Michale

Michale

The Left Wingery opposes Obama in the EXACT same manner and magnitude that they opposed Bush over the same policies??

Where??

Michale

It's actually about the policies espoused by the respective parties. But, you know that. :)

Not at all, Liz...

If it was all about the policies, then ya'all would be condemning the Obama administration to the high heavens for his domestic surveillance programs, his drone programs and all the other Obama policies ya'all hated when they were Bush's policies...

The ONLY possible explanation is that Party loyalty trumps policies..

Am I wrong???

Michale

Also remember, Obama was supposed to be defeated because "no president has ever been re-elected with unemployment above 7 percent" -- nothing has ever happened until it does, in other words.

You have to admit that Obama is an aberration in so many ways that one simply cannot make make the case for the norm...

Considering how bad things are getting in this country, I think things are going to be more like the 2014 midterms...

But I have been wrong before.. :D

On the other hand, I WAS right about the results of the 2014 elections. :D

Michale

Not at all, Michale.

It's actually about the policies espoused by the respective parties. But, you know that. :)

Don't know exactly -- I'd go to the RealClearPolitics page and then click on one of the individual polls (some of these links take you to PDF files will all the results and breakdowns). Overall, I think Obama's at at least 75-80% approval among Dems, but I haven't checked in a while.

John M [3] -

Well, it would obviously improve them, that's for sure. Reagan wasn't actually all that popular when during the 1988 campaign, but HWBush won. I think partly a second-term president's approval ratings rise because more of the public is paying more attention to politics in an election year.

See http://www.obamapollwatch.com for all the comparisons (Obama's record compared in charts against all presidents back to Eisenhower).

I have been meaning to talk about this in one of these OPW columns -- what will Obama's final year look like when compared to other two-termers? It won't be as high as Clinton, and it won't be as low as WBush. Right now it looks like it could either be like LBJ:

http://www.chrisweigant.com/cw/wp-content/themes/crispy2/pix/opwpix/bhovlbj.jpg

or perhaps like Reagan:

http://www.chrisweigant.com/cw/wp-content/themes/crispy2/pix/opwpix/bhovrwr.jpg

LBJ wavered in the 40s his whole final year, while Reagan managed to creep up above 50 (but not by much). Maybe next time I'll include these charts in the OPW column....

LizM [4] -

I think you may be right, especially about the coat-tails aspect of O's polling. If he's above 50, the likelihood of
Dems taking the Senate improves a lot.

See? I'm an optimist too!

:-)

Michale [5] -

Well, that might be accurate, but it's kinda limited. Real consistent polling only goes back to Eisenhower (remember: "Dewey Defeats Truman"??) In that period of time, only one president had two terms and was then succeeded by a member of his own party. That's without deaths or resignations, of course. Reagan is the only one who managed it, so there's not a lot of data. We've only really even had three two-termers in that whole time (Reagan, Clinton, WBush). Not enough data to tell, in other words. Also remember, Obama was supposed to be defeated because "no president has ever been re-elected with unemployment above 7 percent" -- nothing has ever happened until it does, in other words.

TheStig [10] -

Yeah, winters have been kind to Obama, overall. Not entirely sure why this is, but it's mostly consistent (he did go down in at least one January period, though).

Speak2 [13] -

We aim to please. The past year (up to October, at least) has been so flat overall that this detail chart has been almost necessary to see ANYthing at all!

Good point also about pres. elections being lost. Dems used to be the champions at doing so, in fact!

-CW

The third condition is mine: I think most of the Prez elections in my lifetime have been lost rather than won.

Don't know if I ever thanked you when you began including the second graphic into this column (w/o the undecideds and a much narrower range for the vertical axis). I'm really glad you have done this and your solution (including both graphics) works perfectly well. So, thank you.

Oh... Wait...

In a shocking reversal of policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are being told to release illegal immigrants and no longer order them to appear at deportation hearings, essentially a license to stay in the United States, a key agent testified Thursday.

"We might as well abolish our immigration laws altogether," suggested agent Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/border-agent-we-might-as-well-abolish-our-immigration-laws-altogether/article/2582401

Par for the course for Obama and the Democrat Party...

Ignore the laws that don't further the Party agenda...

Michale

Why exactly is it "nonsense"??

Because the law says it's illegal??

Well, I can't argue with that. And it's a good thing we have a POTUS who won't change the laws to fit his partisan agenda..

Oh... Wait...

that they trot out to feel better about losing elections?

3 words..

GREAT NUCLEAR SHELLACKING OF 2014..

"Well, that's.. that's like 11 words or something. Why not just come out and say it... 'I love ya'.."
-Ben Affleck, ARMAGEDDON

:D

Michale

Does anybody really believe this nonsense (i.e. that illegal immigrants are voting in significant numbers, and always for Democrats), or is it just another RWNJ zombie meme that they trot out to feel better about losing elections?

Obama reinstates ‘catch-and-release’ policy for illegal immigrants
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/4/obama-reinstates-catch-and-release-policy-illegals/

I guess the Democrat Party is concerned that there won't be enough freshly minted new Democrat voters to ofset all the negatives that the 2 Dem candidates bring to the field... :^/

Michale

That's what I have been saying for years now.. It's all about the '-D'/'-R' after the name. heh

Michale

Well, certainly in this case.. :D

Michale

No incumbent Party has ever retained the White House when the approval rating of the incumbent has been below 50%..

NEVER.. EVER... NOT ONCE....

Does that answer your question, JM??

Michale

If his approval ratings continue to rise through the rest of the year, I think it can only mean that Democrats will not only keep control of the White House but will regain control of the Senate and improve their standing in the House of Representatives.

Of course, I am the resident cockeyed optimist around here. :)