Poll: Obama worst president since WWII

[apdst]

The IRS scandal didn't become known until May of last year if i remember right. Besides both Romney and Obama spent a billion dollars each. I am not sure if any further advertising would have done any good. There comes a point in time when people just get tired of political ads regardless of who is airing them. Like it or not, Romney had a trust factor even among Republicans that wasn't there for Obama. The timing of the election was perfect for Obama, he was at his high of a 52% approval rating where Romney was never higher than 44%. In fact Romney's disapproval rating were higher than his approval ones except right after the first debate when they were tied at 44% each.

But that is history, I could go into more detail but let's just say Romney's campaign was minor league compared to Obama's.

IRS, VA, Benghazi etc. all came to light after the election, hence the reason I said, "had we known then what we know now".

 

[vesper]

''People's Opinions" is how we got landed with such a incompetent for a President.

Now, people can actually base their opinions on something substantial, instead of the empty platitudes and bumper sticker slogans people like YOU fell for....twice

Though I appreciate your post, I must say the reason so many fell for the platitudes and bumper stickers is due to a MSM that for the most part has become an arm to leftist ideology politics. They no longer see a need to vet a presidential candidate as long as they think he has the potential to fill all the dance cards of the special interests they support. For the busy person who spends his life working for a living, raising a family, often has limited time to even view the news let alone the time to investigate the truthfulness. If they have only time to tune in to catch the news twice a week and keep hearing "Bush lied thousands died" over and over the impact this has on their thinking is phenomenal. But after 6 years of Obama according to the latest polling they have learned a hard lesson.

 

[apdst]

Since average unemployment under GWB was a little under 5.3% and under BHO it's at least two points higher, I'm not sure many would agree that BHO has done better on the economy.eace

It's purdy much a given that Obama has screwed over the economy nine ways from Sunday.

 

[Perotista]

What is truly amazing is the popularity of Reagan after the constant drum beat that he was a somewhat senile idiot who really didn't understand what was going on.

Given that Obama is hailed as the smartest President to ever steal from us, maybe we need a somewhat senile idiot who can start a 25 year economic boom, rebuild our international prestige and strike a little terror into the hearts of our enemies.

The current genius is a loser on all levels and a failure in every arena.

Looks like despite the adoring, fawning press idolizing him and blowing him kisses in every press conference as he answers their fan club questions, the reality is leaking out.

Compare the 2006 worst president results to the 2014 worst president results:


...............................Jul 02 Jun 01
............................... 2014...2006

Harry Truman................0..........1
Dwight Eisenhower.........1..........0
John Kennedy................0..........1
Lyndon Johnson.............3..........4
Richard Nixon...............13.........17
Gerald Ford....................2..........2
Jimmy Carter..................8.........13
Ronald Reagan...............3...........3
George Bush Senior.........2...........3
Bill Clinton.....................3..........16
George W. Bush.............28.........34
Barack Obama................33.........NA

I think this poll is a lot like the polls who as who was the best baseball or football player ever. Those active today, playing today get most of the votes and those further back in time get fewer and fewer. Notice Carter improved, Nixon improved, Clinton went from 16% as the worst president since WWII to only 3%.

This question was also asked: Do you think Barack Obama has been a better President than George W. Bush, worse, or about the same as President Bush?

........................Jul 02...Jan 13...Nov 17...Jul 21...Jan 13
.........................2014....2011.....2010......2010.....2010

Better...................39........46........43..........42........43
Worse...................40........30........37..........32........30
About the same......20........22........19...........23.......23

 

[Perotista]

I'm not sure Washington would have had the stomach to run a political campaign in this climate of lies, hate and division.

You are absolutely correct.

 

[Perotista]

IRS, VA, Benghazi etc. all came to light after the election, hence the reason I said, "had we known then what we know now".

Perhaps, I do think if the election was held today vs. November 2012, Romney would have won. here is another trend line that was inside the poll:

TREND: In the Presidential election of 2012, if Mitt Romney had become President instead of Barack Obama, do you think that, in general, the nation would be better off than it is today or worse off than it is today? (* election of 2008, if John McCain)
.....................ROMNEY MCCAIN
.....................Jul 02......Jan 13...Jul 21...Jan 13
.....................2014.......2011*....2010*...2010*

Better off..........45...........32..........37......35
Worse off..........38...........41..........35......37
SAME................10...........14..........15......17

 

[Puigb]

well, this thread descended quickly into the expected right wing circle jerk.

 

[Puigb]

What is truly amazing is the popularity of Reagan after the constant drum beat that he was a somewhat senile idiot who really didn't understand what was going on.

Given that Obama is hailed as the smartest President to ever steal from us, maybe we need a somewhat senile idiot who can start a 25 year economic boom, rebuild our international prestige and strike a little terror into the hearts of our enemies.

The current genius is a loser on all levels and a failure in every arena.

Looks like despite the adoring, fawning press idolizing him and blowing him kisses in every press conference as he answers their fan club questions, the reality is leaking out.

In all honesty, the only thing that this poll shows is that a lot of low information conservatives participated, hence Reagan finishing first.

 

[Fenton]

So its ok to run a racist hate spewing church as long as you served in the military??? Is this the best you got??? Man you are reaching.

He's High on " Hope and Change ".

Its a terrible addiction, that forces you to disconnect from any semblance of character and integrity.

 

[Fenton]

In all honestly, the only thing that this poll shows is that a lot of low information conservatives participated, hence Reagan finishing first.

" Low information " is equating empty platitudes and bumper sticker slogans to Presidential qualifications.

It's why this poll exist.

 

[Jack Hays]

In all honestly, the only thing that this poll shows is that a lot of low information conservatives participated, hence Reagan finishing first.

Since it was a professional poll conducted by a respected organization the more likely conclusion is that you are in denial.

 

[Navy Pride]

Obama The ‘Worst’ President Since WWII? See How He Stacks Up

I been telling you guys this for a long long time.

Obama The ‘Worst’ President Since WWII? See How He Stacks Up - ABC News

 

[Perotista]

In all honestly, the only thing that this poll shows is that a lot of low information conservatives participated, hence Reagan finishing first.

Actually for Reagan being the best president, it broke down to 35% total, 66% Republican, 6% Democratic, 36% independent. Now what is interesting is 8% of all voters said Obama was the best president since WWII, it broke down like this: Total 8%,Republican 4%, Democrat 18% Independent 2%

The interesting part on Obama is more Republicans 4% think Obama was the best president since WWII and only 2% of independents thought that way. Think about that.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

I'm guessing you didn't even half digest what I said?

People's opinions at this point doesn't mean ****.

What is that called again? Argumentum ad populum? I think that was the correct term. believing something is automatically positively true because people think it's true (classic!).

You mean like peoples' opinions doesn't mean ****? Ever heard of a mid-term election?

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Re: Obama The ‘Worst’ President Since WWII? See How He Stacks Up

I thought you far right wingers didnt believe in democracy. Why believe in this vote?

 

[Linc]

Re: Obama The ‘Worst’ President Since WWII? See How He Stacks Up

This is now the third thread upstairs on this exact topic--first was Perotista at 11:38 my time.

And did you catch where FOX was mad cuz Obama didn't go in person to Brazil?

Yet they would have complained about the cost and security nightmares OTOH. :lamo

Result: FOX losers in these polls are now further against Obama since he couldn't do both or neither .

 

[Puigb]

Actually for Reagan being the best president, it broke down to 35% total, 66% Republican, 6% Democratic, 36% independent. Now what is interesting is 8% of all voters said Obama was the best president since WWII, it broke down like this: Total 8%,Republican 4%, Democrat 18% Independent 2%

The interesting part on Obama is more Republicans 4% think Obama was the best president since WWII and only 2% of independents thought that way. Think about that.

It's my opinion that independents tend to lean one way or the other, either left of the center or right of the center. On this forum for example there are "independents" who very clearly lean right, and to a lesser extent, some who clearly lean left.

Regardless, I really don't care where Obama ranked, just voicing my opinion that Reagan finishing first by the amount he did is a joke, which makes the poll a joke in my book.

 

[Perotista]

It's my opinion that independents tend to lean one way or the other, either left of the center or right of the center. On this forum for example there are "independents" who very clearly lean right, and to a lesser extent, some who clearly lean left.

Regardless, I really don't care where Obama ranked, just voicing my opinion that Reagan finishing first by the amount he did is a joke, which makes the poll a joke in my book.

Well, I wouldn't call the poll a joke as it does show where or who the people today think who was the best and who was the worst. This is also why I put trend lines on a couple of replies to some posters. These things are dynamic and change all the time. This is a snapshot of today. Personally if I had voted, Eisenhower would have been the best followed by JFK, Truman and Clinton and Carter the worst followed by Ford, Bush the second and Obama.

But

 

[donsutherland1]

Since it was a professional poll conducted by a respected organization the more likely conclusion is that you are in denial.

The problem with the "low information" hypothesis is that the largest share of Independents also ranked Reagan first. One need not have agreed with all of Reagan's positions to recognize that he was an unusually effective leader. He knew how to build relationships with those whose support he needed to pursue his policy goals. He knew how to work with the opposition, respecting their needs, never personalizing deep differences, and continually displaying the kind of pragmatism to get things done. He also had the courage to decisively correct policy errors e.g., the U.S. having sent troops to Lebanon in the midst of a sectarian conflict. He knew when to shift from confrontation to conciliation in shifting course on the Soviet Union, a choice that set in motion the end game to a peaceful resolution of the Cold War. It is no surprise that he achieved much of his overall policy goals. Moreover, he left office when the economy was in the midst of a vigorous boom and Presidents are often judged on the state of the economy.

On the Democratic Party side, Clinton ranks #2. After a period of confrontation, he developed a capacity to work with the opposition GOP. He forged the personal meetings during the earlier confrontations into effective working relationships. Hence, he also accomplished a lot of his overall policy goals.

One of the key ingredients of leadership success is the ability to build relationships and leverage them toward strategic ends. Reagan and Clinton were able to do so. Their success in achieving large parts of their agenda was not accidental. It was the result of effective leadership. Not surprisingly, both men rank very high among their Parties and also among Independents.

 

[imagep]

It's my opinion that independents tend to lean one way or the other, either left of the center or right of the center. On this forum for example there are "independents" who very clearly lean right, and to a lesser extent, some who clearly lean left.

Regardless, I really don't care where Obama ranked, just voicing my opinion that Reagan finishing first by the amount he did is a joke, which makes the poll a joke in my book.

I get accused of being both left and right. Sometimes on the same issue and in the same thread. It's all a matter of perspective -"anyone who is less X conservative than me on any issue is a far left radical, anyone who is more conservative than me is a far right winger."

 

[Puigb]

Well, I wouldn't call the poll a joke as it does show where or who the people today think who was the best and who was the worst. This is also why I put trend lines on a couple of replies to some posters. These things are dynamic and change all the time. This is a snapshot of today. Personally if I had voted, Eisenhower would have been the best followed by JFK, Truman and Clinton and Carter the worst followed by Ford, Bush the second and Obama.

But

It's based on a small sample size, no? how many people participated?

Oh, and I agree with you on Ike, though I'm not sure I'd place him first.

 

[StillBallin75]

Moderator's Warning:

Threads merged

 

[imagep]

The problem with the "low information" hypothesis is that the largest share of Independents also ranked Reagan first. One need not have agreed with all of Reagan's positions to recognize that he was an unusually effective leader. He knew how to build relationships with those whose support he needed to pursue his policy goals. He knew how to work with the opposition, respecting their needs, never personalizing deep differences, and continually displaying the kind of pragmatism to get things done. He also had the courage to decisively correct policy errors e.g., the U.S. having sent troops to Lebanon in the midst of a sectarian conflict. He knew when to shift from confrontation to conciliation in shifting course on the Soviet Union, a choice that set in motion the end game to a peaceful resolution of the Cold War. It is no surprise that he achieved much of his overall policy goals. Moreover, he left office when the economy was in the midst of a vigorous boom and Presidents are often judged on the state of the economy.

On the Democratic Party side, Clinton ranks #2. After a period of confrontation, he developed a capacity to work with the opposition GOP. He forged the personal meetings during the earlier confrontations into effective working relationships. Hence, he also accomplished a lot of his overall policy goals.

One of the key ingredients of leadership success is the ability to build relationships and leverage them toward strategic ends. Reagan and Clinton were able to do so. Their success in achieving large parts of their agenda was not accidental. It was the result of effective leadership. Not surprisingly, both men rank very high among their Parties and also among Independents.

What is funny is that Clinton practiced fiscal restraint and balanced the budget, something that conservatives claim that democrats don't want to do. And Reagan spent like a drunken sailor and ran up the federal debt, something that most republicans despise.

 

[StillBallin75]

It's based on a small sample size, no? how many people participated?

Oh, and I agree with you on Ike, though I'm not sure I'd place him first.

I'm one of those people who think polling has limited utility in evaluation the actual job performance of Presidents as opposed to public perception, but to answer your question:

From June 24 - 30, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,446 registered voters nationwide with a margin of error of +/- 2.6 percentage points. Live interviewers call land lines and cell phones.

1,446 is actually a medium-large sample size compared to other polls I think. Margin of error is usually a function also of sample size.

From June 24 - 30, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,446 registered voters nationwide with a margin of error of +/- 2.6 percentage points. Live interviewers call land lines and cell phones.

 

[Puigb]

What is funny is that Clinton practiced fiscal restraint and balanced the budget, something that conservatives claim that democrats don't want to do. And Reagan spent like a drunken sailor and ran up the federal debt, something that most republicans despise.

They only despise it when Democrats do it.