It’s no secret that, as a smart Brookings Institution pundit conceded recently to me, that the CBS/New York Times poll “slants left.” So that makes the latest survey all the more bracing for the White House ( if they’d stop ignoring bad news):
[D]espite intense news coverage and widespread public concern about the economic and ecological damage from the gulf disaster, most Americans remain far more concerned about jobs and the nation’s overall economy.
And in that regard, President Obama does not fare well: 54 percent of the public say he does not have a clear plan for creating jobs, while only 34 percent say he does, an ominous sign heading into this fall’s midterm elections.
Respondents were nearly evenly split on the president’s handling of the economy — 45 percent approve, 48 percent disapprove. His job approval rating remains just below 50 percent. And by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, Americans think the country is on the wrong track.
They are also impatient with Mr. Obama’s response to the oil disaster in the gulf, by a large margin, and attribute the spill to risks taken by BP and its partners in the failed well, according to the poll, which was conducted by telephone from June 16 to 2o with 1,259 adults.
And after his widely panned Oval office, the poll shows 59% of respondents don’t think Obama has a plan for cleaning up the Gulf.
The decline in Obama’s fortunes is not solely attributable to the oil spill, of course. It’s been a long time in coming, although Times readers have been sheltered from much of the bad news for Obama ( much like the president himself, we suspect). If they only read the Times, they might have missed the warning signs in the 2009 gubernatorial elections, written off the election of Scott Brown as a fluke, clung to the belief that the public would learn to love ObamaCare and been convinced George W. Bush could be blamed for everything that went wrong. But there’s no averting their eyes now — Obama and his party are in a heap of trouble and the election will in all likelihood deal a punishing blow to Democrats unlucky enough to be on the ballot.
Well he finally flopped on this, eh? I wonder how the netroots are reacting to this change of heart…
At first, like many, I thought it was incredibly tacky for Obama to do an interview tonight and try to hog the spotlight away from McCain’s night.
Well, guess what? Obama just served up McCain’s best gift of the day.
It’s a simple fifteen-second commercial, a perfect soundbite.
—
Barack Obama clip: “I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated. I’ve already said it’s succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.”
John McCain appears, speaks directly to the camera: Nobody. . . except for me.
And I approve THAT message.
“His take: Yes it worked, but I wasn’t wrong to oppose it–because I opposed it. Now, let me tell you how I’m going to win in Afghanistan . . . ”
Abe, you summed up the Obama campaign in 1.5 sentences. We could apply that formula to every flip-flop since the primary.
another version, if I may
His take: In normal circumstances, as an average clinger, I would say, “I’m wrong”, but I can change ocean levels, so, you know….
Barack Obama is a very dangerous left-wing ideologue. Subconsciously, many well meaning folks are cutting him slack because of the color of his skin. Just pretend that he looks like George McGovern. Say repeatedly to yourself:
I must respond to Barack Obama as if he possessed blond hair and blue eyes.
Everybody should try to learn more about the contest of 1972 between Richard Nixon and George McGovern. By the beginning of September, the race was essentially over. McGovern lost by a landslide. What has changed since that time? I am convinced the main difference is that Obama is a “man of color.”
David Thomson you really have been on a roll lately. You must be taking some courses from Harvard!! Although I agree with your basic premise, there is a little more to it. In 1972 there was a consensus in relation to the Cold War; McGovern broke from that. Today the consensus in relation to Iraq and terrorism in general is murky. Also, as difficult as it may be for some younger readers to believe, in 1972 Nixon was viewed as a very competent, successful president, unlike Bush whose party label is a great liability for McCain.
“I’ve already said it’s succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.” Because he dreamed about bringing the troops home and conceding defeat. The only victory Obama dreams about is the election.
sometimes just to stomach the man requires a willing suspension of disbelief
“You must be taking some courses from Harvard!!”
Oh no, I am not doing anything quite that drastic. I merely visit Harvard’s website —and that alone increases my I.Q. by a minimum of ten percentage points.
Does Senator Obama mean that when McCain pushed for the surge, he didn’t provide in advance a detailed account of how things would turn out to be, number by number, event by event?
Is he implying that McCain’s position was a wild, irrational gamble, and that even McCain, if pressed, should admit he himself is surprised by the success of the surge?
Sounds like something an intellectually confused mind like Sen. Obama’s might actually think…
You are all overreacting to an intelligent and nuanced statement. Of course, your plantation politics don’t allow you to view through any lense other than the racist one.
Remember the wisdom of Forbes, as he has written so many times on this blog: don’t feed the trolls
in reference to #10
Could you post a link to (a video) the O’Reilly interview w/Obama somewhere after it shows at 8pm EST
if it becomes available? (I don’t get cable) .
Thanks!
Nepat, oh oh!! Using that favorite liberal word to convey superior thought: nuanced. Yes, John Kerry talked about it all the time. Keep it up. You Obama folk will nuance yourselves right into political oblivion.
For El Uno to admit error gets us right back to the therapeutic cullture recently dicussed in these august postings.
Nepat, our resident eugenics troll, is back. This fellow, who several days ago suggested that Palin’s decision to bring her Down’s child to term “depleted the gene pool” and thus, was cause enough for him to “work against her” now becomes an advocate for something he calls “nuance.”
Nepat, who apparently never met an Aktion T4 he didn’t like, wants to educate the rest of us in nuance.
Well, that was underwhelming. They’re spreading the whole interview over 4 nights.
Obama STILL won’t say he was wrong on the surge (wonder what their internal polls say to make that verboten).