This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Gallup Predicts A Ruling Party Rout In The Midterms Based On Obama's Popularity Rating
Gallup presents some troubling statistics for the democrats as we approach mid-term elections (a mere three months away). In a nutshell, the party of a president who has a sub-50% rating into midterms, has lost, on average, 36 seats since 1946. Alternatively, presidents with a popularity rating over 50%, lose just 14. As Gallup says: "The clear implication is that the Democrats are vulnerable to losing a significant number of House seats this fall with Barack Obama's approval rating averaging 45% during the last two full weeks of Gallup Daily tracking. The Republicans would need to gain 40 House seats to retake majority control."
Of course, the administration (and its dwindling members) is well-aware of this fact, which is why the next three months will likely see a record amount of pandering, populism and outright manipulation of everything that can be manipulated: that includes mortgages rates, and of course, stocks. Which leads us to observe the calendar of FOMC meetings until November: there are two - tomorrow and September 21. However, for a Fed loosening decision to have a material impact, the September meeting is likely cutting it too close to the election date, as the market will likely not have enough time to digest a favorable outcome, or in turn will be into its reactionary phase by the time November rolls around. Furthermore, the traditionally busy post-Labor day docket will likely mean events on the economic front already have to be in motion by then. Lastly, the fact that the Fed will have just a bare minimum quorum of just four directors through September 10 (at a minimum), means that any decision in the 11 days between then and the 21st will likely be far more problematic than one which has to be taken tomorrow. Which is why from a purely political calendar point of view, tomorrow's Fed meeting is likely seen by the administration as a make or break. The tenuous 40 seat lead which will likely disappear should the current economic trajectory not change, is certainly on the radar for both Obama, and the very independent Federal Reserve.
More observations from Gallup:
On a historical basis, the Democrats under Jimmy Carter suffered the slimmest seat loss of a party whose president was below 50% approval, losing 11 seats in the 1978 midterms. More recently, Bill Clinton in 1994 and George W. Bush in 2006 saw their parties lose enough seats in the House to turn party control over to the opposition party when they had less than majority approval.
The president's party nearly always loses seats in midterm elections, regardless of how well the president is rated by the public. Since World War II, only Clinton in 1998 and Bush in 2002 saw their parties gain seats in a midterm. Both men had approval ratings above 60% at the time of those elections. However, the parties of the other three presidents with ratings above 60% (Eisenhower in 1954, Kennedy in 1962, and Reagan in 1986) lost seats.
In general, though, the more popular a president is, the fewer seats his party loses, as presidents with approval ratings above 60% have averaged just a three-seat loss.
Bottom Line
With the Democratic Party in control of the White House and Congress, and key predictors of midterm seat change -- including presidential approval, congressional approval, and national satisfaction -- below average historically, the Democrats are clearly fighting an uphill battle this midterm election year.
And below is the empirical evidence:
»
- 12272 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Well you're just all sunshine and roses, aren't you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PRlqfauc4Y
Yeah - way too inflamatory not to make some kind of local press. I'd like to see some details on this so-called teacher firing.
Depends who you talk to. People that are proud to work for a living, honestly, are becoming an endangered species.
Cute. Getting junked for asking for primary sources to support a claim.
Personally, I'm with R. Heinlein in "Starship Troopers" in that only people that serve(d) in the military are entitled to vote. Discipline, my friends, discipline.
groupthink my friend, groupthink.
I suggest: Only property owners/tax payers vote
No, no, no. Voting only leads to government
I would prefer the anarcho-capitalist route. That way folks just use their labor and property as they see fit. Every bit of hard currency earned and spent is a vote for products or services provided by others. Those who provide the best products and services are the only leaders an economy or a society requires. Good ideas ARE good leadership. Why does there have to be some unproductive know-it-all in the middle of voluntary transactions mucking things up?
Do we really have to have Cramer on both sides of the screen -- he's making me sqeamish ........................
August -500k September -500k October -500k
GOP gains will be more limited than you think.
First, the US public isn't ready to trust GOP again so soon after the 2008 debacle, the bailouts and the two eternal wars. There's still a smell in the room. GOP economic agenda, which swayed voters since the 1980s, is being questioned and mistrusted now that it looks like it ended up crashing and burning in the crisis. Voter concerns have moved on and changed.
Voters don't trust the calls for "austerity" with Boehner already threatening to raise the retirement age to 70 and cut medicare. GOP also tried to block unemployment extensions. This won't fly too well. Not while banksters and Wall Street got bailouts all too easily. Not when people fear they might need the safety net some day real soon and it just won't be there for them if GOP dismantles it.
People feel they've imposed austerity on themselves already. Tax cuts won't comfort a middle class who's jobs, incomes and real estate are in trouble. Tax cuts look cheap and paltry to people with deflating incomes and work hours. They know big incomes are the ones who really benefit. People are worried about becoming debt slaves and GOP policy favors creditors.
You don't become a debt slave unless you go in to debt. Austerity will come, one way or another. Keynesian Stimulus can not be indefinite.
Guess what? Medicare is going to blow out, it will be restructured whether the voters want it to or not.
So true. People get real upset when you tell them they might have to work until age 70. I don't care, I know I'll probably be working until I die. Most of my retirement money is gone now thanks to Wall Street crooks.
People get real upset when you tell them they might have to work until age 70
Hell, I get pissed if I have to work past 2 PM.
Something that bothers me about tomorrow is that everyone and his uncle have assumed that the Fed will ease tomorrow. What if tomorrow the Fed instead announces a jobs program? Is it in their mandate to do that or does such a bill have to be passed by the house?
Jobs programs are a fiscal policy decision. The fed purportedly executes monetary policies whose end is the duel mandate - which of course might include things like fleet sales see earlier post; so yes maybe we will get a new asset back facility that will be "creative" which means facilitate the offloading of junk car loans onto taxpayers since the German banks are reportedly out of the market. A camero for every J6P. And just think if that boob Erin Burnett gets her way, then you will get a free share of GM with the your Eldorado 2.0 so not only will you get ripped off when the car depreciates 30% as you turn it over, but you will be equally fleeced by a valuation that reflects the promise of new tomorrows
Brought to you by Geico with the personal stamp of approval by Rattner - again purportedly, he has apparently taken the 5th
I hate to put cnbc up on here, but check out how they snuffed Schiff!
In Connecticut, Linda McMahon, a former CEO, is financing her own campaign against former Rep. Rob Simmons in in the Republican primary August 10. The winner faces Democrat Richard Blumenthal, the state's attorney general, who stepped into the race when long-time incumbent Chris Dodd decided to retire.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/38469596?slide=3
Is Vince on steriods? I remember a number of years ago he was just a skinny kind of big mouth and then I saw these pics of him lately and the 1st thing that came to mind was steroids or HGH.
Snap into a slim jim ;)
So now I have a choice between the Banker Party and the Other Banker Party.
No matter who you vote for the government always gets in.
At least we will get to see the surreal horror of a lame duck congress scrambling to get paid and Barry's election surprise.
Partisanship is just an excuse not to think. The Republicans fucked us over for most of the past 30 years, from time to time we got fucked over by the Democrats, and the idea that either party is going to turn this ship around can only rightfully be completely insane.
Vote for whomever you prefer, but don't expect things to get better no matter who wins or by how much. It would be far more productive if we could lay off Congress and most of the Executive branch than just shuffle the chairs around from time to time.
This amuses me--is Utah a red or blue state?
http://www.naturalnews.com/029286_rainwater_collection_water.html
Does it make one whit of difference anymore?
I would prefer to "lay them out" rather than "lay them off". Much more satisfying and would more appropriately serve the sense of justice.
I would prefer to "lay them out"
Is that prize fighting or funerary parlance you're using?
You're choice.
I agree with you on that. It's just shuffling chairs around on the Titanic. The Reaganites really screwed us over for the last 30 years & I don't expect anything earth-shattering from the Dems either this time around. When people start rioting maybe then they'll all get it, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Reagan talked the talk but he couldn't walk the walk. He did, however, nap the nap.
so, does clicking that annoying Cramer ad make ZeroHedge money? I just clicked it 5 times...
In reality it does not help. If a site's clicks don't lead to reasonable conversion, the payment per click is adjusted. So, you are not doing any favors clicking, if not interested, and not potentially a buyer. Some people look at the ads like a tip jar, and click, but in reality it probably hurts more than it helps.
That muse probably paid off AdSense to plant his ass permanently on the ZH site.......funded by the Squid, no doubt.
I don't know nothing about anything. Neither doe's Kramer. He makes me want to laugh & puke @ the same time.
I'm expecting JPM et al to use the election as a jihad against PM, maybe covering their shorts, who knows. Turbo would like to send a message to everyone 'Don't screw with me' especially if the Dems lose the House control. The spin of course would be Washington getting serious about the deficit, responsible government, whatever. Of course we are way past the point of no return.
Voting?
I remember when I used to believe that voting had meaning beyond charade maintenance.
Sieg Heil!
Vote Racoons!
Not just Coons!
I give you Jason Chaffetz to see what Conservatives are.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGEzasVvNCg
Don't drag the Coon into your political rants!
You'll get one Angry raccoon!
Rocky didn't like that, he said, "I'm gonna get that boy."
I think voting is like saying, ok, I drank the kool aid. It's a vote in favor of their theater. My voting history: first time, for Jimmy Carter because RayGun was a hollywood actor. Second time I accidentally pulled the lever under Lyndon LaRouche, so I guess I voted for him. Avoided registering for a long time. Liked Ron Paul, so I registered republican in order to vote for him. He pulled out, and I got jury duty, in a city that makes Baghdad look quiet. Wish I could un-register.
Huxleys Greatniece
ok, I drank the kool aid
I heard that Huxley could mix up a really mean pitcher of kool-aid.
How do you trade or bet that Republicans take the house in November?
That's what I'm interested in.
If that happens it means stale mate so how is that good for the country.
How will CNBC be able to spin that that is a reason for the market to go higher?
Intrade has all manner of futures markets, including elections, financial news, etc.
Doesn't matter who wins, they all follow the same script once they get in office.
In CT it looks like Linda McMahon will win the Republican nomination for Senator to replace Dodd and join Lieberman. The Dems look poised to nominate the CT Atty Gen., Blumenthal. Until two years ago McMahon contributed to Rahm Emanuels run for Congress, Lieberman's run as an independent after he lost the Democrat Primary!
It doesn't matter if McMahon or Blumenthal win, either one will do fine voting with Senator Joe Lieberman.
So, please, vote the first Wednesday in November.
Moron.
Did we just lose the Net?
Google Goes Evil:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-green/breaking-google-goes-evil_b_676...
I can't figure out who I hate more, the Bush team lead by Bernanke, Geithner and Paulson, or the Obama team lead by Bernanke, Geithner and Rubin. I think once the R's regain their majority and throw out Rubin and put in Phil Gramm all our problems will be solved.
It's hard not to disagree.
Glass-Steagall had less pages and was far more effective than anything we have seen lately.
I find it hard to believe that the GOP will pick up 40 House seats. 20 maybe, but not 40. At this point in the game it is way too early to be projecting those kinds of numbers for GOP pick-ups in the House. None of those pollsters will be able to even pick it right the day before the election. There's way too many variables in the upcoming elections.
Keep dreaming - more like 60! - not that they will do any more than stop the socialist - but hey- gridlock is beautiful.
you should look up socialism sometime instead of listening to soundbites from Fox n' Friends in between their banter on the best self-tanning lotions and if Lindsay will go to rehab or not.
Jesus -another fucking moron commie bastard.
look up communism too. your ignorance knows no bounds. next you will call me a fascist perhaps, you already know my response.
He knows...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8saYAuyApUE
you should look up...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrCJhGVcjxg
Why not other elections have netted the out of power party even more previously. Besides there are a bunch of pissed off voters wandering around these days looking for the "change" they were promised by the lying sack of shit occupying the White House at present.
Like it makes a difference.
Lennox.. nice post on mercury. And that is not even SFC (shit from China) which is far worse and more prevalent. Ross Perot was right about NAFTA and Al Gore was wrong (I think he is right about other shit but he has been about 50.50).
People will be dying of cancer in trashed parking lots.... but in the White House, I am sure they are eating 100% organic, 100% of the time on yo' dime bitch...
Buy way out of the money puts, a farm in Canada, gold and guns people because no one is workin for ya, they'ze be workin' 'ginst ya... ain't nothin' gonna' stop it.
I think I will have to come back on as a new character... the Hick... just good ole' fashin' mind fuckin' Yeeeeeeehawwwwwwww I think I have gone fuckin nuts !!!! Yeeee fuckin haw...
"If you are Mad, then go mad." -Old Zen proverb
Do NOT look for fish in the treetops.
Unless a hurricane has just made land fall.
Unless a hurricane has just made land fall.
Nothing is more important to whatever is left of the value of the US Dollar, than for the House to turn Republican and for the Republicans to pick up a few more Senate seats to insure cloture.
Its that simple.
Forget about what the MSM is saying about the Republican agenda. Even if it was true, a Democrat controlled Senate will stop ideas that are too conservative just as a Republican House will stop cap and trade and other neo-liberal policy initiatives from people like Levin, Kerry and Leahy.
The Obama Administration had trouble lobbying the House and Senate when the Dems were in the majority. This Admin. is not up to the challenge of actually advancing cogent policy when they don't have the votes.
Also, don't be confused by what Members and Senators are saying in their districts and States to get elected. Once they're in the whole game changes. That said, the market really ought to drop like a rock if the Dems retain anything close to what they now enjoy and I would be truly worried to see what an emboldened Democrat controlled Congress would do to support Obama in the next cycle.
Nothing is more important to whatever is left of the value of the US Dollar, than for the House to turn Republican...
The dollar* is dead, long live the dollar**.
*Federal Reserve Note
**416 grains of standard silver
I keep imagining there must be a way that concerned citizens could shut down the government in a reasonably peaceable way. The recent revolt in Thailand was instructive - messy, and didn't end well. No plan would go flawlessly. What we need to look for is an ALREADY existing system that could establish itself NATIONALLY, in a short period of time. The Hells Angels would be one example- not the best one, for sure - but what other organizations are national and fairly recognizable, and have a command structure in place? Rotary Club? Association of Police Chiefs? I don't know what the best answer would be. If some organization could step up into a visible position, and come up with sveral, and continuous, ways of disrupting commerce - everyone stalling cars at all major ramps and intersections, taking out powergrids, taking out internet cables. Basically stopping business as usual, and getting media attention - with the simple goal of stopping things BEFORE they descend into chaos. Somehow making people see that they need to plant their own foods, do more local commerce- before the long-distance systems stop functioning. Maybe just a pipe dream - but, I can see SOME sort of organized resistance coming- just wondering what form it will take. Maybe there WILL be a major political rout in November - maybe the TEA partyers will come out of that as a stronger movement.
YYou read how there are so many militias gathering strength in last few years - does anyone know much about these guys- do they have National leadership? I am trying to guess WHAT is going to rise up out of this country if things deteriorate. TEAPArtyers? Hells ANgels? Medellin Posses? Christian Fundamentalists? What is out there?
If some organization could step up into a visible position...
That would be starting off on the wrong foot. Do it like this.
Federal, state and local governments collapse due to their own stupidity and corruption. People start looking for some other organization to fill the void of lord and master.
At this point, some intelligent, productive people realize that if they don't want to have all the responsibilities of society dumped on their broad but tired backs one more time, they have to do something immediately.
These people gather their resources and begin to offer services in the marketplace which not merely duplicate but far exceed the quality and affordability of services formerly provided by government. These entrepreneurs and the people who are happily employed by them unanimously enact and heartily defend one single law of the land:
No one can do anything that hurts another person or their property; one may defend one's self or property in proportion to the force used against them.
Some folks will have good ideas and succeed, others will have bad ideas and fail but they will try again or work for someone who values their labor. After a rough but exhilarating patch, they live happily ever after.
I was able to find this.
http://www.panamalaw.org/guardians_of_the_free_republics_serve_letter.html
http://www.americandreampreservation.com/
I hope its for real.
Thanks, 1fortheroad. Somewhere, out there in the American rural areas - there have got to be some effective movements organizing. What I want to keep an eye on, is who they are, what their methods are, and who is likely to succeed. At this point, they are fringe groups - but, how quickly might they be the effective power in your area? I guess it would be time well-spent researching, in the particular State/Region where you live- finding out what groups exist. It may not be prudent to go to their meetings, meet some of them - but maybe it would teach you something. If things start sliding, you won't have the luxury of waiting for the "Ideal" group to form - it will likely be chaotic - so, I am going to spend some time finding out what is happening in my local area. I am guessing that resisting the impulse to just hunker down as a lone wolf- and , instead, actively trying to connect to your community, may have benefits in the next few years.
No fringe groups.
We are just working with our neighbors and each neighbor is working with thier neighbors. In the local level our government is going quite well. At the county level things are doing ok, but eh.
The State though, they are working on it.
The Federal? That is where the trouble is. It's a two edge sword. They help and they dont help.
As far as groups are concerned, there are no formal groups. Just people taking time to talk with each other several times a week at the fence.
We had poor people freeze last winter down the road aways due to lack of cut wood. My neighbor saw our nice pile and asked if those folks can have it for this winter. Once things cool off, they are going to have two cord or more for winter to start things off.
A problem is solved by a little labor and trade. If I help someone some how, maybe someone else will be motivated.
I have seen towns and cities where entire blocks of housing does not have one soul moving outdoors day or night. They rush to work at 6 am, and rush home at 5 pm and stay indoors all the time.
Those is where the problems are going to start first if things break down.
Kinda jumped the electrified fence on this one. Hard to keep an audience while resorting to such shenanigans.
Nothing conventional will work. Can anything work, short of hanging every politician at every level of government from sea to stinking sea?
I can only think of one idea that might be simple enough to work. I'm not saying you can get people to adopt this idea, but I am certain you cannot get significant numbers of people to rally around ANY existing idea.
The group might be called NO, or JUST SAY NO or NO WE WON'T. The idea is not to implement any specific agenda. The idea is to let anyone in the group "just say no" --- to simply opt-out --- of any government program or scam they do not wish to participate in.
The whole idea is quite similar to the principles that were the original core of the USA --- that individuals must be "left alone" to enjoy or suffer the consequences of their actions, and not enjoy or suffer the consequences of the actions of others.
The best ways to protect individuals against the endless assaults of government are not obvious. But some elements are fairly obvious. When someone needs to avoid the predators-that-be (government) or their agents, some kind of residence-exchange scheme would hide the member or their ligitimately owned property.
The following idea comes to mind. If they can't find you, or your property, or your accounts... they can't do anything to you. So perhaps such an organization should create ways to hide the location of its members, their property, their assets, etc. Perhaps someone can figure out the most effective organizational scheme to implement this for large numbers of individuals. That alone would be a huge help, though the predators-that-be might still find you at work --- IF they think to try there, and IF you have a conventional job they know of and know where you are located (often they don't).
Anything based upon specific interests will fail. You need something that is soooo generic that everyone can benefit, regardless of personal inclinations and beliefs. What I proposed above is so generic that it offends no one except worshipers of authoritarianism. Sadly, today more than 50% of the population worship (or support) authoritarianism. But you don't need anywhere near a majority to make something like this work. The question is, are there enough honest, productive individualists remaining to make something like this work. I have no idea.
An historic rout I'd say. The only thing that may prevent it is how many dead people, illegal Mexicans, and quadruple voters the Democrats can find.
While it is clear that at least a few of my fellow Republicans have learned the lesson of the last few years, the real test for saving the nation will come after the election. Presuming the Republicans do well (and there is a chance they'll simply grind the Democrats to a pulp on November 2nd - some polling does indicate a possible blow out of historic proportions), the job for we, the people will be to exert even more pressure in January than we do in November.
In any political organism, most of the people involved are natural followers - they just go along to get along. A few are leaders - and, of course, some of them want to lead the wrong way. But if you can find the few who can both lead and who know the correct answers, then the necessity is to back them - to demonstrate so much support for those who are doing the right thing that they'll be able to carry the camp-followers with them.
Talk of hating both parties or refusing a label is just so much claptrap - if you are in any way a person rather than just a moral cipher, it is time to pick a side and then do whatever it takes to force that side in the direction you think best.
I'm really curious about what you think the "correct answers" are..
Also: according to my observation, many ZH commenters in the US loathe the two-party system. Asking them to be a "person" and pick a side is more than a bit silly. But hey, maybe you are seeing something I'm not seeing.
A not particularly wise man once said:
"Of course you don't understand this right now. It is because you are blinded by your own absolutist thinking. In order to organize people, it requires structure. And every step of the way people just like you will come out of the woodwork to sabotage such efforts - complaining of too much "top down" authority."
I assume that you will find that to be a satisfactory answer to your question.
Perhaps you are quoting me (out of context) because you don't have anything useful to add.
You don't do yourself justice, the quote answers your question admirably. If the shoe fits....
Well, considering your redistributionist tendencies, I suppose you would say, "If the shoe fits, have the government commander said shoe and pass it on to someone else in exchange for political favors whether it fits them or not, what do we care."
Poison them all. Let the paleontologist sort them out.
Not necessarily.
We think one day one or more cities where things matter will get hit hard by some kind of weapon in some form that hurts or kills alot of people. Biohazard is one way, Nuclear is another and so on.
What matters is that peope get up in the morning out of bed, no matter how bad things get, they roll up sleeves and set about making things right.
Election day this year is going to be one of those days.
Well what can you say. When a bunch of democrats rule like right wing republican monetarists, I can't blame the people, only support them.
But the funny part is, that dipshit republicans, bascially all of them, actually believe that them getting back in some sort of power will change anything.
Let me be clear, when republicans take back control, they will WISH for the current approval ratings the democrats have. Because the republicans are just dumb fuck clueless on EVERYTHING. No iffs, and's, or butt's. They can't govern a PTA meeting let alone the gov't. Sadly the democrats under current direction and leadership cannot either. But once you remove them, the people will get what they want, except they won't, because by that time, they will have put the mental midget republicans in power.
But then again, who's actually a democrat or republican anymore in spirit? Neither party can claim they acted in the interests of their party constituents. Hell the republicans have gotten away with this for longer than I've been alive. (32)
Good luck with the party of 'no ideas' taking back some power, I'm sure we'll just being going backwards even faster than now once that occurrs.
Impeach Obama, and put a real dem in office, not a right winger like Obama.
We need a Center Party. There's no point in coming at it from either extreme, you'll just get marginalized. The Center Party adopts the social freedoms of the Democrats, and pushes the economic control nutcases like Pelosi to the left, where THEY will be marginalized. The the CP adopts the economic freedoms of traditional Republicans, and pushes the social control nutcases to the right where THEY will be marginalized.
Right now, the two major parties can only nominate extremists who can survive the primary process, where the truly committed nutcases run the show. After they're nominated, they each run to the center while winking at their base.
Take the Center away from them up front. Tell people you are middle-of-the-road, you're not going to continue to socialize America like the Dems, and you don't want to snoop in their bedrooms like the Repubs. You're not owned by Wall Street and you don't like lobbyists. It would be a wipeout.
I recommend reading David Stockman's piece on How the GOP destroyed America. I will NEVER vote for those cowards.
I recommend reading David Stockman's piece on How the GOP destroyed America. I will NEVER vote for those cowards.
Isn't refusing to vote for somebody just because of their party affiliation (not what other members of their party may have done in the past) just as silly as voting FOR somebody just because of their party affiliation?
Isn't refusing to vote for somebody just because of their party affiliation (not what other members of their party may have done in the past) just as silly as voting FOR somebody just because of their party affiliation?
How about neither party. Or no party at all.
Vote YOUR voice only. If enough feel the same as you on something then it is made law. Just like it was in meeting houses and the old Lodge Long houses long ago.
I was a Republican since Reagan, I am cutting that party and all others loose. None are revelant. I will vote the way I think ought to vote. For myself. No one else.