Poll: Obama Down 6 Points to “Generic” Republican

From Rasmussen:

…The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds the generic Republican earning 48% of the vote, while the president picks up support from 42%.  Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and another seven percent (7%) are undecided…

Remember, fellow GOPers, I’m mostly linking to these kinds of posts to annoy and depress our liberals…don’t you get cocky:  we’ve got one very hard fight coming up in 2012.

39%

That is Obama’s approval rating – from the LA Times:

President Obama’s summer woes have dragged his approval rating to an all-time low, sinking below 40% for the first time in Gallup’s daily tracking poll.

New data posted Sunday shows that 39% of Americans approve of Obama’s job performance, while 54% disapprove. Both are the worst numbers of his presidency…

Not the sign of a man who is cruising to re-election.  But, also, don’t get cocky, GOPers.  Obama will have a billion dollars to spend and he’ll spend every dime of is slandering the GOP candidates.  No lie will remain untold, no gutter unexplored, in Obama’s quest for a second term.  So, be happy that people are fully awake to how bad Obama is, but don’t let down your guard for a second.

2012 Still Makes Me Feel Fine

From Rasmussen:

…Overall, 43% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president’s performance. That’s the lowest total approval for the president in five months. Fifty-five percent (55%) at least somewhat disapprove…

Any incumbent below 50% approval in in trouble…incumbents below 45% are in lots of trouble.  Obama can still win – in fact, we still have to give him the advantage given the amount of money he’ll raise and the immense powers of the Presidency.  But he’s on thin ice…we can beat him; and beat him very badly.

Poll: Obama Approval at 45%…in New York!

The hits just keep on coming – from the New York Post:

President Obama might need to start taking a few more campaign trips to New York — and not just to raise cash.

A stunning new survey gives the president a negative approval rating in the Empire State for the first time, with just 45 percent approval and 49 percent disapproval among voters, according to the latest Quinnipiac University poll.

That’s a sharp turnaround from June, when Obama’s New York popularity was a healthy 57-38.

In the 2008 presidential election, Obama carried New York with 63 percent of the vote…

Yes, I know Obama will win New York in 2008.  Even if it turns out to be a Reagan-Carter blow out of Obama next year, Obama is almost certain to win New York…but the fact that he’s blow 50% in a State as deep blue as New York shows that he’s going to have to work to defend his electoral base…that he can’t take any State for granted.  He’s going to have to spend time and money in places that he should have locked up before he even starts…and for the GOP comes the opportunity to spend just a little time and money in the blue States and force Obama to spend even more time and money there.

Obama can only win if he holds on to places like North Carolina, Florida and Colorado in 2012…if he’s battling it out for places like New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan, then he’s likely to be defeated next year.  The only question here is whether or not Obama increasing political weakness will impel Democrats to abandon him…not in the sense of nominating someone else (though his weakness invites a primary challenger), but in the sense of writing him off and working, instead, to prevent the GOP from winning 60 Senate seats?

Naturally, things can change – it is a long way to election day.  The trouble is, all indicators are that things will just get worse for America between now and then – and this is thanks to Obama.  Caught in a vise of his own making…

Obama Goes on Vacation

From Zero Hedge:

We bring you this special announcement courtesy of the White House which has informed that American plebs that following a fantastic job well done, in which the market is now back to pre-QE2 levels, unemployment is near record highs, delays for presidential press meetings compare with Newark airplane take offs, pessimism is at record highs, America’s credit rating has just been downgraded, the country was nearly bankrupted, and sales of end of the world provisions are through the roof (not to mention ammunition), president Obama is taking a well-deserved vacation at Martha’s Vineyard at the end of the month…

This man Obama has a tin ear – he just can’t see what is going on.  Or maybe he really doesn’t care.  Memo to Obama’s handlers – now is not the time for the President to go playing with the rich and powerful.  The White House is pretty swank…and Camp David is just a short helicopter ride away…going to Martha’s Vineyard is way of saying “so long, suckers” to the American people.

We will remember in November 2012.

Poll: Majority Against Obama’s Re-election

From USA Today/Gallup:

…a majority of Americans, 51%, say President Obama doesn’t deserve re-election; 47% say he does…

Not a good sign for a man seeking re-election.  And do click on the above link for a State-by-State breakdown of Obama’s approval rating.  Here’s the important bits:

Obama’s approval is at 53% in California; 52% in Minnesota; 54% in Vermont…and only 54% in Illinois!

If the election were held today, Obama would be crushed…now, is it likely to get better, or worse, for him by November of next year?

The Obama Downgrade

Instapundit has a small round up of disappointment among liberals about Obama, and has this to say:

It’s as if, in some sort of national spasm of carelessness and self-deceit, we elected a guy entirely unqualified by experience or personal characteristics to the single most important office in the land, to serve during a period of unusual troubles that he was not equipped to address.

And now liberals are starting to realize that things aren’t getting better and that Obama will be their standard-bearer in 2012.  They’ve already lost the House, lost massively at the State level and will probably lose the Senate next year…and Obama is the guy who will symbolize the whole party.  This is not looking good for our liberals.

To be fair to Obama, a President McCain may have made a lot of mistakes, too.  McCain might also have bought the siren song of government spending and money printing.  But there is this difference we can see – McCain is a man of long experience in practical affairs and would have seen by the end of 2010 that it wasn’t working…that something different needed to be tried, and having a fund of conservative and libertarian beliefs, he would have opened his mind to those who proposed a different course.  Obama can’t do that – he lacks the knowledge to see an alternative to the liberal worldview he imparted in college.  It may well be that Obama has never read a single, conservative book; that he’s never listened to a conservative thinker; his whole idea of us might really be summed up in his “bitter clingers” remark…and you don’t go to “bitter clingers” in search for ideas.  But where do you go, then, when your liberal ideas have failed?

This triumph of hope over experience we had in 2008 is now on auto-pilot.  Incapable of changing course for lack of intellectual ability to see a different course, it is only concerned with the mechanics of re-election…give a speech, have a fund-raiser; lather, rinse, repeat.  There will be no change until after the election – rumor has it that Bernanke might print up a bag of money to sustain the market (that is why it is up to much so early)…and so complete collapse might hold off for a while, perhaps even until after the election.  So, this may be it – Obama is downgraded – from “Hope and Change” to “Prolonged Situation” and we get to keep our fingers crossed that nothing bad happens for 15 months, because we’ve got a President who is incapable of dealing with it.

 

Poll: “Generic Republican” Bests Obama by Five

From Rasmussen:

…The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters shows the generic Republican with 47% of the vote, while the president picks up 42% support. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and seven percent (7%) are undecided…

Not the poll numbers of a man who just won a political battle.  Obama is severely damaged political goods.

He can (and likely, will) bounce back from this – and 2012 will be the hardest fought campaign in American history (possibly in world history).  Obama and the liberalism he leads and personifies will not go out without a fight.  No matter how bad things get, they will go after us with all they’ve got.  They will ask and give no quarter.

But, still, anyone who is worried that a robust, conservative message can’t win against Obama is nuts…any coherent alternative can beat him.  Better if its conservative, but the main thing for the 2012 GOP candidate is to not be Obama, just as for the Democrats the prime thing was to not be Bush.

We can beat him and his Democrats – and not just beat them, but crush them down so low that for 20 years they won’t be able to trouble us.  We can win the power necessary to restore American liberty and greatness…all we have to do is fight it out and never quit.

Obama Just Isn’t Liberal, Enough

From The New Yorker:

…Of course, invoking the Fourteenth Amendment has always been a long shot, a last refuge. But Obama’s seeming refusal to hold it in reserve (“like the fire axe on the wall,” in Garrett Epps’s words) is emblematic of his all too civilized, all too accommodating negotiating strategy—indeed, of his whole approach to the nation’s larger economic dilemma, the most disappointing aspect of his Presidency. His stimulus package asked for too little and got less. He has allowed deficits and debt to supersede mass unemployment as the emergency of the moment. He has too readily accepted Republican terms of debate, such as likening the country to a household that must “live within its means.” (For even the most prudent householders, living within one’s means can include going into debt, as in taking out a car loan so that one can get to one’s job.) He has done too little to educate the public to the wisdom of post-Herbert Hoover economics: fiscal balance is achieved over time, not in a single year; in flush times a government should run a surplus, but when the economy falters deficits are part of the remedy; when the immediate problem is what it is now—a lack of demand, not a shortage of capital—higher spending is generally more efficacious than lower taxes, especially lower taxes on the rich…

And now the Carterization of Obama is complete…well, except that he hasn’t had his Killer Rabbit attack.  You see, I remember this – back in 1980 when I was gleefully reading over the liberal angst about Carter’s defeat, there were liberal opinions that Carter’s failure was that he wasn’t liberal enough.  Had he spent more, taxed more, cut defense more, negotiated with our enemies more…had he just gone full blown in to the most extreme liberalism possible, it all would have worked out.  There is a bizarre disconnect from reality in our “reality-based community”…the unwillingness to ever admit that liberalism can get it wrong, or even be unpopular.

One does have to wonder – that was written by Hendrik Hertzberg.  He’s a well-educated man:  at least, his credentials say so.  But does he really believe that there was in what FDR did a stark contrast to what Hoover did?  Does he further believe that what FDR did worked?  Hoover spent bags of money trying to fix the economy (little remembered is how in 1932 FDR ran on a balanced budget platform).  FDR just spent bags and bags and bags.  Hoover didn’t fix the depression, neither did FDR.  Yet here we are in 2011 and here is Mr. Hertzberg, certain that the lesson of the past is that you have to go flat out in spending…don’t do what Hoover did!  And Obama, in Hertzberg’s view, is being too Hooverish and not channeling his inner-FDR.  But Hoover did what FDR did and both FDR and Hoover failed utterly.  How do you get that ignorant about history and yet graduate from the Ivy League and become a commentator for The New Yorker?

Furthermore, a little blogger like me is supposed to stand in awe of all this…that I don’t have an Ivy League diploma and don’t have an editor to carefully review what I’ve written, and so I should accept as from on high such pronouncements.  But that is absurd – I can see what is plain as a pikestaff, Hertzberg, by the evidence in his article, would have difficulty finding the balls on a bull.  There is making a mistake – I’ve done that; I’ll do it again and again, too…but there is a huge difference between “mistake” and “obtuse”.

Never mind.  As long as liberals really think that it is a lack of liberalism which makes for liberal failure, it works out mostly to our advantage.  True, it came back to bite us in 2008 – never imagined someone as leftist as Obama could even get nominated, let alone elected…but everything, I guess, really is possible.  It is highly likely that we will correct 2008’s error in 2012…and Hertzberg and other liberals will then proclaim not a shift to the right to regain America’s trust, but a further shift to the left because those darn morons, the voters, just don’t know what’s good for them.  We should be able to keep the Democrats out of the White House for 20 years on that.

HAT TIPCommentary