Half of U.S. Would Vote Against Obama Now

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,860
665
113
50
TX
:00hour :sadwave:

Friday, 15 Jan 2010 10:41 AM
Article Font Size

By: Dan Weil

A new poll shows that if the next presidential election were held today, 50 percent of Americans would vote against Barack Obama.

That amount said they would definitely or probably vote for someone else, according to the Allstate/National Journal Heartland Monitor poll. The amount that would definitely vote against Obama totals 37 percent.

Only 39 percent said they would vote for him, and 23 percent would definitely do so.

As you might expect, Obama?s approval rating slumped to 47 percent in the poll, down from 61 percent in April.

Only 34 percent of respondents view the country as moving in the right direction, down from 47 percent in April. And 55 percent of those surveyed see the country moving in the wrong direction, up from 42 percent in April.

Clearly voters are upset with the Democrats? healthcare reform effort, talk of higher taxes and the surge in unemployment to 10 percent.

Just 41 percent of Americans trust Obama more than Republicans in Congress, while 33 percent trust the Republicans more. That eight-point gap has plunged from 21 points in September.

And what policy areas concern voters the most? Of those who believe Obama has us headed in the wrong direction, 45 percent identify spending and government regulation as a top reason for their view.

Obama?s standing has slumped in other polls as well. According to the latest Fox News survey, his approval rating stands at just 50 percent, down from 65 percent a week after he took office.

That poll also indicated that less than half the country believes he's meeting expectations, and nearly two out of three respondents are dissatisfied with the country?s direction.
 

Skulnik

Truth Teller
Forum Member
Mar 30, 2007
21,010
250
83
Jefferson City, Missouri
And 2000 election was stolen by Bush, whats your point?

Please don't REPEAT a LIE.

TIA.



MEDIA RECOUNT: BUSH
WON THE 2000 ELECTION


April 3, 2001


An Online NewsHour Report

More than three months after Democrat Al Gore conceded the hotly contested 2000 election, an independent hand recount of Florida's ballots released today says he would have lost anyway, even if officials would have allowed the hand count he requested.



Online Special: Covering Election 2000

Online Special: Election Night Timeline

Online Special
Media Watch

Feb. 13, 2001:
The three network news anchors discuss election night.

Dec. 21, 2000:
Members of the media take another look at the disputed Florida ballots.

Dec. 12, 2000:
Four editorial page editors on the Supreme Court recount decision.

Dec. 5, 2000:
Columnists discuss the election.

Nov. 21, 2000:
Five editorial writers on the protracted presidential election.

Nov. 8, 2000:
A look at election night's bad media calls.

Browse the NewsHour coverage of Politics & Campaigns and Law






The Miami Herald

USA Today


In the first full study of Florida's ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court would have been allowed to continue, using standards that would have allowed even faintly dimpled "undervotes" -- ballots the voter has noticeably indented but had not punched all the way through -- to be counted.

The study, conducted by the accounting firm of BDO Seidman, counted over 60,000 votes in Florida's 67 counties, tabulating separate vote totals in several standards categories.

While the USA Today report focused on what would have happened had the Florida Supreme Court-ordered recount not been halted by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Herald pointed to one scenario under which Gore could have scored a narrow victory -- a fresh recount in all counties using the most generous standards.

In their reports, the newspapers assumed counts already completed when the court-ordered recount was stopped would have been included in any official count. Thus, they allowed numbers from seven counties -- Palm Beach, Volusia, Broward, Hamilton, Manatee, Escambia and Madison -- to stand, but applied the most inclusive standards to votes in the rest of the state. If those numbers did not stand, the Herald reported, a more generous hypothetical revisited recount would have scored the White House for Gore -- but with only a 393-vote margin.

Under most other scenarios, the papers reported, Bush would have retained his lead.

The newspapers' review did not include the approximately 110,000 "overvotes" -- ballots cast for more than one candidate. Both papers are planning a separate analysis of overvote numbers next month.

Early reaction
Neither President Bush nor former Vice President Gore have thus far commented on the recount's results. But according to White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, Mr. Bush has put the close election behind him.

"The president believes, just as the American people do, that this election was settled months ago," he told the Herald. "The voters spoke and George W. Bush won."

But former Gore campaign spokesman Doug Hattaway, now working as a Democratic consultant in Boston, said Mr. Gore would have captured the White House had voters' true intentions been determined.

"What this shows is that if you count the voter's intent, Gore wins," he told the Associated Press. "If you look for excuses not to count votes, Bush does better."

In all, the newspapers' recount cost more than $500,000 and employed 27 accountants.

Another recount of all Florida votes -- including both under- and overvotes -- is still in the works under the eye of a consortium of media organizations, including The Associated Press, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and CNN. That review, conducted by the Chicago-based National Opinion Research Center, is due out next month.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Here's the part that I love in the post:

Just 41 percent of Americans trust Obama more than Republicans in Congress, while 33 percent trust the Republicans more.

Only a third of Americans apparently, from your own poll, trust the Republicans more than Obama. Thanks for clearing that up for apparently everyone except staunch conservatives... I know math is hard, trust me, I'm taking a math class right now... but that's something to be happy about if you are a Republican? :shrug:

Seriously, doesn't that pretty much render the rest of the post immaterial? gmroz is on point, as we rarely if ever (don't remember) even elect a President with more than half of the vote. And now, half would vote against him? And where did the poll come from? Fox News viewers? Again, not that it matters, but still...
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
kurby
Here's the part that I love in the post:

Just 41 percent of Americans trust Obama more than Republicans in Congress, while 33 percent trust the Republicans more.

Only a third of Americans apparently, from your own poll, trust the Republicans more than Obama. Thanks for clearing that up for apparently everyone except staunch conservatives... I know math is hard, trust me, I'm taking a math class right now... but that's something to be happy about if you are a Republican? :shrug:

Seriously, doesn't that pretty much render the rest of the post immaterial? gmroz is on point, as we rarely if ever (don't remember) even elect a President with more than half of the vote. And now, half would vote against him? And where did the poll come from? Fox News viewers? Again, not that it matters, but still...

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

hedge is white dog shit:142smilie :142smilie
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
Scott, are you a Black Racist?

You sure come off as one, tell the TRUTH.

TIA.
.......................................................

no I just hate white arians that hate anybody that is not the same pearly white they are.

you havent told the truth in about 3 years
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
Still seems RACIST to me, why does skin color have to be included, just sayin.

:nono:

jmo
.............................................................

Because thats where it starts. Look at how you guys treat the President of the US.

and we all know the reason. Its all about skin color.

you would as soon like for America to be bankrupt or nuked all because a black man is our President.
Its sick and we see it in here everyday.

and that means yellow, black, red, and the rest fall into the same category although you will not admit it. Easier for most to just keep it under the down low so to speak.

its sad really .

I am white but I would have marched with MLK if I had the opportunity. The only problem was that MLK was shot in the head by the same thinking patterns that alot of you use on this forum.

There were so many things just wrong back then.

I dont want to see the US go backwards. We got enough problems without throwing the new President down the tube.

Maybe you will have another NeoCon President in 2012. Hopefully one that will not take us back to where President Cheney took us.

and I really dont give a shit what you think about what I think. You are well known to be unable to reason with one iota. And I recognize that as a waste of my time.

its just easier to call out white dog shit and you will get the message. :kiss:
 
Last edited:

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Yeah, I heard plenty about all of the entire race in Minnesota. Acorn was an extremely small part of it - not that you would have a clue about Minnesota. I live here. Do you have any information about Norm Coleman, his connections, donations to his campaign, trips he took to exotic places paid for by his supporters, who received preferential treatment and favoritism from him, or anything of the sort? Did you watch any of the local coverage of the campaign? Do you know anything about the history of Norm Coleman when he was originally a democrat until he lost his first political campaign, then changed parties? Do you know how he mortgaged the finances and future of St. Paul as Mayor for some big projects that he could attach his name to?

I could add about 10 more things that of course you have no clue about to show how IGNORANT you are to what you bring up as a subject, that have NOTHING to do with any of the people you say I watch and get my news from.

What insight do you think Jon Stewart and Keith Olberman have to that senate race that would jade my opinion about? They aren't local, and very little of what they talked about had to do with this race. But you are too stupid to know that. And you accuse me of of getting my information about the Coleman/Franken race from Stephen Colbert? Actually, you say it's from Cobert - which tells me the depth of your understanding of the situation. Do you know the themes and subject matter of the Colbert Repor? Do you know his commentary is right wing, and humorously over the top so?

Let me save you some time. I've held back until about now. You are an uniformed, unprepared person that really embarrasses yourself in most posts, but because of what I mentioned before, is not smart enough to realize it. I'm not calling you any names here, so save that. I'm explaining something to you that you may or may not be able to understand.

If you want to discuss the inside story of the Minnesota Senate race, feel free. I am very up to date and informed on what happened HERE. If you want to accuse me of something, please make it more impactful than getting my information from a right wing humorist like Stephen Colbert.

Actually, I invite virtually any INTELLIGENT discussion about ANY issue with you. Because I don't need to ridicule you about much of anything. I can use the complete lack of substance or content that you always "use" in your brief, youtube-laced links.

Stephen Colbert... that was the best one yet. You never cease to top yourself with stupid posts. :mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
nice post Chadman

they really dont have the meat and potatos to back up anything they want as NeoCon Conservatives, except they want to fawk Sarah
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top