Articles and Analysis


US: National Survey (ABC/Post 4/22-25)

Topics: National , poll

ABC News / Washington Post
4/22-25/10; 1,001 adults, 3% margin of error
870 registered voters (generic ballot only)
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(ABC: story, results; Post: story, results)


Obama Job Approval
54% Approve, 44% Disapprove (chart)
Economy: 49 / 49 (chart)
Health Care: 49 / 49 (chart)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Barack Obama: 57 / 41 (chart)

2010 Congress: Generic Ballot
Registered voters: 48% Democrat, 43% Republican (chart)

Right now, are you inclined to vote to re-elect your representative in Congress in the next election or are you inclined to look around for someone else to vote for?
32% Re-elect, 57% Look around

Generally speaking, would you say you favor smaller government with fewer services, or larger government with more services?
56% Smaller gov't, fewer services
40% Larger gov't, more services

Party ID
34% Democrat, 23% Republican, 38% independent (chart)



Party ID appears to be skewed considerably. If you adjust this the spread for job approval is about 51/47 or, at worst, 50/48. Still a good result for Obama, no matter how you look at it.

More interesting are the health care numbers and, to a lesser degree the economy numbers. I'd need to see this repeated by some other pollsters before I'd start to believe the needle had shifted on this.



Yeah, 23% is way too low for Republicans. It's an outlier the way Republicmussen is on the other end of the voter ID spectrum.



I'd say 23% is about right. It's a poll of all adults, so you're going to get a lot of "democrats" and even more so "independents" who aren't registered/eligible to vote...



11 point gap in party idenity is a little bit off; I would give the Dems over the GOP more like 7-8 points when I polled people. It is an indication that financial reform is a popular idea and why the moderates in the GOP are still being so stubborn on bringing financial reform to a vote in the senate, I don't know.



rdw, the poll also surveyed registered voters:


But it doesn't seem to indicate which questions were all adults, and which ones were registered voters.


Field Marshal:

If you guys believe this poll, i have some quality land i'd like to sell you.

Why don't pollsters ask people who respond "independent" who they voted for in 2008 and then lump them into a leaner category.

Gallup has the party ID gap at 1.



This is so far off the charts as an outlier it is silly to even discuss it here. How can ABC and Washington Post put out garbage like this and keep a straight face?

The pollster.com composite shows the generic at a 4 point lead for republicans and this poll shows an 5 point lead for democrats? Get real. They are 125% above the curve and people are supposed to take this seriously? Especially when this is supposed to be registered voters.

Pollster.com's party affiliation shows a 7% lead of democrats over republicans and they show an 11% lead? They are over 57% above the curve and this is supposed to be taken seriously?

They show a 54% approval for Obama and pollster shows it at 47%? They overstate approval by 7 points and understate disapproval by 4 points. Their spread is 11 points positive for Obama. Pollster shows 1 point negative for Obama. Their ratio is off by 12 points and we are supposed to take this seriously?

I can't believe these two companies that claim to be "news organizations" aren't embarassed to put out such a bad poll.



Basically subtract 5 from Obama's and the Democrats numbers and add 5 to the GOPs and you have reality.

And for perspective... the final ABC News/Washington Post in 1994 had the Democrats up 47-42 in the Generic ballot.



You guys are a riot! When it does not show what you like it's biased. So I guess every time I see a Ras poll I should dismiss that for the same reason? What should be more alarming to the GOP is the AZ poll that showed a huge shift on hispanic voters against Jan Brewer and the whole AZ GOP (-46 differential if memory serves), but let's keep up that immigration policy it's a real winner!



Hey guys, up next to the party breakdown is a button called (chart). I suggest you click it, and see that the party breakdown of this poll is not off from the trends found over all polls.

Hope this helped.



"So I guess every time I see a Ras poll I should dismiss that for the same reason?"

What? I don't know about you but almost every liberal on this site dismisses a rasmussen poll each and every time it comes out. Except for those few days that it showed better results for Obama than Gallup. You guys absolutely loved rasmussen for those polls. You hate them again.

"the party breakdown of this poll is not off from the trends found over all polls."

What? I did. Look at the numbers I posted above. They are off by 57%. That is significant. They are off by 125% on the generic ballot. These numbers don't come anywhere near the pollster composite numbers.

These numbers are much, much further outside the curve than any of the rasmussen polls you liberals complain so much about. This is beyond "house effect". This is ridiculous.


Westwoodnc Westwoodnc:

I don't care much. The Dems will have "good" polls here and there until November.



Here is my personal story about why I think the stimulus bill was a complete failure and why a majority of americans continue to think so and blame democrats for it.

I won't name the company, but my current employer received hundreds of millions of dollars in stimulus money. Shortly after that, they terminated 5,000 employees. Later last year, they closed a plant here in the US and are building a new plant to replace it in Mexico. In January, they announced they are closing another plant here in the US and are building a replacement in China.

In February, I found out that I was losing my job because my employer is going to outsource the work I, and many other employees do to a company in India.

So, this is my personal experience with the stimulus. The government paying companies to put employees on unemployment. 11,000 people from my company are now unemployed and the government helped them do that with with free stimulus money. Money we pay in taxes.

I'm not alone. There are millions of people who have seen the same thing over the past year. And now that the layoffs are starting so companies can afford Obamacare, it will only get worse.



I actually LOve this poll.

It shows that even a heavily left leaning sample still wants:

56% Smaller gov't, fewer services
40% Larger gov't, more services

Sanity is making a comeback..



Seriously, biased? This poll at 34/23/38 D/R/I has the Dems over the Reps by 48/43..... a month ago at 34/24/38 it was the Dems over the Reps 48/44...same poll Do you approve Obama's handling of the economy 49/49 this month last month 45/52..so spare the biased crap.



Obama's approval is linked to public perception of the economy. As the economy improves, so will Obama's numbers.

You can curse the sun for rising, but you can't stop it.



Gary Wagner:

"What? I did. Look at the numbers I posted above. They are off by 57%. That is significant. They are off by 125% on the generic ballot. These numbers don't come anywhere near the pollster composite numbers."

Firstly, it is slightly absurd using percentages like that. Take for example if the combined polls showed a lead to republicans of 1 point and a poll came out with the democrats lead of 2 points, using your percentages the poll would be 'off' by 200% despite being fairly comfortably inside the MoE.

Secondly, ABC/post polls nearly always tend towards the democrats (compared to a poll average), while rasmussen tends towards the republicans (at one point they had Obama at -13 which was even further away from the average than this poll.), hence why sites like this take the average of all polls. The only real concern is that the volume of polls that rasmussen does might be overly influential on the averages especially in races which polling is scarce.



The party ID breakdown basically mirrors the trendlines that are a composite of all pollsters.




"In February, I found out that I was losing my job because my employer is going to outsource the work I, and many other employees do to a company in India."

I'm sorry. This is a big problem and has been for the whole decade, probably a lot longer. It was definitely a problem during the Bush years, since Kerry brought up the outsourcing issue in 2004. Obviously the stimulus money was not used by your company to hold on to employees. I wish they had. Perhaps they used it to shore up whatever debts or investment losses they incurred? It seems to me that the company would have outsourced the work regardless of whether there was a stimulus or not.

Frankly, I don't know what the government can do to stop outsourcing, because the countries attracting these companies are offering their own incentives. Even huge tax incentives on our part would not make up for the incredible labor savings that result from offshoring work. With the increased connectivity of the internet, it makes it even easier.



It's the economy stupid.

The perception that the economy is turning around is taking hold.

Single issue candidates are going to be pushed to the sidelines as the debate about immigration reform, financial reform, and foreign policy become equally important to voters.


Speedo Bandit:

Shannon, do you seriously believe this poll. ABC and the Washington Post should be mocked and pointed at for be being so damn pathetic. Please use some common sense when looking at these polls. Look at the run down of polls and see how much this poll sticks out. It is propaganda pure and simple. I used to get worried when I saw polls like this, but now I laugh at how ridiculous and embarrassing it is for these organizations. These numbers are intentionally skewed and that is all there is to it.



Aaron, I agree. Capitalism favors cost only, so the American economy is expected to mirror 3rd World economies sometime in the future. The rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer, until a time when the poor here are just as poor as they are in China. That's the inevitability of neo-liberal economics.

The problem is that the only alternative is some kind of socialistic/populist/protectivist or corporatist strategy. I don't understand the concept of adhering to a 17th century or 18th century economics philosophy. Surely we can get beyond capitalism vs socialism.


Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.