Tweet
President Obama is a man whose re-election should be in trouble based on the current state of the economy and perceptions about his handling of it. The economy is still bad and unemployment has remained pretty terrible during the entirety of Obama’s tenure. That is why currently 52 percent of the American people still say the economy/jobs is the number one problem in the country, and on that issue Obama gets a very poor score.
The Washington Post/ABC news found only 42 percent approve of Obama’s handling of the economy, while 55 percent disapprove. The NBC/WSJ poll had nearly identical results with 43 percent approving of his handling of the economy and 52 percent disapproving. In addition the latter poll found that on a host of economic issues a plurality believes Obama has actually made things worse: 37 percent think Obama’s approach to the economic downturn made things worse compared to just 31 percent who think he made it better. Similarly, 32 percent think he made the housing market worse and just 24 percent think he made it better. On gas prices it is 37 percent worse and just 11 percent better.
A President with poor marks on the economy, running for re-election during a bad economy and with the economy the number one issue should have some serious political problems. Yet both recent polls show him with a small lead. The Post/ABC poll has Obama leading by three, and the NBC/WSJ poll has Obama up by four.
I can only assume that Obama continues to lead in large part because even though the American people think Obama has done a poor job with the economy, they doubt Romney could do better. The ABC poll had Obama and Romney completely tied on the questions of who they think would do a better job with the economy and job creation. More telling, the NBC poll found 32 percent are “extremely” or “quite” confident Obama has the right policies to improve the economy, while just 19 percent feel that way about Romney. The country thinks Romney would either be no better or perhaps worse on the number one issue in this election.
The Romney campaign has tried to make his business prowess a main selling point, as proof that he could better handle the economy. But so far that strategy appears to have failed. What is supposed to be Romney’s greatest strength is at best a wash. Romney doesn’t even need to be seen as being able to do a great job on the economy to win the issue. He just needs to be seen as able to do better than the poor job Obama has done, yet Romney hasn’t managed to clear that low bar.
As we get closer to the election this could change, but as it currently stands the Romney team has a lot of work to do on this issue. This election could easily turn into a referendum on Obama’s handling of the economy, but not if the alternative is seen as even less capable of handling the challenge.
11 Comments
“…but so far, that strategy appears to have failed.”
According to this, Romney’s opened up a 6 point lead in Florida:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/poll-romney-now-leads-obama-florida-125757880.html
At this stage of things, and given the economic status-quo that we’ve got, I think that’s significant. As I said, if it gets into double digits, then Obama is going to have trouble reversing it, and it may mean that his lucrative think tank/highly-paid speaking tour will begin shortly after the election.
The only possible better result, from a progressive point of view, would be if a progressive third party candidate won. Short of that, THIS would be the absolute best result, long term, for progressives. It’s too bad so many progressives are just like corporate CEO’s and refuse to think long term, only short term.
Obama has to ride the economy pony, such as it is, but I keep thinking that the bushCo foreign policy chickens that he’s been feeding so diligently, are going to be landing on the roof of the White House. Just as with Bush, he’ll try to string that out as long as he can, so that it won’t have much effect on this election. We’ll see.
“…Obama continues to lead in large part because even though the American people think Obama has done a poor job with the economy, they doubt Romney could do better…”
Yeah, that’s about right. But it would have been a lot simpler to just say they both suck.
I have been weighing all of the “bads” and “goods”, and since Obama has protected the corporate status-quo so well, I won’t mind it being dumped back into the laps of the republicans. Their policies will only make things worse, and evidently we need that to have any chance of getting someone in office who will really rock the boat and go for the changes that we need.
The alternative is another four years of this shitty stasis, with it’s creeping-fascism, and then the full blame to fall on the democrats in four years. In fact, if I were a republican, I would not be at all troubled by the prospect of another four years of a “liberal” democrat who has done miraculous rehab on the republicans and who has protected so much of their agenda.
“…they both suck…”
Now, dangit, Kafka, we’re trying to avoid saying that. It kind of depresses enthusiasm, as well as contributions.
:o)
Florida is one of about 4-5 states that will determine the next occupant of the WH and servant of the 1%.
However, current electoral maps show Obama with 284 and Romney with 190. Romney will likely have to winn all the “toss-up” states and steal one currently in Obama’s camp.
I agree. I have republican friends who have been up-in-arms for the last 3.5 years about Obama in office. What are they mad about? He’s a “socialist”. They can’t really give good examples, though. To my surprise and consternation, I find myself in (silent) agreement with them. Obama is a CORPORATE socialist.
If progressive views are going to get anywhere, progressive writers when discussing the “cognitive dissonance” of numbers like these MUST start pointing out that much of the “don’t like what Obama has done for the economy” comes from the Krugthulu/Keynesian wing of the party who mostly are going to vote for Obama because yes, the alternative is worse.
But unless we start EMPHASIZING that Obama supporters DO NOT LIKE his policies MOSTLY because the alternatives are either, 1) vote for the bat-shit crazy reactionaries or 2) tilt at Green windmills, there WILL BE NO PRESSURE on Obama’s crew to talk about the issue.
It’s a really good idea not to quote these “contrary” figures and then say–or even imply–that it “puzzling”….
It is unfortunate that Media & Team Obama are not doing a better job at pointing Blame where it really lies, at the feet of GOP-Congress. There are three good books out that lay out how GOP have obstructed job growth in the U.S., so as to defeat Pres. Obama. They had to get the Congress by making healthcare a boogeyman, and they got it. Then they refused to pass Jobs & Transporation Bills. They furthered weakned the economy last year with the debt debauchle, which sent us backwards; GOP Governors have refused to take Stimulus and create infra-structure jobs or high-speed rail. And there are many more bills that in the Senate are filibustered. If Pres. Obama had had a Democratic Congress job growth would have been much further along and steady. He can right the ship as in Auto Industry, Bin Ladin. He is trying to make it so Rich people pay their faire share. But money talks and it is hard to overcome the entrenched greed and power of those corporations who lobby and buy off politicians.
Anyway,president Obama fall short expectations in every chapter,from jobs to foreclosures,to Health care(no single payer,everything for Big Phar),to taxes,to middle class,etc,etc,you name it.Obama is Misstress of Big Banks and Corps,
like this Romney.Dems and republicans politicians are in the same pot,everyone trying to make a buck out of people, AND Dems are criticizing Bain capital?…come on.!!