Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: Obama (Gallup 10/16-19)


Gallup
10/18-19/09; 1,521 adults, 3% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Gallup release)

National

Do you think the country is -- or is not -- more deeply divided this year on the major issues facing the country than it has been in the past several years?
68% More deeply, 29% Not more deeply

Regardless of which presidential candidate you preferred, do you think the Obama administration will or will not be able to do each of the following?

Increase respect for the United States abroad:
60% Yes, will, 38% No, will not

Improve the health care system:
46% Yes, 52% No

Reduce unemployment:
51% Yes, 46% No

Control federal spending:
31% Yes, 67% No

Keep the U.S. safe from terrorism:
57% Yes, 40% No

Bring U.S. troops home from Iraq in a way that is not harmful to the U.S.:
56% Yes, 41% No

Bring U.S. troops home from Afghanistan in a way that is not harmful to the U.S.:
46% Yes, 50% No

Heal political divisions in this country:
28% Yes, 69% No

 

Comments
Stillow:

Yikes. 68 saying we are more divided....wierd, Obama was supposed to bring us all together.

The dangerous quesion here was controlling federal spending.......people if we cannot do that, we will hae no country left in a few years....we are burined neck high in debt....and its pulling us under like quicksand.

____________________

Stillow:

Yikes. 68 saying we are more divided....wierd, Obama was supposed to bring us all together.

The dangerous quesion here was controlling federal spending.......people if we cannot do that, we will hae no country left in a few years....we are burined neck high in debt....and its pulling us under like quicksand.

____________________

Xenobion:

I recall compassionate conservatism, uniter not a divider, ect. Noone I think can heal partisanship where its at right now. Anyways, it takes a Democrat to balance the budget as history shows us.

____________________

Stillow:

X, watch out, cus that argument coudl be turned to say it takes a conservative congress to balance the budget.................!

____________________

Farleftandproud:

The reality is that our divisions in the US are beyond anything a president can do. Obama has trie more than any president in our time to pick Republicans in his administration and to high positions, like Laque in NY, Huntsman the Gov of Utah and keeping a Bush Appointee Gates. He can try as hard as he can and it just won't sway many stubborn Americans to not be partisan. In this 21st century hysterical political climate, Obama can do just so much but healing political divisions, is totally impossible. It is a complete Geographic thing.

____________________

Stillow:

Farleftandproud

Choosing Huntsman was not a glorious show of getting along, he did that to remove Huntsman as a possible presidential challenger to him in 2012. Gates was kept becaue we are war and it woudl be irresponsible to have changed in the midst of a war. Bush got along well with Dems early on with that crappy no child left behind and some other stuff.

Obama is highly partisan, just like the rst of 'em...no real change here.

____________________

platanoman:

He removed him as possible presidential challenger? What about Jim Leach, Ray Lahood, or Judd Gregg? Where they going to challenge the president in 2012? Come on.

____________________

Stillow:

Is that the same Leach who supported Obama for president? And Gregg stepped out after he found what partisan stuff Obama was up to with the census.

____________________

Gopherguy:

Here are my solutions to end the large partisan divide. Please let me know if any of my reasons are correct, off base, or somewhere in the middle.

1. The media. MSNBC and Fox for obvious reasons. Also the for profit media. Media sensationalizes and frames issues likely to catch attention rather than properly report the facts and check the facts of stories. I don't advocate any type of fairness doctrine. I'm advocating not for profit media and to discourage Fox and MSNBC viewing.

2. Private financing of public elections. One man one vote no longer matters because huge donors' voices are headed more than a poor individual because the man with the money has more influence due to money being necessary for election. Public financing would have helped all Republicans last year and Democrats in past elections.

____________________

Gopherguy:

Ending private financing would make politicians accountable to the people. It would cause them to work on the issues that truly matter to people on both sides of the aisle.

____________________

Stillow:

If memory serves, allpresidents make an effort to appoint a couple spots to the opposing party....didn't Bush put in Norman Mineta for transportation sec?

____________________

Stillow:

Gopherguy

Sure a unbiased media would help, but that will never happen i nthe real world. Its about money, just like politics. Look how much money Bloomberg and Corzine spent this year......huge amounts of cash. Money talks, everything else walks. The media and politicans make more money the more divided the country is. It sucks, but its just how it will be.

____________________

Gopherguy:

You're right, but that doesn't mean it can't change. If you and I and everyone else wants it to change it will change. No one can take away one man one vote, not as long as we abide by the constitution.

____________________

platanoman:

"Is that the same Leach who supported Obama for president? And Gregg stepped out after he found what partisan stuff Obama was up to with the census"


Umm Leech and Gregg are Republicans. Gregg said he didn't resign because of "partisan stuff with Obama". Let's not forget Robert Gates who consider himself a Republican or General Jim Jones who endorsed John Mccain

____________________

Stillow:

What is your point? Its pretty normal for presidents to get support and make appointees fro mthe other party...I pulled the one out from memory from Bush....if we researched I am sure there are more, probably some zcars, etc inthere too.

So its not like Obama is the first.......

____________________

Polaris:

Anyways, it takes a Democrat to balance the budget as history shows us.

Xenebion,

Are you serious? Obama has so far wracked up more debt than GWB did his entire first two terms! (Per the CBO)

-Polaris

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

The partisan divide will not heal because the people are polarized! What we disagree on is fundamental, and it's been that way since America was founded. No one can stop that because you can't force people to see things the way you do.

ie: health care. If you deconstruct all the arguments, it comes down to how you define what health care is. Is it a commodity or is it a right? All lines of argument diverge from there.

____________________

Bigmike:

Did anyone else notice that, at least in the 3 big races, the incumbent party got replaced?

I think there are a lot of people dissatisfied with govt. Probably for very different reasons. Libs who don't think BO is lib enough. Cons who think the GOP isn't conservative enough. The economy stinks. The deficits are over the top.

I could go for throwing them ALL out and starting with a fresh batch. Are there any libs out there who want to make a deal? You promise to vote for the Green Party and I will promise to vote for the Libertarians. It's time to send the Big 2 a message. Do your job for a change.

____________________

Thaddeus:

Polaris:
Not sure where the CBO tracks debts, but according to the Treasury department's "Debt to the Penny" that's not even close to a true statement.
GWB in 8 years: 4.9 trillion dollars ($4,894,621,693,708.39 to be more specific)
Obama (1/21-11/05): 1.35 trillion (1,353,538,068,171.16)

And for reference Clinton: 1.6 trillion ($1,558,036,760,971.78)

None is chump change, that's for sure. Even as a Dem, I agree with Stillow that we are on a unsustainable path. Any panel on solutions should have Bill and Newt on it, they came the closest in modern history.

Couple observations though:
1) GWB inherited a close to balanced budget, where Obama inherited a over 400B annual deficit.
2) Neither inherited a great economy, but I don't remember talk about the collapse of the global financial markets in 2001.
3) I normally have a hard time blaming a first year budget on any president since the prior year;s budget goes to Oct., however this year Obama and congress did pass much new spending on top of the current budget.

T

____________________

RAG2:

@ Stillow:

Your crediting a Republican Congress for balancing the budget in the 1990's is flawed. The actual heavy lifting was done in 1993 by Bill Clinton and Congressional Democrats--who cut spending and raised taxes on the wealthiest 1% of Americans. US News & World Report predicted that Clinton's budget "would not take ONE PENNY off the deficit", and Reps predicted another recession (on the heals of the one we'd just left). The opposite happened. We had more prosperity under Clinton than under Reagan, and the deficit was greatly reduced even BEFORE the Reps had their turn at it. And Clinton vetoed most of their budgets; by the time he actually signed one most of the deficit was ALREADY GONE. (And Clinton, not the GOP Congress, really deserves credit for welfare reform too. By the time they passed a bill Clinton would sign, he'd already granted waivers for oner half the states to do their own thing.)

____________________

RAG2:

Clarifiers: "Clinton vetoed must of their budgets"--most of the GOP's budgets. "He'd granted waivers of oner half the states"--"oner" was supposed to be "over".

____________________

RAG2:

By the way, it's the REPUBLICANS who are to blame for the polarization. Democrats have bent over backwards over the last 15 years to meet the GOP halfway, and Reps haven't reciprocated. For them, it's "my way or the highway". Max Baccus labored hard to work out a minimalist, compromise health-care bill, only got Olympia Snowe. By the way, the GOP bill only cover 3 milliono of the 47 million uninsured and allows HC companies to keep denying care to sick people and people with pre-existing conditions. Some compromise.

Reps only want 2 things: Power for its own sake, and a complete privitization of the public safety net. (Didja forget how they tried to privatize SS only 4 years ago?) "Ownership Society" = "On-Your-Own Society"

____________________



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