Today’s Washington Post-ABC News Poll is being touted by Democrats as a key moment in the 2012 election because for the first time, President Obama is shown as getting over the 50 percent mark in terms of job approval and in a head-to-head matchup with Mitt Romney. These are encouraging numbers for the president, but Democrats shouldn’t start mailing out inaugural ball tickets just yet. A close reading of the poll as well as the political context in which it was taken shows that the president is still highly vulnerable on a number of issues, leaving likely Republican nominee Mitt Romney still in position to make a strong challenge this fall.
First, it should be noted that the poll is only of adults, not registered voters, let alone likely voters, so its results should be taken with a shovelful of salt. The poll sample is also skewed to the left as the respondents’ party affiliation showed 34 percent Democrats to only 23 percent Republicans, figures that do not reflect most national samples of party loyalties. Just as important, the poll shows widespread dissatisfaction with the president’s handling of the economy, no confidence that a recovery from the last recession has occurred as well as a belief that the country is on the wrong track. There is no question that Obama’s position is far stronger than it seemed a few months ago. But given that the full impact of rising gas prices has not yet been felt in the country and that Romney is only now just emerging as the GOP standard-bearer after almost a year of non-stop bashing from his party opponents, these results ought not cause Democrats to celebrate too much or cause too much despair among Republicans.
The president has been the beneficiary of a long period of internecine warfare among his opponents with many Republicans concentrating their efforts on disparaging Romney. The cumulative impact of these attacks, which may well continue for a few more weeks if, as expected, Rick Santorum continues his kamikaze primary run, has definitely hurt Romney, especially as Obama has been able to conserve his resources and his apparent immunity from attacks from his side of the aisle.
The advantages of incumbency are most readily seen in the poll’s reading of the likeability of the two likely opponents in November. While Obama had a small advantage when it comes to strength of leadership and vision, he wins by a landslide when it comes to likeability with a 64-26 percent edge over Romney. He can thank the fawning coverage he and his family have received from the national media for these numbers. While the press has assailed Romney for his wealth and probed his religion and every other aspect of his life in a manner that they did not dare to push Obama four years ago, the president and his wife and children continue to receive the Camelot treatment from the media. Not since the Kennedy administration has any presidential family been treated with kid gloves the way Obama’s has and that gives him a clear edge, especially because the only thing most Americans know about Romney’s personal life is that he once traveled with a dog on the roof of his car.
Yet despite this factor as well as the recent perception of a stronger recovery, Romney need not despair. Even a majority of this poll’s skewed sample trust Romney to do a better job than the president on handling the economy, which is still the major issue that will decide the election. And given the fact that gas prices are likely to go a lot higher this summer, dissatisfaction with the administration’s energy policy (another Obama weak point in the poll) is bound to influence more voters against the incumbent.
So while Obama has good reason to be happy about his 51-43 lead over Romney in this poll, he’s far from out of the woods. The likelihood is that his advantage among likely voters in a sample that isn’t stacked with Democrats would largely evaporate. Though the president continues to enjoy the tremendous advantages that go with incumbency, Romney is still on his heels and will have every opportunity to mount a strong challenge this fall.
Unless the 2012 exit polls show a turn out anything like this poll's sample, it is a worthless poll. Fine by me. Let the Democrats think they have the election won. There is plenty in this poll that shows he's going to have a tough time this fall, as you pointed out.
"The president has been the beneficiary of a long period of internecine warfare among his opponents with many Republicans concentrating their efforts on disparaging Romney. The cumulative impact of these attacks, which may well continue for a few more weeks if, as expected, Rick Santorum continues his kamikaze primary run, has definitely hurt Romney,…" n nLet the blame begin! Blame conservatives, in general, and Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, in particular, for Mitt Romney's probable loss to Barak Obama in November.
Polls like this serve the Democrats by giving a headline suggesting Obama has lost none of his support, so that those unhappy about Obama and the country might find themselves wondering if maybe they aren't wrong or over-reacting. Sorry to be cynical, but thank you for this article that may help get the truth out. I do remember though how excited I was about Reagan in 1980. I not only registered to vote but went down to the local Republican headquarters and volunteered — ended up copying registered Republicans addresses onto envelopes from the voting rolls. I never imagined the country could possibly re-elect Carter. I took it for granted that the country couldn't. No way. But, reading about 1980 now, no matter what I was thinking, Carter was ahead in the polls for much of the race. So, we'll see!
Glad to see that everyone is writing off this poll as the obvious propaganda it is. n nWhy do the Dems do this kind of thing? n nOne reason may be that a continual run of bad poll numbers and discouraging electoral news can easily become a self-fulfilling prophecy, the proverbial snow ball effect. n nAnother reason is the other side of the coin: by pumping out this fake optimism, the Dems hope to generate some momentum themselves. Remember that Dems live and die and come back to life a zombies for the Almighty Opinion Poll, so they absolutely cannot live with bad polling results even if it means having to make the s**t up like the WaPo does here. They must be reading alot of secret (but more honest) polling that tells them Obama is toast so, ergo, they must put out a positive poll that will feed the illusion of rising hopes and inevitability.
Present polls don’t mean much, that’s true. But as Rothenberg noted in Roll Call, MR’s loss of support among non-affiliated women is only exceeded by his loss among same group of men. n nPO can run against the Ryan budget with ease. He’s going to ram it down Republicans’ throats. In order to prevent him from doing that, Republicans are going to need a better offense than is currently on display. n nHe’s going to ram past Foreign Policy disasters down the same throats. n nHe can easily ask the electorate these questions: Who would you rather have in charge if another Katrina hits? Should Louisiana be “on its own” or is she part of the American family? Are we a Union only when we’re planning to wage war, or do we remain one in the attempt to establish stability and peace as well? n nEven high gas prices won’t necessarily help the GOP. This isn’t Carter/Reagan. It’s current failure vs. shiver-inducing past and possibly repeat failure. n nLose sight of that at your own peril.
I admit to not having read enough about Ryan's current budget, but his last budget cut MUCH LESS MONEY from Medicare than Obamacare does. Maybe discussing that won't hurt Romney as much as you think. n nWhat past foreign policy disasters? Do you mean Obama telling Iraq to go eff itself? Do you mean Obama's disastrous Afghanistan policies? Do you mean another treaty with Russia to complete his work (we give up the rest of our missiles)? n nAnd who would you rather have in charge if there's another Gulf oil spill — Obama who essentially told the Gulf states to rot (because they weren't going to vote for him anyway)? n nObama may win by dividing the country against itself and using dirty tricks — afterall, he does have the MSM under complete control — but now it's all about Obama. America is not dead yet!
You can't compare the Gulf oil spill to Katrina. Did Obama say he was going to let Louisiana rot because its citizens wouldn't vote for him? Can you provide the quote? I'm serious. n nWhat foreign policy disasters? How about no weapons of mass destruction? Do you really think that's nothing or a success? n nIraq may have been necessary, I don't know and neither do you. What about what Haas had to say or write? n nIIRC, and according to Haas, the administration didn't think it would do any good to go into Afghanistan at first. n nMax Boot, who I have nothing against and who seems to be a smart fellow, advised nation building in Yemen. Is that who we are, as Americans? Are we Nation builders? Is Nation building constitutional, and if so, what is the limiting principle? n nAre those foreign policy successes? Is Iran just now ready to go nuclear?
I said "essentially" on the Gulf oil spill. The concerns were raised over and over about jobs and money lost in the Gulf. The oil from the spill, thanks to union supporting considerations particularly, wasn't cleaned up, and the states put forth plan after plan to get the federal government to hurry it up. The feds were concerned with EPA type matters, and all of their conclusions (as far as I know) were wrong, specifically when brought into court. And did Obama then obey the court order? No, he ignored it, being above the law (I speculate). My bit of sarcasm is that the states along the Gulf, with the exception of swing state Florida, tend to vote Republican in national elections … which makes me wonder aloud if, since Commentary of recent have pointed out Obama's moves to raise women's issues, or attack religious freedoms, or start a race issue in order, paraphrasing many commentators, to divide and get his base mobilized for the coming election … I speculate that the feds under Obama were so uninterested in southern states he was putting under for his EPA base, that he "essentially" told them where they could go as far as he was concerned.
Governor Romney needs to pull a Harry Truman in advance. He needs to tell those supporters who are depending on his win (using language as expansive as it is diplomatic) that they can plant one if they’re betting he’s going to govern one Nation, under God, according to sectarian whim. n n
Romney might be smartest to use the concepts of Obama's 2008 rhetoric — both to prove what a liar and absolute politician Obama is, and to talk about how to really make America energy independent and save Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, how to reform taxes, how to make all Americans equal under the law, and support our friends in the world, rather than look the other way. Maybe it isn't just about blue states and red states as Obama thinks — all 57 of them.
It's not going to be harder to portray Romney as liar too. His past and present positions will make that easy. n nHe has no more power to make America energy independent than Obama does. He can direct her toward that goal but he can't make immediate progress anymore than Obama can. He has no power to control gas prices either. n nYou think President Obama is a singularly dishonest man. And I'm not so sure about that. n nSocial Security, Medicare and Medicaid have to be talked about in earnest. When that happens, you let me know. n nWho are our Friends in the world? Tell me and then tell me how much support that's going to cost the United States taxpayer. It might be worth it. It might just be the right thing to do. Let's have an honest discussion. Let's talk about how the Constitution makes us a Union especially in that way and in so few others. n nThe social services could have been defanged when people were less dependent on them but we had a Cold War to win, and I'm not even sure we won it. n nThis isn't an election in which the aspiring candidate can jaw-jaw his way to a win.
What occurs to me primarily in your reply is just one part — Romney's changes of mind. What I see is that he has flip-flopped, but it might not be so wise to attack that because the defense is that Obama hasn't flip-flopped, but, as a Commentary column a couple of days ago pointed out, he's mad. He says he didn't do things that he did and that he did things that he didn't as if he's consistent when … he doesn't appear to be all here in the real world. This, I think, can come out. and I think it will hurt Obama's chances. n nI think if it's stressed his today's forced-on-him explanation of the Buffett rule he's campaigning on, and how it's not about taxes, but about punishing rich people, will hurt him. Yes, yes — he says "in the name of fairness." Now let's get him on record defining that. I think Obama is an easier subject to attack and much weaker than his hubris might suggest.
I just wanted to add to that that Obama's anger does come out — and it's not Presidential. I don't think he'll start frothing at the mouth in front of a microphone, but I do think his logic can be tied up and that people will be able to hear it. n nJust look at how he went after Romney on "marvelous." How many dozens of times will he try to do the same thing? Have you ever known anyone who had the habit of saying the same thing, or finding the same fault everywhere, and never seemed to know how they were repeating themselves? Didn't it get on your nerves? n nRomney can get under peoples' skins.
After effectively demolishing the poll, Mr. Tobin says, "So while Obama has good reason to be happy about his 51-43 lead over Romney in this poll…" I don't get that. If the poll is significantly skewed to the left, as this post demonstrates (and I agree with that analysis), then it is essentially worthless. And if it is worthless, why should Obama be happy with it? On the other hand, if Obama has "good reason" to be happy about this lead, what are those "good reasons"? Maybe I'm just nitpicking, but it seems that by couching his conclusion in such equivocal language, Mr. Tobin (whom I respect and admire) is carrying water for the very pollsters who manufactured this garbage.