Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: National Survey (PPP 7/9-12)

Topics: National , poll

Public Policy Polling (D)
7/9-12/10; 667 registered voters, 3.8% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(PPP release)

National

Obama Job Approval
45% Approve, 52% Disapprove (chart)
Dems: 81 / 16 (chart)
Reps: 9 / 88 (chart)
Inds: 40 / 56 (chart)

Do you support or oppose President Obama's health care plan, or do you not have an opinion?
40% Support, 53% Oppose

Would you be more or less likely to vote for a candidate who was endorsed by ____, or would it not make a difference?
Barack Obama: 32% More likely, 49% Less likely, 15% No difference
Bill Clinton: 31% More likely, 43% Less likely, 23% No difference
Sarah Palin: 30% More likely, 51% Less likely, 17% No difference

 

Comments
Paleo:

Pretty crummy numbers. Ironically, some of his, and the Democrats, worst numbers have come from PPP and Democracy Corps.

Until Obama starts fighting, and attacking, these middling numbers will continue.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Let the left-wing spin begin... 3....2....1.... GO!

____________________

Publius:

Let the right wing overconfidence continue.

____________________

Xenobion:

Obama at 45% obviously he's so close from being impeached! There's the right wing spin for you.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I have always found that July in recent years has not been the best month for Democrats. Even in a good Democratic year, it looked like George Allen, Burns from Montana and Talent in Missouri were going to keep those senate seats, and that didn't happen. 2008, Obama went overseas and he was suddenly seeing an evaporating lead against Mccain, and Last July the GOP was able to try to "break Obama" as Jim Demint would say to help delay moving health care forward and Democrats were victimized in August by the mob rule tactics of the far right. This July's polls are no different.

I think if the GOP shows the same kinds of tactics this summer it will only hurt them. They want to try to win over some Hispanics and in some areas asians; they won't do that if they come across as racist and painting Obama as a "african jungle man". If they could do it to Obama, they would probably make fun of Asians too. Chris Christie in NJ won some communties where Eastern Indians were huge in number. They typically are centrists who must have liked something about Christie, but it may work for him, but won't work in these states if the GOP wants to win on a larger scale.

____________________

seg:

Paleo:
PPP and Democracy Corps use LV, just like Rasmussen.

If you don't like surprises come election time, use LV. If you want to feel more optimistic, look only at polls that use RV and Adults. In fact, after 1 September don't look at polls at all since they all switch to LV then. Those that don't, simply quit polling so they will not look awful in November (tsk, tsk. Demo numbers always deteriorate when we stop polling!).

"Until Obama starts fighting, and attacking, these middling numbers will continue."

Obama has been vicously attacking straw men and straw arguments since he was elected. Last night on Jon Stewart, I saw Axelrod continue the same strategy. He got not ONE positive reaction from the studio audience.

Moral: smearing your opponents works if you are in good odor. Otherwise, that strategy will only drive Obama's numbers down even further. When you are in charge, you need to show some results. I mean good results, not what we have been getting.

____________________

ndirish11:

Obama's approval hasn't changed a lot in the past 8 months. It is slightly trending down but still in the mid 40s. And unless the economy gets notably worse (or better haha) his approval won't differ that much more. If his numbers stay in the mid 40s, he can still easily be re-elected in 2012.

____________________

Paleo:

"PPP and Democracy Corps use LV"

If you look at the top of the page, you'll see that it says registered voters.

____________________

Poll Troll:

FLAP you are nuts. July not a good month for democrats? This trend has been obvious since late march. Look at RCP approval composite. What people like about Christie is he was CUTTING spending and CUTTING taxes. People from totalitarian regimes are rightfully uncomfortable with Chairman Obama.

nah nah nah nah, nah nah nah nah, hey hey hey, GOODBYE!

____________________

Stillow:

"Xenobion:
Obama at 45% obviously he's so close from being impeached! There's the right wing spin for you."

You have to stop straining yourself with these clever posts. Many of us here are worried about your well being.

Weren't we told by lefties that HCR was gaining support?

49 percent less likely to vote for someone Barry endorses. Uh oh, cus Barry was just here in NV endorsing Reid...hahahaha! Barry just aniled the coffin shut on H. Reid. We owe Barry one for that!

Now we just need to get him out to CA to endorse Boxer.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

No, Christie won in NJ over some Indian Asians because he seemed to have a positive plan for small businesses. I have to say that both parties in America have a huge tax on small businesses to continue. Howard Dean, a liberal governor in VT, and Ed Rendell in PA did a lot to reduce the business tax while governor. What happens is when taxes are cut, other taxes go up, which has affected small businesses the most. If the GOP had worked for small businesses, it would have been small businesses with the tax decreases under Bush, instead of those who downsize and send our jobs to Mexico.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

ANd good Republicans like Scott Brown or even Christie, do not play the race card and are not strictly catering to the party line. If CA had picked Campbell as their GOP nominee, I would be much more worried about the GOP gaining the senate.

____________________

Paleo:

"What people like about Christie is he was CUTTING spending and CUTTING taxes."

Whose taxes did he cut? I live in New Jersey and not a single person has received a tax cut since Christie took office. In fact, by eliminating the property tax rebate, many people will, in effect, be paying higher taxes.

____________________

real_american:

Healthcare support is up all the way to 40%? Will those of you who claimed that approval would skyrocket after it was passed and would become the number one winning issue for dems in the fall explain if this is the bump you were talking about or if you still think that everyone will suddenly fall in love with it in the next 3 months.

I'm not a poll expert but I don't think having 60% of voters not approving of the biggest piece of legislation in history is good for the party that passed it without a single vote from the other party.

A hilarious side-note in this poll is that only 46% of voters will admit to having voted for Obama. 9% say "someone else or don't remember". We know Nader and everyone else combined got about 2% of the vote so that means there are 7% of voters who voted for Obama but are ashamed to admit it - even to an anonymous pollster.

____________________

Xenobion:

Stillow I have a response for this type of poll that I posted a couple months ago.

Stillow - "You libs just watch, Obama's approval is just going to sink like the Titanic."

1 year later 4 points down.

Keep wishing, perhaps Obama will come to you at night dressed up as tinkerbell and make it come true!

____________________

Field Marshal:

It will take some time for the ObamaBots, those that voted for him, to change their vote on him. Its too early yet. He's basically only lost those that did not vote for him and a small percentage that did and were on the fence about doing so.

However, the ardent voters will more easily change their vote for their rep or senator or gov. Give Obama another year of F-ing up and he will start to lose those devotees as well.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Paleo: You know NJ better than I do. If Christie doesn't cut spending or taxes, he will probably be tea bagged in 2013. I would like to see how someone like Sharron Angle would do in NJ.

I guess even Christie, may be another wolf in a sheep's disguise.

I often wonder how Snow and Collins have remained in the same party as all the fanatics. They may not remain republicans if Snowe gets tea bagged in 2012.

____________________

JPB11011:

I live in NJ as well. Christie hasn't cut taxes except to let the punative millionaire's tax expire and to campaign for rejection of the local school budgets where he was 67% successful.

Right now he is focused on cutting the spending and fixing the mess by decades of mismanagement and giveaways to the unions.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I guess Christie won't be running for president in 2012 than. He can't be worse than Bob Mcdonnell in VA? That guy is what I would call a member of the Christian Taliban, or the Christian Reich! GAY STATE WORKERS NEED NOT APPLY

UNMARRIED TEACHERS NEED NOT APPLY

UNMARRIED PEOPLE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ADAPT CHILDREN

____________________

Field Marshal:

Amazing. Simply amazing farleft.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Okay, I meant to say, "Unmarried teachers living with someone of the opposite sex" hae been discriminated against in some of the Bible belt states. You can google this.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

It is puzzling how the country goes to such extremes, and doesn't seem to find a happy medium. The new genre of GOP candidates seem to be big money ceo's like Fiorina in CA or Ron JOhnson in WI who have been guilty of outsourcing jobs and being connected to big oil, by investing in BP (Ron Johnson in WI)

Not sure about Fiorina, but I can prove, that senate candidate in WI has a rising stock currently in BP

The other type of Republican is the tea party fanatics like Paul, Angle and the pioneer of them all, figuratively, Jim Demint. A combo or fanatical Christian conservativism, anti- IRS, anti-tax, anti public schools, anti-choice (Even in cases of sexual assault incest)

I have come up to bat within my party to support candidates who have pro-life leanings like Stupak, and those who don't support hardline control. I have really tried hard to sometimes encourage centrists within my own party. It just seems like the GOP isn't doing the same. I think Scott Brown, Snowe and Collins will get very frustrated in the next election when they have to say they are running as Republicans. They have just sabataged centrists in just about every part of the country other than parts of New England and the West Coast, and MD

Do I believe that Obama will be heckled next January or this Sept when he gives a major speech? I would bet $100 he'll get heckled. Jim Demint said he wished he had said "You lie" instead of the guy who did.

____________________

Louis:

More likely- less likley is meaningless unless it is only asked of undecided and perhaps leaning voters. Otherwise you get distortions from people who have no intention of voting a particular way saying they are less likly because of their atipathy toward a particular person.
breaking down the less likely and more likely by Republican , Independent and Democarat would give you more meaningful results.

____________________

Paleo:

"Christie hasn't cut taxes except to let the punative [sic] millionaire's tax expire."

The surtax expired before he took office. He vetoed a version of it that would have applied to fewer taxpayers.

Punative? LOL, to quote FM. The state needed to close a budget gap. Spending was cut in absolute terms from the previous budget. Would you have preferred it if they had raised everyone's taxes? Somehow, I think not.

____________________

Paleo:

"If Christie doesn't cut spending or taxes, he will probably be tea bagged in 2013."

He faced a teabagger last year, Steve Lonegan. And may face him next time. But New Jersey Republicans still maintain a somewhat "moderate" streak, so I don't think it will go anywhere.

And Christie has cut spending, as Corzine did in his last budget.

____________________

real_american:

@FM: "It will take some time for the ObamaBots, those that voted for him, to change their vote on him."

You have to consider the race factor. Obama's people, his surrogates, and even his supporters here on this site are constantly playing the race card. People know that someone will get in their face and start screaming racist if they simply disagree with his spending plans or anything else he does.

It's not just that people are afraid of being called racist, though that's part of it. Some of the liberals have been so race bait brainwashed that they think opposing Obama means that they actually are racist and they are appalled at that thought.

The race card has always been a democrat tool since the blacks shifted away from the republicans in the 1940's, but it has never been as successful as it is right now.

We're dealing with a new dynamic here. Most people screaming racism will never change their approval of Obama because they believe their own rhetoric and are afraid of becoming a racist by opposing something he does.

____________________

Paleo:

The race card has always been a democrat [sic] tool since the blacks shifted away from the republicans in the 1940's [sic], but it has never been as successful as it is right now.

I guess the national Democrats were playing the race card when the sought to end segregation in the south in the 1960s.

Seems to me I've seen more "playing the race card race card" on here than cries of racism. It's a tricky tactic to claim the race card is being played even when it isn't.

____________________

vincent106:

@Paleo

You call other people liars and then have the nads to say more people talk about the race card over people being called racists? Youre a joke dude.

____________________

seg:

Paleo:
Wow! You are right. Registered voters. I just assumed it was LV because it is so bad for demos and PPP often does LV.

ndirish11:
Obama can certainly be re-elected if he starts at 45%. He can also lose if he starts that low.

Finally, he can also fall much, much lower. If you look around the world, liberals and socialists are faring poorly. Something about over-spending, sovereign debt, fear of rampant inflation, dire necessity of making painful cuts, raising taxes, loss of confidence in basic competence. Probably not relevant in America.

Unlike the rest of the world, Obama also has an increasingly unpopular war. Unlike poor Bush, Obama's opposition has not made a partisan issue of it for Obama, and liberal "pacifists" have turned into poodles.

However, if we lose a large battle or make concessions that go over poorly, watch out! If Iran tests a nuclear weapon and an intercontinental missle before the election (as the CIA says will probably happen), watch out!

The only thing Obama polls well in is foreign affairs. It is the one thing he has faced no significant tests in - so far. Watch out!

____________________

ndirish11:

Right now we have hit bottom for Obama. Low 40s is the bottom, it's not going any lower. The people who are supporting him are the democrats and the liberal independents. Obama's approvals are not going to go down or change noticeably unless the economy improves or gets a lot worse or some other major unforeseen event occurs.

____________________

real_american:

"I guess the national Democrats were playing the race card when the sought to end segregation in the south in the 1960s."

I'm confused. Are you talking about Senator Robert Byrd, the only senator to have started his own Ku Klux Klan group and who fillibustered the 1960's civil rights legislation? I'm pretty sure he was not only a "national democrat", he was the leader of the "national democrats".

But some people have moved on from the 1960's, just like most have moved on beyond the 1860's when the democrats wanted to keep slavery so badly that they started a war over it.

So, do you want to talk about the 21st century, the 20th century, or the 19th century?

Some people change with time. In case your watch broke, this is 2010 - not 1960. If you think nothing has changed, you've been asleep for 50 years.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"If you look around the world, liberals and socialists are faring poorly."

Really?

What countries are you referring to here and what criteria are you using?"

here's some elections that occurred in 2010

The Francophile socialist party in Belgium gained seats in their June parliamentary elections. They have 6-7 parties that could be termed "liberal" in one way or another including two socialist parties.

Poland - civic platform is the centre-right party and they've had an edge for a while now, not much swing there.

Slovakia - social democrats gained, christian democrats declined

Japan - liberal democrats gained. Democrats declined although they are still in control which is significant considering the liberal democrats basically had hegemony until recently. I don't know how you'd categorize either of these parties as "liberal" or "conservative" - Japanese don't think that way. Some factions within the lib dems might be what you'd call "liberal."

I guess you're thinking of the UK and Netherlands. Listening to the rhetoric between Brown, Cameron, and Clegg, I'd say the UK conservatives have liberalized considerably since Thatcher and Major (Labour became somewhat more conservative under Blair). The UK Lib Dems are a weird mix of libertarian and collectivist positions.

Germany - Merkel's centre-right coalition is clearly cracking as evidenced by the recent presidential balloting.

The "liberals" in the Netherlands are split between 4 or 5 parties - some gained, the major one lost. Centre-left "christian democratic" parties are declining all over Europe mostly for reasons unrelated to economic ideology. The VVD is hardly "conservative" by our standards - they are fully supportive of universal health care, for example. But yes, they're not the socialists. Nationalist, nativist parties gained - the PVV. The Dutch have 6 major parties, I would call only 1 "conservative," 4 varying degrees of liberal, 1 moderate.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"Finally, he can also fall much, much lower. "

I've been saying for a while now that if anything is going to bring down Obama, it's going to be the wars.

____________________

real_american:

@Aaron_in_TX:

"I've been saying for a while now that if anything is going to bring down Obama, it's going to be the wars."

I think it will be the economy, taxes, and healthcare.

If we return to the Clinton tax hikes next year, people making less than $250,000 will be absolutely shocked at how much their taxes go up. If you tell the average family their federal taxes are going up $2,000 per year, they'll turn on him.

If we see 20 - 30 million people lose their insurance because of Obamacare, they'll turn on him.

If the average family sees their health insurance costs go up $3,000 per year, they'll turn on him.

If he passes cap and tax and the average family sees their energy costs go up $2,000 per year, they'll turn on him.

If he gets his European style VAT tax and it costs the average family $2,000 per year, they'll turn on him.

If his tax hike causes a double dip recession (or depression as many are now fearing) and we see 15% unemployment, they'll turn on him.

So imagine the perfect storm of all of these things happening. The average family's taxes and healthcare costs go up by $10,000 per year, we have 15% unemployment, we have more uninsured people than before Obamacare was passed, and we are still running trillion dollar debts, people will definitely turn on him.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"The average family's taxes and healthcare costs go up by $10,000 per year, we have 15% unemployment,"

LOL, this is not going to happen. That's Glenn Beckian sensationalism.

"I think it will be the economy, taxes, and healthcare."

From the republican perspective. Domestic initiatives other than cutting taxes are rarely popular nowadays with the public regardless of what party they originate from. Democrats don't care about taxes as much, and health care makes the majority of them happy (a minority is disappointed). Democrats (or progressives before 1932) have been fighting for that for 100 years. Sure, it could have been better, but the fact remains that it's been a liberal wet dream that Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Clinton all talked about and failed (LBJ did get half a loaf with medicare/medicaid). Obama succeeded, with a big assist from Pelosi.

It'd be as if a republican president was elected and actually got a bill passed that outlawed abortion. All conservatives huff and puff about abortion and no republican president has delivered.

The intensity surrounding health care has been dying down for a while now. Immigration is the new cool thing to complain about.

No, what will bring him down will be the cratering of support among people who voted for him thinking he was going to get us out of the wars. Americans have no patience for endless wars; never have. Even WWII would have become unpopular, that's one of the reasons Truman wanted to end it so quickly.

George Bush did not fall below 40 until he started to piss off his own supporters with Harriett Miers, poor handling of Katrina and the wars, and immigration.

____________________

real_american:

@Aaron:

"Democrats don't care about taxes as much, and health care makes the majority of them happy"

The devil is in the details and time will tell. I happen to think that no matter what the intent of this bill, congress is so inept, corrupt, greedy, and downright stupid that our healthcare system will be far worse with this bill that had they done nothing at all.

The supposition of, "Something is better than nothing" is completely false.

The best thing that could happen to the democrats is if the republicans are able to get the 42 votes needed to overturn the healthcare disaster before it destroys people's lives.

Healthcare furor has died down slightly. 56% still want it repealed, down from 61%. That's not exactly loving it.

But unless congress acts, 2 million people will lose their insurance in 6 weeks (September 1st).

Most companies begin their annual health insurance sign-up in the fall. In a couple of months, people are going to see that their premiums are going up 25% - 30%.

Then more damage starts next year. More and more medicare patients will lose their doctors. There will be another huge premium increase next year.

Then it really gets bad is 2014. By that time, premiums will be 70% higher than now and 15 million people will have lost their employer insurance.

But that's not the worst. By 2020, insurance premiums will have more than doubled, it will be nearly impossible for medicare patients to get treatment, and the figures will come out showing that the real cost over 10 years was $2.6 trillion - not $900 billion.

But the democrats have their head in the sand and rely on phony numbers that make them feel good.

____________________

Field Marshal:

George Bush did not fall below 40 until he started to piss off his own supporters with Harriett Miers, poor handling of Katrina and the wars, and immigration.

Diagree Aaron. I think the spending is what pissed off his ardent supporters along with the war in Iraq going poorly and immigration. I think most conservatives realized that the media excoriation of Bush for Katrina was false.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

" I think the spending is what pissed off his ardent supporters along with the war in Iraq going poorly and immigration. I think most conservatives realized that the media excoriation of Bush for Katrina was false."

Well, what did he spend on? The wars. Yeah, medicare part D but that was not something I heard republicans complain about. It's funny you mention spending as a reason for his decline when I don't remember them complaining. I first remembered complaining from republicans about Harriet Miers and REALLY heard it over immigration.

The most intense increase of the deficit took place in Bush's first term.

People tend to overlook a lot of spending when it's spending they agree with.

____________________



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.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR