accounting, holidays, vacation,
sick days, personal days, medical, etc. Your logic is just plain wrong,
rethink it and get back to me if you have any questions.
Steve W.
It always amazes me where folks talking about any benefits or taxes seem
to think the money comes from. They don't seem to think about the fact
that the company pays out a LOT of money to pay for those "benefits" and
what it actually costs just to keep them employed.
I think the last number I heard was that you could take your hourly rate
and figure that 2/3 of it could be added on just to keep you as an employee.
So if you're earning 60,000 a year it is costing the employer closer to
100,000 just to keep you as an employee.
There is a LOT of overhead involved and they just keep piling more on.
I looked into opening a new garage a couple years ago. Prior to even
opening the doors I figured on spending 1.8 million dollars!
--
Steve W.
Michael A. Terrell
Buerste wrote:
>
> As an American citizen, I'm ashamed. I'm not sending you a check, but I'm
> ashamed. (unless you really need a check)
No, I'm not asking for money. :) I manage to scrape by, but I wiped
out my savings several years ago.
Mark Rand
>I think the last number I heard was that you could take your hourly rate
>and figure that 2/3 of it could be added on just to keep you as an employee.
>So if you're earning 60,000 a year it is costing the employer closer to
>100,000 just to keep you as an employee.
>
That's cheap. My (internal, before profits) chargeable cost is 2.5 times my
before tax pay rate...
Mark Rand
RTFM
Curly Surmudgeon
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Buerste wrote:
>>
>> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:mLidnc3UmamwyYDW...@earthlink.com...
>> >
>> > Buerste wrote:
>> >>
>> >> <dca...@krl.org> wrote in message
>> >> news:a0514712-06b3-46b2-
bae0-87f...@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>> >> On Dec 7, 1:11 am, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
>> >> > A straight popular vote would work, and wouldn't be too hard to
>> >> > implement,
>> >>
>> >> > Cheers!
>> >> > Rich
>> >> A straight popular vote would not work.
>> >>
>> >> Dan
>> >>
>> >> How about a straight popular vote only by people that actually pay
>> >> federal
>> >> income taxes? THAT would certainly change EVERYTHING!
>> >
>> >
>> > So, you want to take away the right to vote from Disabled Veterans?
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Offworld checks no longer accepted!
>>
>> You don't have to pay taxes on your pittance of VA benefits? How did
>> Obammy miss that? I told you I think all vets should get a million
>> dollars for every year of service...and that's NOT enough!
>
>
> Non service connected disability is $985 a month. That is about 50%
> below the poverty level. People on welfare get more.
>
> My military medical records are 'conveniently' missing, or I would
> get $3800 a month.
Mine are claimed to have been destroyed in a 1973(?) fire in Kansas City
where the records were kept. One or two pages survived barely legible.
Did you keep hospital records? I didn't.
Spehro Pefhany
I use 2.0 as a rule of thumb.
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Lib Loo
"Curly Surmudgeon" <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote in message
news:hfkhgj$va8$8...@news.eternal-september.org...
> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:08:14 -0800, Hawke <davesm...@digitalpath.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>
>>> Poor Loo....still soooooooooo bitter for losing.
>>>
>>> Wanna bet that if the Presidental election was today your boy would
>>> still lose?
>>>
>>> Laugh..laugh..lauhg..
>>>
>>> TMT
>>
>>
>> No, no, it's not that. He's got ODS, Obama Derangement Syndrome. He's an
>> Obama hater and is so filled with rage that he's incoherent. All he
>> can do is make post after post about how horrible Obama is. Even if
>> Obama brought us out of the great recession and ends both wars he'll
>> still be criticizing him. Like the guy in the AARP commercial says about
>> the AARP card except it's about Obama. Yep, this is one deranged guy.
>>
>> Hawke
>
> Almost true. Libby Loo (Jerry, Basil Karlo, eskWIRED, et. al) has a
> fetish for mothers, grandmothers and sisters. Occasionally, for variety,
> he'll throw in some homosexuality but that's about it for his toolbox.
Curly Albert has fetishes for Mexican homosexuals and his right palm.
Buerste
With just the little bit that I hear that you do with vets and other
downtrodden, and your health issues that don't keep you down, you are a
hero!
Buerste
"Steve W." <csr...@NOTyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hfp6mj$898$1...@aioe.org...
>
> It always amazes me where folks talking about any benefits or taxes seem
> to think the money comes from. They don't seem to think about the fact
> that the company pays out a LOT of money to pay for those "benefits" and
> what it actually costs just to keep them employed.
>
> I think the last number I heard was that you could take your hourly rate
> and figure that 2/3 of it could be added on just to keep you as an
> employee.
> So if you're earning 60,000 a year it is costing the employer closer to
> 100,000 just to keep you as an employee.
>
> There is a LOT of overhead involved and they just keep piling more on.
>
> I looked into opening a new garage a couple years ago. Prior to even
> opening the doors I figured on spending 1.8 million dollars!
>
> --
> Steve W.
It costs me 1.5 times an employees pay. Often, they only comprehend their
take-home.
Rich Grise
> Buerste wrote:
>>
>> As an American citizen, I'm ashamed. I'm not sending you a check, but
>> I'm ashamed. (unless you really need a check)
>
> No, I'm not asking for money. :) I manage to scrape by, but I wiped
> out my savings several years ago.
How about "Those who pay federal income tax AND veterans?"
I could go for that, being a veteran of the "Vietnam Advisory Campaign."
Thanks,
Rich
Strabo
Kansas City?
The fire I'm aware of wiped out records for some WWII, Korean and
Viet Nam vets. Thought it was in Colorado.
You were to have hand-carried your medical records when changing duty
stations but ordinarily you wouldn't have been given your medical
records at discharge. They should have been sent directly to storage.
Curly Surmudgeon
Now you made me go back and look...
"Thank you for contacting the National Personnel Records Center. The
military record needed to answer your inquiry was located in the area
that suffered the most damage in the fire that occurred at this center on
July 12, 1973. Fortunately, a portion of the record was among those
recovered; however, it was damaged in the fire."
Addressed:
National Personnel Records Center
9700 Page Avenue
St. Louis, Missouri 63132-5100
cavelamb
It was Saint Louis Army Records Depot.
My records were saved because they had been transfered to the
Navy records depot (another story).