It’s official now. Barack Obama’s ratings are “historically polarized,” according to a new Gallup survey.
Jeffrey Jones of the Gallup organization writes, “The historically high gap between partisans’ job approval ratings of Barack Obama continued during Obama’s third year in office, with an average of 80 percent of Democrats and 12 percent of Republicans approving of the job he was doing… The 68-point gap between partisans’ approval ratings of Obama last year is nine points higher than that for any other president’s third year.” Obama, by the way, holds the record for the most polarized first and second years in office, too. Which means Obama has set a record for polarization every year he’s been in office.
So now is as good a time as any to remind people one of the core claims made by Barack Obama during his presidential campaign wasn’t simply that he would heal the planet; he would also heal the nation’s political breach. He would elevate the national debate. Reason would prevail over emotion. He would do away with what he called the “50 plus one” style of governing. Obama would “turn the page” on the “old politics” of division and anger. He would end a politics that “breeds division and conflict and cynicism.” He would help us to “rediscover our bonds to each other and … get out of this constant petty bickering that’s come to characterize our politics.” He would “cast off the worn-out ideas and politics of the past.”
“I will listen to you,” Obama said on a stage in Grant Park on the night of his election, “especially when we disagree.”
His election, he informed us, was a sign we had “chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.” On the day of his inauguration he came to proclaim “an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics.”
“The time has come to set aside childish things,” he told us on the day of his inauguration. And to paraphrase the Book of Isaiah, a community organizer shall lead us.
Where Obama has led us, it turns out, is to as much polarization as we have ever seen. Our divisions are deeper than they were. Our common ground is less than we could have imagined. Conflict and discord prevail over unity of purpose. Petty bickering characterizes our politics. Obama has wrapped himself in worn-out ideas and the politics of the past. And we have not even fully engaged in the 2012 presidential campaign, which will make our present disunity look like the land of milk and honey.
Whatever the cause of our divisions – and they are many and complicated – it was Barack Obama who said he would bind up the wounds. This promise was at the centerpiece of his campaign, the heart of his appeal, the meaning behind “hope and change.” And now it lies in ashes.
I'm from Ohio, not Pennsylvania — and I'm not sure I am getting your point. What I hope is significant is that Bush II won twice, then, and, by what you said, did so without winning Pennsylvania. I think Clinton (Hilary, actually) started the polarization which has dominated politics since her "Vast right wing conspiracy" — and since the electoral map really has broken down into red and blue states and maybe a half dozen swing states which are all that is in play. That to me is depressing because I cannot imagine anyone voting to re-elect Obama … and yet a lot of people are going to. My hope, to disagree with your last line, is that no matter who the candidate is that they will really attack Obama's policies next fall, which won't convince the Democrats, but will get Republicans to turn out!
I would like to think you are right and the GW Bush precedent prevails. n nIt may be that there is little enthusiasm in Penna because there is a belief it will stay Blue as it has. In this case, Penna. become irrelevant and no point in trying to win in Penna. n nMy personal, and perhaps jaundiced experience, is that Democrats are still in love with Obama, that the Union Democrats to support Bob Casey will turn out the vote and the Republicans remain lethargic. As you point out, it may be that the campaigns and the Establishment doesn't think it needs Pennsylvania. GW Bush ran for open seat, not against an incumbent, and in 2004, he was the incumbent and both times lost Penna. n nMaybe a Republican can win the presidency without winning Pennsylvania but I think it unlikely. I hope I am wrong and you are right. thanks for the reminded.
yes. with all due respect, bob, Pennsylvania is NOT key to a GOP win. I would venture to say that our friend Keith from Ohio could better make that claim for his state. n nhowever, I think it's going to be Florida that decides things again, which is one of the many reasons Marco Rubio needs to be VP. n n
Sorry Mr. Vlasak. You're another example of a republican not knowing much about his party. Gingrich started the vicious partisanship that now exists when he instructed, via e-mail and public speeches, for republicans to refer to their Democratic opponents as "weak, disgusting, perverted, unstable, America-hating, socialist" you get the picture. And you wonder why newt is viewed with disgust and revulsion by almost everyone who actually knows him.
Wehner blames this solely on Obama, but a cursory look at the trend from Nixon onwards suggests polarization has grown increasingly fierce since the two major parties started to become ideologically sorted. Nowadays, virtually all Republicans are conservatives and there is no place for moderates in the party… It's difficult to see how ANY mainstream Democratic president could satisfy these folks. Perhaps Obama was naive to think otherwise, but it's quite depressing if any president from now on has to treat the other party as unrelentingly obstructionist. n nAnyway, it's interesting that opinion polls constantly show the public believes REPUBLICANS are less inclined to compromise e.g. when it comes to taxes and the deficit! So it's not as if Americans believe Obama has not tried to bridge the political divide — at least if public opinion polls are any indication. n nFinally, it is also quite interesting that (unlike Wehner's hero George W. Bush!) NONE of the current Republican frontrunners is touting his record as a bipartisan bridge-builder. All three of them are trying to outdo each other as defenders of orthodox uncompromising "full spectrum" conservatism when it comes to social, fiscal and foreign policy issues. Romney could certainly claim he has a track record of "working with a Democratic legislature" on issues such as healthcare reform, but it's actually an embarrassing liability that he managed to get elected in a deep Blue state such as Massachusetts. n nMARCU$
Pennsylvania is a fairly liberal state. It is a few points to the left of Wisconsin and Iowa, which are considered center-left states. Republicans do not need it to win. Never understood why Pennsylvanians keep voting for Marxist Dems if they're supposed to be so religious and freedom loving. It's a Poser State if you ask me.
Anyone who bothered to look at Obama's background when he ran for election could not possibly have been surprised by his left wing extremism. While I do not like the fact that he was so disingenuous in the 2008, that is business as usual. Just look at the current GOP field. Can anyone reasonably trust Romney or Gingrich. I guess we can trust Santorum to stay mired in every issue that has dragged the GOP down. And we certainly can trust Dr. Paul, but he is only in this to move the GOP slightly back to conservative sanity. Also, let's not forget that W campaigned as a conservative and as against nation-building in 2000. Yet, as president, he was a liberal and also the biggest nation-builder ever (with no competence whatsoever to support his policies). For whatever reason, the GOP decided awhile ago to concede this race even though Obama is beatable. Obama stinks, but the GOP elite is just so wedded to failed to neocon philosophy, foreign and domestic, that it has a long, long way to go
he's only polarizing because i'm a giant racist
A more discerning analyst would have noticed that GW Bush holds the highest polarization for three of his years as president, and five of his years are among the worst 10 among presidents since 1953. Obama ranks number 4 and is in the top 10 three times.
The real point is that the right-left divide has lingered for a decade, regardless of who is president. It is the writer’s privilege to blame this on Obama, but the public understands that at least Obama has tried to be bipartisan. He has created that impression, at least, for those who insist on giving him no credit. Who can honestly claim as much for the GOP?
@Sahib First and foremost if you are doing the right thing and following the constitution (Something the progressive Democrats either refuse, or claim we conservatives don’t understand) So that important fact aside next is your claim that..”but the public understands that at least Obama has tried to be bipartisan.” You just lost any credibility you had with that cockamamie comment.
Mr. Obama is a the head of a party that is as anti-American, anti-Christian, Anti-business as any president in the history of the United States of America. Not only should he lose the election, he should lose it by such a land-slide that he will be remembered by that and only that.
In Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia area vote democratic. Every other area of the state is tea party people and they shall repeat the 2010 congressional vote. Republicans win Pennsylvania. n n
This approval-gap poll includes republicans, who to my amazement approve of Obuckethead!! How is it possible there is a registered republican — who's telling the truth — that approves of the job Obonehead is doing? A lot like the law of gravity, it's undeniable and a real republican who supports Omugabe is an impossibility, like reversing that law of gravity — the poll is suspect!!! n nAlrighty then: Demand Occubagger-omugabe and Holder resign immediately!!!
This approval-gap poll includes republicans, who to my amazement approve of Obuckethead!! How is it possible there is a registered republican — who's telling the truth — that approves of the job Obonehead is doing? A lot like the law of gravity, it's undeniable and a real republican who supports Omugabe is an impossibility, like reversing that law of gravity — the poll is suspect!!!
Amazing how people just leave out certain unpleasant.facts.__1. Shortly after Obama was inaugurated, Mitch McConnell said that the only goal for the Repubican party is to make Obama a one term president. Sounds pretty polarizing and obstructipnist to me.__2. Republican members of Congress (especially the freshmen Tea Partiers of 2010) signed pledges not to compromise pon any issue not approved the the Tea Party.__3. If Republicans win in a sweep, many have already signed pledges to not appoint any Supreme Court nominee who approves of abortion.__Unfortunately, the USA is a country with 3 million plus diverse people and to think that any one pooint of view should rule is not only polarizing but unpatriotic.
The GOP will probably take the Senate in 2012, and will hold onto the House as well. This effectively clips Obama's wings and he will be a lame duck for four years, similar to Bill Clinton in 1996. n nThe difference today is that we don't have a dot-com bubble to fill federal coffers with a temporary windfall, so neither the Congress nor the President will be able to do much other than blow their usual hot air. They are cutting back on Defense spending (a mistake in my opinion, given the dangerous world in which we live) so our military options in the future will be limited as well. n nThe only sensible and forward thinking policy for this next Congress is to drastically, ruthlessly cut federal expenditures until revenue exceeds expenses. They should cut $1 trillion next year, then another $1 trillion the following year, and apply the surplus to paying down the national debt. n n10-15 years of discipline and we will have a solvent national account once more, and we'll be able to do anything we want from that point–build a high speed national railroad, build a city on the Moon, anything. n nOf course, this is just a pipe dream. We will likely continue down the path toward bankruptcy until the Chinese own us lock stock and barrel.
Thanks for the link to the maps. I like that it has previous Presidential elections (1972-2012) so that it's easy to compare trends.
First thing all of you are doing wrong is to decide who is telling the American people who they will vote for. nAt this point Obama is getting high points for a jailterm as an Oath breaker, domestic enemy of the USA., traitor, and under our penal code, murderer. nGeorgia found him to not meet the requirements to run for the president, let alone be one, so he will also do time for that, as will his wife, and every one who covered for him, "cleaned up" after him. nWe the People are sick of those who think we are stupid. We like America, the land of the FREE and the Brave, and do NOT like America the "tagged and controlled". nWe like it so much that we are starting to really raise our voices in asking those who are supposed to be the "frontline defense for the US Constitution to do the job they get paid for or leave the USA permanently, and it is not to assist a domestic enemy/Oath breaker/ traitor/murderer.
President Obama entered office with more good will than anybody since Bush 1988. He squandered it by focusing not on jobs and a recession-rebound, but on nationalizing medicine. Why did he do that? The black family is in complete disarray in this country. He could have engaged both sides in some sane education reform, and some strengthening of marriage; didn't. He doesn't have much imagination, and he really isn't a guy who can bring enemies together. Put it this way: he doesn't have the man-skills of an Eisenhower, a Johnson (! — I don't like him, but he got done what he wanted), a Reagan, or even the Great Buffoon Bill. As far as "polarizing" is concerned — there's one party that's sold its soul to the sexual revolution. We have Republicans who are too dumb to see that cultural rot underlies the political rot, but that's something that no Democrat can now admit and get elected.
Certainly Obama has been a divider in office. I cannot remember any president who was so contemptuous and disdainful of large segments of our citizenry. The closest I can think of was Nixon talking about the "silent majority". n nAnd as for the Republicans working to out-conservative each other, well this is the primary and I imagine whoever wins will start touting himself as a uniter immediately upon nomination. n nAnd now I want to say something nice about Mitt Romney. I think of all the contenders he will do best in that role. He is NOT exciting, but he is also not scary in any way. (Unless one has some undue fear of Mormons which some do have.) n nIf Romney can get his act together (and by this I do mean stage presence) and run a "haven't we had enough excitement lately – how about some HARD WORK and competence" he may do very well. n nAnd he needs to get his charming wife out there, if she wants her hubby to be prez she needs to be front and center every day from now until the inauguration.
What divides us is the deep interference of the government into every aspect of everyone's lives. Anything that the government does for one must, of necessity, take away from another. All decisions made by the government are for self-serving political and economic reasons. Each party helps supporters and withholds or sanctions the supporters of their opponents. We are not merely an observing audience, we are all deeply affected by the decisions they make. Those who must pay for all of this resent those who are the recipient and the recipients resent the fact that they must rely on those who pay.
Pennsylvania is not a liberal state. It is a center-right state with the great misfortune to have two large, and a couple of smaller, liberal cities in it.
Even so, the rest of us nearly pulled it out for W against Kerry.
This of course, is why Governor Corbett is trying to get a bill through the legislature that will allow PA’s electoral votes to be awarded according to the vote in each district. So that a tiny lead in votes from Philly, Pittsburgh, Eris, etc will not throw all of our electors to yet another Democrat.
It is also, of course, why the Dem National Committee is doing false ads that Corbett is trying to ‘steal’ the next election by allowing those of us in the rest of the state to have our votes actually count for something.