Obama Approval Compares Favorably to Other Presidents

[TheTaoOfBill]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/118928/Obama-Approval-Compares-Favorably-Prior-Presidents.aspx

PRINCETON, NJ -- So far in May, Barack Obama has averaged 65% job approval. Since World War II, only three of the previous eight presidents elected to their first terms -- Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan -- have had a higher average approval rating in May of their first year. Obama's average exceeds those of the three most recent presidents -- George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/cusrq5svd0udikizqetopq.gif

Since he became president, the trend line on Obama's job approval rating in Gallup Poll Daily tracking has been fairly flat. However, his May average to date of 65% does represent a slight improvement over his ratings from the prior three months, which ranged from 62% to 64%.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/0w-hpadla0ktlbhyz-4jqa.gif

Historically, there has been no clear pattern in the trends for presidential approval ratings through May of a president's first year in office -- four of the previous eight post-World War II presidents showed increases in their approval ratings from February (Gallup does not have January readings for all presidents) to May, and four showed decreases.

The four presidents whose approval ratings increased were Eisenhower (+6 points), Kennedy (+5), Richard Nixon (+3), and Reagan (+15). Reagan's sharp increase was the product of a fairly low initial average of 53% combined with a spike in his approval rating associated with a rally in support after John Hinckley's attempted assassination of him in late March 1981.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/a0l-absp1ea6bkl_m2rw5w.gif

Obama would fall into the group of presidents who have increased their approval averages from February to May, though his rating has improved by just a single percentage point during this time, from 64% to 65%.

Declining approval ratings in the first four months of a president's term have been the norm recently. Of the last five presidents before Obama, only Reagan enjoyed an increase in his approval rating during this time. Jimmy Carter (-4 points), George H.W. Bush (-3), Clinton (-10), and George W. Bush (-4) all saw drops in public support.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/mcvfc3c13e2wyd5u7dnhag.gif

A number of factors probably contributed to Clinton's rather large decline in support. In terms of policy, he faced a backlash from the military and the public over his attempts to change policy to allow openly gay men and women to serve in the military, and he was unable to pass his proposed economic stimulus plan. Clinton had problems filling the attorney general position, and there was controversy over the siege of the Branch Davidians' Waco, Texas, compound. Also not to be dismissed was the public relations disaster created when Los Angeles International Airport runways were closed to allow the president to get a high-priced haircut.

Honeymoon Still Going On for Obama

Obama's consistent monthly averages above 60% clearly indicate he is still enjoying the honeymoon phase of his presidency. That level of support has been typical for presidents at this point in their terms; even though many presidents experienced declines in their approval ratings by May of their first year in office, all managed to stay at or above the 60% level except George W. Bush and Clinton.

Obama has had a few individual ratings of 59% in Gallup Poll Daily tracking, but not enough to push his average for any given week or month below 60%.

His popular support will certainly be tested in the coming months, though, as Congress begins work on some of his more ambitious initiatives, including his 2010 budget and healthcare reform. In addition to the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, he is also attempting to advance the Middle East peace process and deal with the increasingly serious situation in North Korea.

However, to date, according to the American public, he seems to be performing better than most of his immediate predecessors, and not worse than most post-World War II presidents.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with 13,310 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted May 1-27, 2009, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

[WASTRIC]

hummmm.... tied with Carter ;-)

[INDY4PUMAS]

Lincoln did not become a popular presidenti until 25+ years after his death.
He is considered one of the best now. In the big picture, short term perception means nothing.

[Spang]

In the big picture, short term perception means nothing.

Unless the short-term perception reveals Obama isn't doing well.

[INDY4PUMAS]

At the end of his first term, let's hope explicit results determine Obama's fate, not the bias perceptions broadcasted by left-wing and right wing "journalists".

[CGP]

Surprised that Bill Clinton had the lowest rating in this list...

[CGP]

I think it's actually very difficult to make any sense of these ratings over time.

People today learn far more information about a president, and far more untruths, than they would have 10-15-20-30 years ago. The explosion of the Internet means people are exposed to an endless range of information about a politician, much of which can be negative information. Back in the non-Internet days this means of inflence/impact was simply not present. So I don't take much notice of those 75% approval ratings in terms of regarding them as being the best ever - it has not been a level playing field over time. It's bad science to compare 2 results when the conditions that led to them are dramatically different.

[TheTaoOfBill]

Surprised that Bill Clinton had the lowest rating in this list...

Clinton's fell so quickly because he pushed so hard for gays to serve openly in the military. Perhaps that's a clue as to why Obama isn't pushing equally as hard and is asking congress to do it instead...

[CGP]

Clinton's fell so quickly because he pushed so hard for gays to serve openly in the military. Perhaps that's a clue as to why Obama isn't pushing equally as hard and is asking congress to do it instead...

Probably.

Apparently it's not a vote winner to support those, ah, gay people! :-bd

[TheTaoOfBill]

Probably.

Apparently it's not a vote winner to support those, ah, gay people! :-bd

Isn't that a shame? :mad:

[BillDemo]

"Obama Approval Compares Favorably to Other Presidents"? Gimme a break.

This should be titled "Obama Approval Compares Favorably to Other Presidents.... In A Poll Of Stupid Voters Who Keep Getting Fooled Again And Again And Again..."

Need I remind anyone that Obama is the least experienced President in Modern Times?

[TheTaoOfBill]

"Obama Approval Compares Favorably to Other Presidents"? Gimme a break.

This should be titled "Obama Approval Compares Favorably to Other Presidents.... In A Poll Of Stupid Voters Who Keep Getting Fooled Again And Again And Again..."

Need I remind anyone that Obama is the least experienced President in Modern Times?

What does that have anything to do with how he is performing?

[Spang]

What does that have anything to do with how he is performing?

We are nothing more than stupid voters, sitting on the couch sipping on some Kool-Aid.

[Wyoming Dem]

We are nothing more than stupid voters, sitting on the couch sipping on some Kool-Aid.
My Kool Aid would have to be infused with generous amounts of some alcoholic beverage for me to agree that Obama is doing a good job...About all I can say is he hasn't f***ed everything up yet (plenty of time...) and for me, that is being generous.
But imbibe on and continue to give me your kool-aid perpesctive...I have no other Kool Aid drinker source in my acquaintance ( I do after all, live in Cheny Land Wyoming.) And I find your optimism astounding!

[TheTaoOfBill]

I find myself agreeing with most everything Obama has done thus far. There are a few things here and there where I don't agree. And there are a few areas where I think he could do more. But for the most part I agree with what he is doing. I think Obama has been a thoughtful and effective president thus far.

[mavfin]

Ah, Tao blows his hero's horn again. (:|

[TheTaoOfBill]

Ah, Tao blows his hero's horn again. (:|

Comments like that make it extremely hard not to be a complete ******* on this forum. I'm not a blind follower of Obama. I just said there are things I disagree with and things I wish he did more for.

Obama is not my hero or messiah and I don't think Obama is the best president ever. I just support him because for the most part we are on the same wavelength. And apparently that's just too much for some people to handle on this forum.

I NEVER make snide comments to people about the people they support. You might see me attack the candidates themselves but I never treat someone on this forum like a jerk for the candidates they choose to support.

I'm sorry you can't handle the same level of restraint.

[mavfin]

Hmm. I seem to have struck a nerve. :surprise:

[Jobu86]

Hmm. I seem to have struck a nerve. :surprise:

Like that wasn't your intent.

[sojourner]

Comments like that make it extremely hard not to be a complete ******* on this forum. I'm not a blind follower of Obama. I just said there are things I disagree with and things I wish he did more for.


I remember the HCF chat line on election night that you participated in and couldn’t believe that you were allowed to join HCF the next day (You were a bit of a jerk that night).

Your posts here have been very respectful. I apologize for misjudging you.

P.S. have you been attending AA meeting? :)

[mavfin]

Like that wasn't your intent.

Yes, it was my intent. When people continue to cheerlead for someone, and highlight how great they are, no matter what that someone does or doesn't do, and gloss over problems, I tend to call them on it. If you don't like that, I understand. It's your prerogative to dislike what I do or how I do it.

It's a free country, and free speech still lives, as long as I'm not threatening anyone, and I don't do that. Obviously, if Murray asks me to stop, then that's where free speech ends on the forum, as it's his, and he defines the rules.

There are two in particular on this forum that are very good at cheering for their hero, and excusing his failures in any way they can justify. I call them on it once in a while, and watch to see who runs to defend them for it.

[Jobu86]

Yes, it was my intent. When people continue to cheerlead for someone, and highlight how great they are, no matter what that someone does or doesn't do, and gloss over problems, I tend to call them on it. If you don't like that, I understand. It's your prerogative to dislike what I do or how I do it.

It's a free country, and free speech still lives, as long as I'm not threatening anyone, and I don't do that. Obviously, if Murray asks me to stop, then that's where free speech ends on the forum, as it's his, and he defines the rules.

There are two in particular on this forum that are very good at cheering for their hero, and excusing his failures in any way they can justify. I call them on it once in a while, and watch to see who runs to defend them for it.

So it's not OK to cheer for him on most issues (and in fact they do post when they have disagreements with him), but it's perfectly fine to slam him on every single issue? There are more than 2 that do that. A little hypocritical there. Just because someone thinks Obama has been a good president does not make them a blind idiot.

[mavfin]

So it's not OK to cheer for him on most issues (and in fact they do post when they have disagreements with him), but it's perfectly fine to slam him on every single issue? There are more than 2 that do that. A little hypocritical there.

If you'll look around, you'll find I don't slam him on every issue. No, I won't list them. I still think he's a fraud, and that he's bad for the country, but, I hope that he turns out better than I expect, every day.

I think that his election exposed the electorate for what it is. Sheep for the media to manipulate. Many, many hard questions that most candidates have had to answer in the past were never asked of the Chosen One. His manner of ascension still makes me suspicious. So shoot me.

[Jobu86]

If you'll look around, you'll find I don't slam him on every issue. No, I won't list them.

I wasn't implying you were one of those that did, I was saying it's hypocritical to point at those "2" as problems when there are more on the opposite side doing the same thing.

[Kbentleyis]

I would like all to keep in mind that Axelrod (BHO's administration), pays for most of these polls. They live by the polls. I expect they question the same people over and over. Saves on cost, I would presume.

Much of the youth supported BHO, and I can see why. BHO's life is a stage, and most youth love the "idol", "movie star", rolls. You'll find most agree with his ideology and face value. The "older" crowd that supported him, actually thought he'd change things... which is the reason we're hearing about so much buyer's remorse--he changed things for the worse.

99% of the time we've seen BHO it's been on a stage and pre-written. And, now, his news coverage is controlled by his personal White House press. How sad. No one is ever going to see the "real" BHO. One has to be careful and instead of listening to what he says, watch what he does. He stays a mystery to all concerns. The one thing that is apparent and he cannot hide is his obsession to have power; to control.

I personally cannot wait until the final curtain comes down on this administration. I've had enough of the Hollywood facade.

[Jobu86]

I would like all to keep in mind that Axelrod (BHO's administration), pays for most of these polls. They live by the polls. I expect they question the same people over and over. Saves on cost, I would presume.

Much of the youth supported BHO, and I can see why. BHO's life is a stage, and most youth love the "idol", "movie star", rolls. You'll find most agree with his ideology and face value. The "older" crowd that supported him, actually thought he'd change things... which is the reason we're hearing about so much buyer's remorse--he changed things for the worse.

99% of the time we've seen BHO it's been on a stage and pre-written. And, now, his news coverage is controlled by his personal White House press. How sad. No one is ever going to see the "real" BHO. One has to be careful and instead of listening to what he says, watch what he does. He stays a mystery to all concerns. The one thing that is apparent and he cannot hide is his obsession to have power; to control.

I personally cannot wait until the final curtain comes down on this administration. I've had enough of the Hollywood facade.

Right. Gallup is biased toward the Obama administration. They've been doing independent polling for many decades as a cover so they could appear impartial when Obama finally came into the picture.

[TheTaoOfBill]

I would like all to keep in mind that Axelrod (BHO's administration), pays for most of these polls. They live by the polls. I expect they question the same people over and over. Saves on cost, I would presume.

Much of the youth supported BHO, and I can see why. BHO's life is a stage, and most youth love the "idol", "movie star", rolls. You'll find most agree with his ideology and face value. The "older" crowd that supported him, actually thought he'd change things... which is the reason we're hearing about so much buyer's remorse--he changed things for the worse.

99% of the time we've seen BHO it's been on a stage and pre-written. And, now, his news coverage is controlled by his personal White House press. How sad. No one is ever going to see the "real" BHO. One has to be careful and instead of listening to what he says, watch what he does. He stays a mystery to all concerns. The one thing that is apparent and he cannot hide is his obsession to have power; to control.

I personally cannot wait until the final curtain comes down on this administration. I've had enough of the Hollywood facade.

Absolutely not true. But keep holding on to that false sense of reality. It will help him win again in 2012.

[Brooke]

Surprised that Bill Clinton had the lowest rating in this list...

He was pretty slow out the gate. It wasn't just gays in the military and "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (something he now disagrees with), it was also the health care task force thing. People didn't take well to the plan and to putting Hillary in charge.

And let's not forget this was also the time Filegate and Travelgate were happening. Not to mention the $200 haircuts that tied up the runway at LAX on a visit to L.A. (I am probably the person in this country who remembers that..lol).

[sojourner]

Absolutely not true. But keep holding on to that false sense of reality. It will help him win again in 2012.

The part about Axelrod paying for the poll is probably false, but the rest?

[Brooke]

I would like all to keep in mind that Axelrod (BHO's administration), pays for most of these polls. They live by the polls. I expect they question the same people over and over. Saves on cost, I would presume.

Much of the youth supported BHO, and I can see why. BHO's life is a stage, and most youth love the "idol", "movie star", rolls. You'll find most agree with his ideology and face value. The "older" crowd that supported him, actually thought he'd change things... which is the reason we're hearing about so much buyer's remorse--he changed things for the worse.

99% of the time we've seen BHO it's been on a stage and pre-written. And, now, his news coverage is controlled by his personal White House press. How sad. No one is ever going to see the "real" BHO. One has to be careful and instead of listening to what he says, watch what he does. He stays a mystery to all concerns. The one thing that is apparent and he cannot hide is his obsession to have power; to control.

I personally cannot wait until the final curtain comes down on this administration. I've had enough of the Hollywood facade.

Way to promote the demise of Hillary's current job and call the administration she works for a "charade" on a Hillary forum. Brilliant.

[mavfin]

Way to promote the demise of Hillary's current job and call the administration she works for a "charade" on a Hillary forum. Brilliant.

Hillary is still Hillary. But, the administration she works for is in many ways a charade. That is not demeaning Hillary. Saying that it does is stretching, imo.

To go by your rule there, we couldn't criticize Obama's administration on this forum at all, because Hillary is the SoS. Nope, not going by that.

[Wyoming Dem]

Hillary is still Hillary. But, the administration she works for is in many ways a charade. That is not demeaning Hillary. Saying that it does is stretching, imo.

To go by your rule there, we couldn't criticize Obama's administration on this forum at all, because Hillary is the SoS. Nope, not going by that.
I agree...Hillary CLinton accepted the job for reasons of her own which I have failed utterly to understand. I personally, could never vote for her again and saw her taking the job as a betrayel. But that is me personally and I understand others do not feel the same way. She certainly knew who Obama was and, by accepting the job, was willing to overlook it. His administration is a sham...a barely disguised "version" of Bush and how his supporters can still believe in the hopey/changey mantra while keeping a straight face, I will never understand. The list of broken campaign promises (FISA, Guantanamo, Afghanistan, ending both wars, Don't ask don't tell, etc) is growing faster than Obama's rhetoric. How can true believers be willing to overlook all of those things? What could he possibly do that would undermine their support? So I do think that criticism of Hillary Clinton is acceptable and certainly, criticism of the Obama Administration is as well (and way too easy...)

[Kbentleyis]

TaoOfBill, and others; I would never give you a lot of BS regarding "who pays for the polls". You can believe what you like, but I'm betting BHO's favorability is so far in the toilet, it's ready to be flushed.

Just because you don't see it in black and white, don't be so quick to dismiss. Take your own polls. Many who spend time on the computer, open your phone book and do, oh, maybe 20 calls. (First have your questions ready). I did last week. I made 50 calls. 3 gave a somewhat favorable answer. I can't repeat what others said.

Time to start backing up this support BS. Some of you would be appauled of the remarks I've heard.

Please do your own poll. It's an education for everyone.

[Jobu86]

TaoOfBill, and others; I would never give you a lot of BS regarding "who pays for the polls". You can believe what you like, but I'm betting BHO's favorability is so far in the toilet, it's ready to be flushed.

Just because you don't see it in black and white, don't be so quick to dismiss. Take your own polls. Many who spend time on the computer, open your phone book and do, oh, maybe 20 calls. (First have your questions ready). I did last week. I made 50 calls. 3 gave a somewhat favorable answer. I can't repeat what others said.

Time to start backing up this support BS. Some of you would be appauled of the remarks I've heard.

Please do your own poll. It's an education for everyone.

I'm not going to call random people up, it's just not my thing. But you honestly believe Scott Rasmussen, a conservative (and excellent) pollster is overestimating Obama's favorable rating? He has him just under 60%, and I would bet quite a lot that Obama's true favorable rating is very near that. Rasmussen would never mess with his poll to put Obama in a better light. Why would he? He's never been an Obama supporter at all. I find it hard to take you guys seriously regarding polls after many here completely dismissed the pre-election polls as way off when they ended up being nearly dead on, or even underestimating Obama's support. I just see that happening now again.

[Spang]

Please do your own poll. It's an education for everyone.

I don't have to. I already know that at least 75% of the people I call out of a local phone book will think less-than-favorably of Barack Obama. Then again, I live in East Tennessee.

[Kbentleyis]

I'm not going to call random people up, it's just not my thing. But you honestly believe Scott Rasmussen, a conservative (and excellent) pollster is overestimating Obama's favorable rating? He has him just under 60%, and I would bet quite a lot that Obama's true favorable rating is very near that. Rasmussen would never mess with his poll to put Obama in a better light. Why would he? He's never been an Obama supporter at all. I find it hard to take you guys seriously regarding polls after many here completely dismissed the pre-election polls as way off when they ended up being nearly dead on, or even underestimating Obama's support. I just see that happening now again.

We just saw 847 million buy the White House, so it shouldn't be too hard to imagine. Think back, have you ever see so many polls given until this election? Why, the only poll we ever saw was on Bush or Pelosi from time to time.

Pollsters have to make a living too.

[Wyoming Dem]

I don't have to. I already know that at least 75% of the people I call out of a local phone book will think less-than-favorably of Barack Obama. Then again, I live in East Tennessee.
Shame on you...racial profiling.

[Spang]

Shame on you...racial profiling.

Obama is very much hated in East Tennessee.

[TheTaoOfBill]

TaoOfBill, and others; I would never give you a lot of BS regarding "who pays for the polls". You can believe what you like, but I'm betting BHO's favorability is so far in the toilet, it's ready to be flushed.

Just because you don't see it in black and white, don't be so quick to dismiss. Take your own polls. Many who spend time on the computer, open your phone book and do, oh, maybe 20 calls. (First have your questions ready). I did last week. I made 50 calls. 3 gave a somewhat favorable answer. I can't repeat what others said.

Time to start backing up this support BS. Some of you would be appauled of the remarks I've heard.

Please do your own poll. It's an education for everyone.

People on this forum were saying the exact same thing about Obama and polling during the election. The voters proved that theory wrong.

The pollsters are not corrupt and they do paint an accurate picture of where the nation stands. And right now it stands pretty favorably in Obama's court.

[Brooke]

I still don't understand the reasoning behind mavfin, KBentleyis, and Wyoming Dem's posts (re: Hillary). But I'm willing to respect it, nonetheless.

[mack20]

If you guys would like a different metric other than polling with which to judge, how about using the Intrade Prediction Market? Prediction Markets are notoriously accurate. For example, Intrade predicted the election result in every single state correctly in both the 2004 and 2006 elections. In fact, in 2006 the stronger the favorite in the betting markets, the larger the margin of victory. In the 2008 election, Intrade only missed 2 states in the general election, Indiana and Missouri, with the only other error being that Nebraska split it's votes for the first time in election history. Overall, Intrade predicted the final electoral votes as 364-174.

Right now Intrade has it as a 70% chance that Obama has a favorable rating of 60%+ in June and an 98% chance that Obama's favorable rating is 55%+ for the month.

[VotingHillary]

I still don't understand the reasoning behind mavfin, KBentleyis, and Wyoming Dem's posts (re: Hillary). But I'm willing to respect it, nonetheless.

hillarystamp!

I don't get it either. While I wasn't all that thrilled initially when she accepted SOS, I do feel SAFER because of the fact that she is.

[sojourner]

hillarystamp!

I don't get it either. While I wasn't all that thrilled initially when she accepted SOS, I do feel SAFER because of the fact that she is.

She opposed Obama on many issues and then joined his administration. Seems like she betrayed the people that supported her the most and turned out to be just another politician. If they were PUMAs I can definitely see why they would be upset.

[TheTaoOfBill]

She opposed Obama on many issues and then joined his administration. Seems like she betrayed the people that supported her the most and turned out to be just another politician. If they were PUMAs I can definitely see why they would be upset.

Hillary really wasn't on the opposite side of Obama on too many issues. Her differences with Obama were for the most part cosmetic and not ideological. It is not surprising at all that 2 democrats who are for the most part in lock step on foreign policy would work together.

[sojourner]

Hillary really wasn't on the opposite side of Obama on too many issues. Her differences with Obama were for the most part cosmetic and not ideological. It is not surprising at all that 2 democrats who are for the most part in lock step on foreign policy would work together.

That would explain it also.