Then you’re being out-cited by a troll, which doesn’t say much for you. I think he’s wrong about 46 or 50 percent being rock solid support - you don’t need polls to tell you how divided and frustrated the country is - but that’s not trolling. At most it’s being obstinate.
Travelling on business Venetian? Away from your normal ISP?
Sometimes obsitnate equals being a jerk, but you can’t see that, apparently.
Its part of the new “Enemy List”* function, kind of like the Friend List, but if somebody on it is getting a pile on, it alerts you.
*Only available to premium subscribers.
Anyone that disagrees with you is not your enemy.
http://www.dailykos.com/ Here is a neutral site that says Obama’s approval is 54 and unfavorable 44.
Actually, any amount of support could be considered rock solid as long as it’s unwavering. Three percent support could be ‘rock solid’ if it was unlikely to go lower than that.
In other words, the term ‘rock solid’ doesn’t mean a plurality; it just means that the number is unlikely to change.
Having said that, however, I don’t think Obama’s overall approval rating of 46% or 50% (or whatever it is currently) meets that criteria as it continues to wane. And the country’s support/approval for his handling of the health care bill is even lower - somewhere around 35%, IIRC.
So while it could be said that a certain percentage of Obama’s support is rock solid, I don’t think it can be said that it’s ‘rock solid’ at 50% - or anywhere close to it.
And I expect Obama’s support to fall further unless he pulls a Clinton and moves much more toward the center…which I think he will do. He doesn’t seem so inclined toward the “Full steam ahead and damn the consequences” approach that the Democrats in congress have adopted since the election.
The thing is, this is still a center-to-center-right country. Obama was not elected because the populace had suddenly shifted leftward, but because so many people had become bitterly disappointed in the way that Bush and the Republican party had been running things. Pelosi, Reid & Co., and certain of their minions in congress, then mistakenly took the results of the election to mean that the country had shifted left in its politics and they could pretty much do whatever they wanted to, which as usual was spend, spend, spend, and to try to ram through a health care bill that most of the country doesn’t want and is dubious about and frightened of.
So we’re beginng to see the chickens come home to roost in the ever-increasing popularity of Sarah Palin, the recent election of two Republican governors and the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. And now, in the wake of Brown’s election in particular, Obama and certain members of congress are beginning to back off and issue statements to the effect that they may have lost touch with the American people and that a slower, more considered approach may be called for.
Pelosi, Reid & Co. would do well to recognize that also.
They may well be telling the truth, Gonz, probably are. But they damn sure ain’t neutral. This kind of thing goes on your permanent record, you know…
Then why didn’t they elect McCain? Certainly conservative enough. Sarah Palin was certainly popular with the American right, which so dominates a center-right nation. He was all mavericky and stuff, pointedly distanced from the Bushes.
But Obama, campaigning on a Trotskyist agenda, kicked his ass into next week.
See the problem?
No, no problem at all.
One, the Democrats convinced everyone that McCain was going to be GWB II; two, the idea of Palin being a heartbeat away from the presidency scared away a significant number of conservative voters; three, contrary to what you say, Obama actually hid much of his, as you put it, ‘Trotskyist’ side, presenting himself as a centrist who would govern to serve both sides - something which in practice he’s done very little of; and four, people had no idea how arrogantly and forcefully Congress would behave once it had a Democrat in the Oval Office.
I have no doubt that had Obama campaigned by saying that he and Congress would do the things they’ve ended up doing, McCain would have won by a very significant margin, even with Palin on the ticket.
Obama has been absurdly centrist, to the point that his approval ratings are below 50%. He hasn’t gone after guns, he has taken measures to prosecute the war in Afghanistan… about the only thing he has done that might be considered leftist (unfortunately, because it should not be a left/right topic) was to pursue universal health care.
Obama is by far the most centrist politician I have seen in my lifetime. Trotskyist? You must be kidding. Has it come to this, that someone who is so willing to compromise that he all but sabotages himself is seen as “Trotskyist”? If so, I’m ashamed to be a “right-winger”, inasmuch as I lean that way being a centrist and all.
Awkward.
As a matter of fact, I was.
If you’ll recall, luci was the one who originally referred to Obama as having a Trotskyist agenda. I merely went along with it in a somewhat playful, ornery, sense, not imagining that anyone would take it so seriously.
I’ve been taking a bit of a break from the boards lately, as I’ve come to feel that it’s been getting me too cranked up. Perhaps you should do the same.
Pollster.com averages all the polls out at 49.0% approval, 45.5% disapproval (as of earlier this week).
I don’t know what “rock solid” means in this context but 49% is more than high enough for eventual re-election, based on previous presidential ratings. It’s not remotely stellar but it’s not ZOMG OBAMA IS T3H SUXX0R either.
Um, no. Sarah Palin convinced everyone that McCain was going to be GWB II (or worse, that in the event McCain died she would be GWB II). When Palin joined the campaign a lot of the waverers who otherwise liked McCain ran screaming in the opposite direction. Myself included.
Interestingly enough, if you do do that, you get the Wikipedia page for the number 46.
I agree. That is the only definition that counts. Every president that has been re-elected in the last 40 years has had approval ratings below 50% in the year before the election. If not in reference to re-election chances, what other relevance does “rock solid” have"?
Obama isn’t up for re-election in 2011 as far as I know.
I suspect that Obama’s approval rating on the SDMB is rock solid. So was Diogenes’ conviction that the Mass. Senate race would go Democratic. Perhaps the one has more than a little to do with the other.
Regards,
Shodan
I also recall the one where Burgess Meredith becomes the last man on Earth, discovers an immense library of polling statistics, and breaks his glasses on purpose.
The CBS poll I linked to proved that his disapproval is the worst ever after one year for a president. That seems to me to be more relevant than the actual number.
But since Diogenes has been owned enough in this thread, I figured why pile on.
I don’t know about that. His touchingly naive attempts to actually govern in bipartisan fashion rather than just talking about bipartisan government have turned off a lot of us.
The bailouts are pretty much the only thing he’s done - as opposed to said he’ll do - that I’m happy about.