The post-debt ceiling polling is brutal for Congress, Republicans and the Tea Party:
Republicans in Congress shoulder more of the blame for the difficulties in reaching a debt-ceiling agreement than President Obama and the Democrats, the poll found.
The Republicans compromised too little, a majority of those polled said. All told, 72 percent disapproved of the way Republicans in Congress handled the negotiations, while 66 percent disapproved of the way Democrats in Congress handled negotiations.
The Tea Party is viewed favorably by a mere 20% of the population, with 43% saying that the Tea Party has too much influence on the Republican party. Obama’s handling of the hostage negotiation is about evenly split (47% approved, 46% disapproved).
With a stable of candidates kissing Tea Party ass, the Republicans are positioning themselves to lose a Presidential election that would otherwise be winnable considering the wretched state of the economy. The more Obama can hang the Tea Party and Congressional obstruction around Republicans’ necks, the more likely he is to win, with the added bonus of some coattails in the House and Senate.
jibeaux
I saw a comment somewhere on that polling along the lines of “what is going to take to get the 40% of the public that has no opinion about the Tea party out from under their rock?” It’s just really weird. But I bet if you did sit down what that 40% for a powwow, then the 20% tea party approval rating would go to 27.
liberal
Thanks for posting yet more evidence that if Obama had insisted on a clean bill and stuck to it instead of entering negotiations on additional conditions, the Republicans would have been under immense political pressure to cave.
Ash Can
The trick is to translate dissatisfaction with Republicans and the Tea Party into dissatisfaction with my Republican representative and the Tea Party’s influence in my Congressional district. As Shakespeare would say, “Aye, there’s the rub.”
ETA @ liberal: But if that political pressure doesn’t come from their own districts it’s ineffective.
Raven (formerly stuckinred)
U.S. stock futures turn sharply higher following a much better-than-expected report showing 117,000 jobs were added in July.
geg6
75% say that most congresscritters should take a long walk down a short pier. The remainder approach that 28% crazification factor. Funny how that works.
MattF
The Republican assumption that an economic collapse will benefit them politically is just, maybe, possibly, not working out so great. Maybe time for Repubs to reconsider, think this one through again… In particular, their slogan– “Suffering is good for you and good for us.” Could it be that there’s a problem there? Ya think?
UofAZGrad
I think a bad economy will get pretty much any republican asshole elected. People forget that Reagan was considered so crazy and outside the mainstream that he and his advisers tried to negotiate with Gerald Ford to be Vice Preside (and to reassure the electorate that they were going to be sort of co-presidents).
Carter was delighted that Reagan won the nomination just as Obama is probably rooting for Bachmann. In the end Reagan won in a landslide and it wasn’t cause of the hostage crisis – the economy sucked and that is all it takes. For further evidence – a guy named Barack Hussein Obama won Virginia and took an electoral vote in Nebraska because the economy really sucked in 2008.
Comrade Javamanphil
117,000 is not nearly enough to keep pace with new entrants to the job market. Investors just have no place else to go but the mattress.
As for the polling, talk to me again a year from now when it might matter. Most people won’t remember at all. I just heard from my very liberal in-laws that live in a Dem controlled state that they are voting for no incumbents next year. As long as the media continues to report both sides do it and make jokes about a dysfunctional Washington, the less plugged-in among us will target anyone in power regardless of ideology. Going to be a long slog to next Nov.
birthmarker
Your post assumes a coherent message from dems. Big assumption.
Ash Can
@Raven (formerly stuckinred): Unless something hits the fan in Europe, especially wrt Italy and/or Greece, I’d bet that stops, or at least slows, the market slide.
Alwhite
This is all well and good but please remember the majority of Americans were against Ronald Reagan’s policies when they elected and the re-elected him. And then there is the fact that the country got 8 years of close up into what Republican rule does and still voted for Republicans in ’10.
Ash Can
@Comrade Javamanphil: What your in-laws say now, and what they say late in an election campaign during which their Dem incumbent discusses issues and makes promises and the Republican challenger does nothing but shoot heroin on stage and throw the used needle at the reporters covering the event, could very well be completely different.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
During all the Sturm und Drang, I knew I heard a ‘candygram for Mr. Mongo’ in there somewhere. Just like back during the budget negotiations.
As far as next year is concerned, I’m reminded of an old joke. Something about not having to be faster than the bear, just faster than you.
tommybones
The Forest or the Trees?
If the GOP keeps getting conservative policies enacted, even without control of Senate or White House, does it actually matter that much if they are positioning themselves to lose the 2012 POTUS election???
Brandon
You know what mistermix? Who gives a flying f___ Obama’s about reelection? The fact that there is an open question whether Obama can will re-election against these morons tells you all you need to know about his failed administration. And I don’t say failed lightly, but the man has failed to get the economy back on track and create a jobs. That should have been his number one goal, it was not.
Also, I would please dare ask you, 15 months before the day people have to vote, give the damn horse race a rest already. For all the harping bloggers do about MSM horse race journalism, just goes to show that they do it for a reason because it seems to have an audience. Or else why would mistermix and John Cole and number of other front pagers be writing horse race posts with such regularity?
The Sheriff's A Ni-
And of course nothing says the sheriff won again than the whiny bleats of smoldering firebaggers left holding a blackened box of Nestle’s Gold.
Barry
As has been pointed out, 100K jobs/month is just keeping up with population growth. And that’s IF the numbers aren’t revised downward later.
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
The problem here is not the approvals or job performance, unfortunately.
Looking further into the poll, 44% say that cuts didn’t go far enough, compared to about the same that either they were ‘just right’ or didn’t go far enough. And the same thing basically with similar numbers compared to those who wanted at least SOME sort of revenue and those who say it should have been ALL cuts just like it was.
Obama may be coming out like roses, but our policies are losing. Again. Because the GOP’s policies and the slanted compromises in response are the only fucking policies the people ever fucking hear.
Zagloba
The problem is that every voter would love to send a candygram to every member of congress but their own.
dr. bloor
72 v. 66 percent disapproval is pretty cold comfort. Also, the teahadists and their constituents don’t care how much the rest of the country hates them-they care about shoving their agenda down everyone elses throat.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Barry:
According to TPM (haven’t double checked) but both May and June’s numbers were revised upwards.
dpCap
@Raven (formerly stuckinred):
So much for Bachmann’s hopes on ruining jobs to get elected.
Cat Lady
I’m in the camp of who cares about the polling now – next week there will be a new sparkly thing to distract, and the herd will move on. Can the OH NOES OBAMA IS TEH SUXXOR crowd please STFU too? The Republican primaries haven’t even started yet, and the candidate debates will provide endless opportunities and memorable quotes for dissection of the crazy. There’s a long way to go, and one thing I can predict is that nothing about this process is predictable.
Dennis SGMM
The Republicans suffered a modest six percentage point hit in disapproval,versus the Democrats, for nearly running the economy off a cliff. That makes me wonder what they’d have to do to take a ten percentage point hit. It also makes me wonder if the obstructionism and gridlock they’re bound to cause in future will actually hurt them at the polls.
patrick
if he can hang whoever the republican candidate is with the rope of the congressional republicans and win, then Obama would be more accurately described as the black harry truman…
Dennis SGMM
@Zagloba:
Not so fast; my rep is David Dreier.
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
@Dennis SGMM:
More concerning to me is the fact that the numbers seem to keep bearing out a ‘pox on both houses’ mindset, which continues and always continues to benefit the GOP, since they can scorch the earth all they want, and the public will continue to diffuse blame.
Plus as noted before, the continued acceptance of the right wing policies. In an atmosphere where the public ostensibly supports liberal policies in theory, only to reject them once a liberal or Dem is attached to said policies, having them already rejected outright compared to the further scorched earth bullshit is….to put it lightly, disastrous. :/
Culture of Truth
So while it is generally accepted that 27% will support anything, no matter how crazy, the tea party can still only get 20%?
Strandedvandal
Failed Administration? Dude, you are just not paying attention. If you think that the Obama Administration has been a failure, you really need to extract your cranium from your sphincter. I realize it’s all the rage for the Emo Prog crowd to gnash their teeth and wail, but it is just plain stupid. So stop it.
Culture of Truth
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik: yeah, I worry about the pox / scorched earth thing too
zmulls
@UofAZGrad I think the hostage crisis was a huge factor in Reagan’s election. The perception of Carter as ineffective (not to mention the failed rescue mission) was, as I recall, the biggest factor. Yes, the economy sucked, and yes, that was an equally large factor.
But back in 1980, the Supply Side myth was in the ascendant. Many folks (including undergraduate me) thought it sounded like it made sense. Labor, at the time, fit the cliche that people have today (big, bloated, corrupt), and the Democratic Congress was ossified. It was time for some sort of generational change. And enough people bought the Supply Side snake oil, and some still drink it.
My turning point was the S&L crisis. It was obvious that deregulating the S&Ls led to very very bad and greedy behavior, and cutting taxes just put money in the pockets of assholes, who bought toys for themselves rather than “investing it and letting it trickle down.” I’m still furious that a lot of jerks worked the system and walked off with their pockets stuffed, and I bailed them out.
By now, even though some people are Supply Siders, many more people see through it. By now, many people are no longer to dismiss the religious right as harmless. We’re in a different time, and are headed for another generational shake-up (you could argue that 2008 was the first sign of it, and the tea party is the dying thrashing of the Reagan generation).
Obama has a hard road to hoe with the economy the way it is. Romney would have a shot in the general, but I don’t think he makes it through the primaries. The true believers have a hold of the party and they need to be proved wrong before the GOP moves a millimeter back to the center. It is entirely possible they will go the Barry Goldwater route this time around.
jwb
I found this analysis interesting. I’m sure it’s as one-sided as “Obama sold us out,” but I liked the fact that the author at least looked at what’s in the bill.
Ivan Ivanovich Renko
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-: Oh, you heard it too?
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
the more it looks like the gop can win, the more they go with the safer candidate. the fringe has to get fringier.
Culture of Truth
I doubt Bachmann can win, but I can see Perry pulling a Reagan.
pk
I think the problem is the innate selfishness and sense of entitlement of the population in general. In theory everyone likes the idea of policies which help people, but the republicans immediately translate the policy into “the democrats are giving away your money to worthless layabouts”. People love the idea of the govt working for only their own individual selves and anything which goes to others is can be translated into wasteful expenditure and fraud. By voting republican people are really cutting off their nose to spite their face.
I have a neighbor who has a poor uneducated sister. The sister has two kids from two different men, does pretty much nothing for the kids, apparently has kept getting govt assistance for a very long time. My neighbor says “why is my money going to this worthless woman, if she did not get the money maybe she may make more responsible choices”. Neighbor and husband have health issues which will make it impossible for them to get health insurance if the husband loses his job, but they are staunch republicans seething with rage at the socialist Obama. Heck for all I know even the sister votes republican! There is no hope for people like this. And these are not unintelligent people. I share most of their values. We are truly screwed!
Dennis SGMM
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik:
The “pox on both houses” bit is worrisome, especially when the narrow difference in disapproval ratings seems to bear it out.
cleek
@Dennis SGMM:
yeah, and my guy is pretty awesome, too (David Price, NC).
my Senators are kinda meh. but i’m glad i live close enough to Chapel Hill to have Price as my rep.
cleek
@Culture of Truth:
NPR did a brutal story on Perry’s upcoming Bother Jesus For Jobs rally, this AM. they went through the list of guest speakers and sponsors and every one of them was a lunatic. the reporter even, gasp, used the words “extreme right wing”, multiple times.
Perry’s aggressive Bible-thumping will not do well outside of TX.
Monkey Business
First off, approval ratings and hypotheticals for the President are useless until he’s actually running against someone. Right now, he doesn’t have an opponent. Moreover, even if he’s losing to “Generic Republican”, it would be a stretch to call any of the GOP Presidential Candidates a “Generic Republican”.
Basically, it’s a long way to November 2012.
chopper
@Ash Can:
likewise, the baggers don’t blink. zombies are like that.
zmulls
We will probably flip our district back R to D. We had Sestak, and he vacated to run for Senate. We elected Meehan, who is a decent enough guy, but he has to toe the GOP line, which is not going to fly in our centrist district.
Also, the guy we ran (Brian Lentz) got caught setting up a far-right third-party candidate to try to siphon votes from the GOP. That’s legal, of course, and it’s a classic GOP tactic, but he got caught and it cast a pall on his campaign (and a lot of progressives stayed home rather than vote for him).
So we should be a -1 GOP/+1 Dem in 2012.
Unfortunately PA Senate is Casey’s to lose. He should weather the storm, though PA has some awfully conservative areas. The Casey name is still well-respected, even in red areas. I wish we didn’t have to wait until 2016 to remove Toomey.
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
@Monkey Business:
I’m not even that worried about Obama’s chances right now. I’m still worried that he’s not as inevitable as some people are taking him, but right now, he seems to be the only one the public is keeping above this.
My concern is that while he’s making out well, the rest of the Democratic party, approval and policy wise, is circling the drain faster and faster. The GOP may have shit approval as well, but they seem to be the only one getting their policy made law of the land.
Bruce S
That’s Krugman’s advice to him (in the midst of the predictable bitching.) I’m hoping that Obama takes that page and runs against this Congress. And coordinates with the congressional candidates on the ground – so it really is a Democratic plan of attack and not just a campaign consultant’s scheme, which are notorious for backfiring. The economy – even in a “not worst” case – is going to suck, so he needs to have an agenda that doesn’t sound like bullshit, take some responsibility for where we need to go next and draw some clear lines. “Process politics,” running “against Washington” when he’s been the allegedly most powerful person there for three years, personal appeal or vague slogans aren’t going to do the job.
jwest
It will be interesting to see if Obama runs for reelection.
Most likely, upon reviewing the polls and knowing that with the economy as bad as it is and getting worse, he will avoid the embarrassment of a Carteresque loss and opt out.
zmulls
“It will be interesting to see if Obama runs for reelection.”
I’m not sure I see any evidence, or even a hint, in Obama’s behavior or apparent character, that would lead me to speculate he would be looking to gracefully bow out. You can argue that he has a tough fight on his hands, and there is a *chance* the winds will turn against him, but barring a rock-solid-certainty of defeat (e.g., Johnson in the middle of Vietnam), it is not in the nature of Presidents to just quit….
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik:
I’m not sure that the public rejects liberal policies..once a liberal or Dem is attached to said policies. I think it is more the case that the public rejects technocratic establishment policies that benefit only our elites and while the GOP may be worse, the Dems are bad enough that they quickly lose the public’s support and sympathy as soon as they get into office and become the establishment again. The public reacts to the Dems with “you’ve been sleeping with that Wall St. woman again, haven’t you? I can smell her perfume in your hair.”
In our two party system with both parties being in bed with the upper crust, there really is no way for John Q. Public to give a middle finger to the elites, which is all the poor bastard really wants anyway. The closest approximation is to vote out incumbents, and of course this benefits the more insane of the two parties because there is no long term accountability for their actions. No matter how bad they behave, all they have to do is wait a couple of election cycles and they’ll get back into power.
Scott
Obama is not going to opt out of running for re-election especially against the group of clowns that are running against him.
General Stuck
@Cat Lady:
LOL, you might as well try an stop time. This blog will be a full frontal firebagger one, in the not too distant future.
And Judging my mistermix’s comment section this morning, I figure he’ll get the ‘secret republican’ stamped on his backside before very much longer.
It was nice while it lasted
Paul in KY
@Culture of Truth: I think it would be more like pulling a GWB. God help us all if that happens.
Paul in KY
@jwest: I will be very surprised if that happened. It would be first time since Johnson that it happened, and if you go by 1st termers who didn’t have any prior experience (filling out the term of a predecessor who died in office), you would have to go back to Harding, I believe.
I’m 99.99% sure he’ll run.
wrb
only a 6 point disapproval spread is all after that performance?
I call that good news for the Republicans and the tea party
Emma
@jwest: Only in your little firebagger dreams, sweetpea.
Frankensteinbeck
@liberal:
A) These polls say exactly the opposite of that. People are mad at the GOP for risking the economy by not compromising. You’re suggesting we’d have looked better than them by very loudly not compromising?
B) There is no ‘pressure’. All the pressure imaginable was already on them. They don’t give a flying rat’s ass. The sane ones are terrified of being primaried and are assholes anyway. The Tea Partiers WANTED default and believed in their hearts that they would personally be riding a unicorn pony over a rainbow afterwards even if their polling was at 1% beforehand. This is crucial in all discussions of putting pressure on the GOP right now. *They don’t give a flying rat’s ass*.
lllphd
the spin is, and will be, that boehner won this and obama lost and obama’s base is turning on him, etc. but little to no mention will be made of the fact that the worst datum in that polling (actually, dry as those things can be, is pretty edifying) is boehner’s nosedive (30 approve/57 disapprove); seems everyone hates him: dems of course, republicans for sucking teabagger toes and looking like an idiot, teabaggers for compromising. i don’t envy his position, but neither do i respect how he mishandled it; what an incompetent cretin.
more tantalizing tidbits: 75% don’t think congress deserves reelection (isn’t that bigger than last november?); obama is more trusted to lead, 47-33; 85% think compromise is better than standing your ground; 44% feel bush is responsible for the mess we’re in, 15% obama, 15% congress; 62% want jobs as the top priority (which obama turned to immediately while boehner recessed the house); and those polled are evenly split on relief/frustration felt at the outcome, 44/45. approval of the bill is a bit more nuanced: only 4% strongly approve, 42% somewhat approve, 26% somewhat disapprove, and 19% strongly disapprove, putting the overall approval at 46% compared to overall disapproval at 45%, tho the approval is mushier and disapproval a bit stronger. of course, the shared numbers don’t show us who, republicans or dems, do this approving or not, or why, which is pretty key. you can hate the bill because it cuts essential social programs or you can love it because it threatens military spending. this nuance is also lost in the fact that only 15% felt the spending cuts went too far, while 44% felt they didn’t go far enough; and while 50% felt some tax increases should have also been included, 44% felt it should have relied only on cuts (which confuses me, but may explain which republicans or dems are doing the approving, etc.). more to the point, tho, 82% felt the wrangling was all about political advantage, and 71% felt it makes us look really bad on the world stage; 22% felt it will make the economy better, 24% worse, and 46% see no effect.
enough weeds; but sometimes the headline takeaways don’t give the full picture, and even the data docs leave a lot unanswered because the questions are not asked well and/or the tabs don’t include enough info.
my bottom line is, big surprise, the public is in confusion about the whole thing, leaving it ripe for exploitation. gee, wonder who’ll jump on that one.
schnooten
@liberal: Polls aren’t political pressure. Votes are. Calls are. Letters are. Polls only matter when they agree with conservative ideals.
Elie
@General Stuck:
I am pretty disgusted. I think I would rather read Red State than come here regularly to read some of this swill. I can just look at Fox or other teevee to get that — why make a special effort?
If the firebaggers weren’t just so STUPID, made arguments with facts, were actually interested in progessive policies, then it would be different. These are just tea partiers in every way and I have no respect for them. Wish they would go join their brethren on the right like Jane. Disgusting.
WaterGirl
@Elie: They aren’t intellectually interesting, or funny; they are not even sharing any facts. They are lazy and are just trying to pull other people down. What we have now is the equivalent of an annoying pack of buzzing mosquitoes.
Just walk on by. Brushing them off like an annoying fly is the best thing you can do.
Tom Q
@UofAZGrad: Your view that even the most outrageous candidate can be elected in dire enough circumstances is correct, 1980 being the most clear example. But I think you, like many, err in assuming the economy is the sole determining factor in elections. Carter was deficient in a number of other areas even before the economy went south in 1980 — he was an uncharismatic, caretaker president challenged within his own party; faced an ongoing foreign policy disaster; and then had the bad luck to face a charismatic (even if too far right) challenger. Even with that, it wasn’t that the economy itself was so bad — the unemployment rate, as I keep trying to tell people, was the same in November ’84 as it had been in Nov. ’80 — but that the direction, sudden recession, was the worst possible for a candidate running for re-election
Obama differs in all sorts of ways. He’s the most charismatic Democrat since Kennedy; he’s taken on major challenges; he has an unimpeachable foreign policy success (OBL) and no glaring failures; except for the Internet gripe squad, he’s popular within his party and very unlikely to face a challenge. Literally his only drawback is the economy and, again, I suggest we wait to see the direction of the economy over the next 16 months. No one questions it’s lackluster or worse in an overall sense. But if we see moderate job growth by next Spring — the sort that Bush II saw in ’04 — we’ll lose the Doom-doom-doom sense floating around this week, even though the full picture won’t be that much improved. Should such a thing happen, Obama would be absolutely unbeatable in November ’12.
Brandon
I am certainly not a firebagger. I’ve been around for a while. As someone who donated a thousand dollars to the Obama campaign, I feel that my Obot bonafides are proven. But what I have noticed in Obama is a tendency to care more about the Village and polls than actually leading. He has made it his hallmark to be the least worst alternative. But I fail to see how that will get him reelected without a motivated base and an awful economy. After Desert Storm, I’m sure Poppy Bush could never in his life imagined that he would lose reelection to the philandering Gov on the 48th worst state in the country. But despite not having much of a record or even a reputation, Clinton did just that by running on “its the economy, stupid”. Well that still holds true today. And aside from an anemic stimulus package, Obama has done exactly nothing, zero, zilch to enact policies that will get people back to work. And worse than that, instead of using opportunities for leverage with Congress to make sure such policies are enacted, he has instead sat back and let Congress take the iniative to him. Each time he is called upon to put people back to work, he has failed. Stimulus was failure number one, and Bruce Bartlett does a nice job deconstructing how he created a package that was ineffective by catering to Republican supp
Brandon
Oops, mobile maldunction.
He careers to R’s on stimulus and got zero votes. Next, he bizarrely agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts without requesting a single ounce of flesh in return. Now the ‘Satan sandwich’. Someone please explain to me when Obama is going to at the very least outline an economic plan and why didn’t he have the foresight to do so when, you know, he had Democratic control of both chambers. And at what point does he start to threaten to take goodies away from R constituencies in order to get what he wants? Because that is obviously the only way these people know how to play ball. Instead, I heard that he has asked Congress to propose job creation measures. Which only means that the R’s will say tax cuts.
Brandon
I am not looking for the liberal street fighter that many others crave, but I did expect Obama to provide bold leadership and new direction. He has so far failed to do that. And so long as unemployment is hovering around double digits, he has failed in the single most important task of his Presidency. So yes, so far, by the most objective measure possible, he has failed.
Maude
@Brandon:
Congress is an equal branch of government. Obama can not make Congress do anything.
Without Congress approving spending bills which originate in the House, there is no put people back to work money.
The infrastructure projects can’t happen without the first, the House passing a bill.
Take into consideration that some Republican governors have turned away federal money for infrastructure projects.
Here in NJ, Christie did that and now is spending millions to try to prevent the state from having to give back the money to the federal government.
A president who shouts and carries on will lose against the right wingers and make things worse. It is about who has the power over what and that is what you don’t seem to comprehend.
NamelessGenXer
@jwest:
Dateline April 4, 2011: Obama Announces Reelection bid
Please get with the program THX. Also too, unlike 1980 the Whining Hamster Brigade is an EPIC FAIL with their primary-him-from-the-left screed. And yes, I’m talking to you, Brandon ;-)
Frankensteinbeck
@Brandon:
If that is your standard, and it’s not a bad one, Obama has failed by that standard. Not completely failed, since the economy could be much, much worse and almost was. Still, the economy remains bad and he has failed – if that is your only metric.
But I put to you that *no Democrat could have succeeded* by that metric. Only a Republican could have achieved what was required to fix the economy, because the Democrats care about the nation and want to fix it and would have gone along. The Republicans care about Obama losing reelection. The country can go fuck itself for all they care. They’ve been quite blunt and open about that. By your system, Obama has indeed failed – but he’d have had to be Superman to succeed.
jeff
Yes, because that belief worked SO well in 2010! (Remember how Michael Steele was going to drive the Republicans over a cliff, and none were going to get elected? Never doubt the ability of the Democratic Party to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!
slightly_peeved
@Brandon:
DADT repeal, START Treaty, UI extensions.
You don’t think Obama’s fought because you haven’t been paying any attention, apparently.