Things not looking so good for Obama’s Re-Election

February 1, 2012 | Filed under 2012 Presidential Race | Posted by

Presidential Elections are not determined at the National Level, they are won or lost at the state level.

Obama’s overall approval does not bode well for his re-election (44% and falling), but on a state by state basis it’s worse.  Far worse.

Gallup state numbers predict huge Obama loss

By Conn Caroll | The Washington Examiner

Gallup released their annual state-by-state presidential approval numbers yesterday, and the results should have 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue very worried. If President Obama carries only those states where he had a net positive approval rating in 2011 (e.g. Michigan where he is up 48 percent to 44 percent), Obama would lose the 2012 election to the Republican nominee 323 electoral votes to 215.

A lot can happen between now and November, but this does not look good for Teh One.

 

« « Dear Romneyites, Reagan Was NOT an Abortion Supporter!
Rep. Jackie Speier Slams Susan G. Komen On The House Floor » »

Shortlink:

Posted by on February 1, 2012.
Filed under 2012 Presidential Race.


Both comments and pings are currently closed.
  • Brucehenry

    Kind of a difference between an approval rating and a contest between alternatives. This looks like wishful thinking to me. 

    Hey, what would the map look like if it equated GINGRICH’S state-by-state approval ratings to electoral votes? Heh.

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      Incumbency has a power all it’s own, until the incumbent convinces enough people that he’s not worthy of re-election.

      As regards Gingrich’s state by state approval ratings, there’s not three years of polling data on that issue.

    • jim_m

       Please don’t cite the last PPP poll that showed obama beating Romney and Colbert getting 13% of the vote too.  It just isn’t credible. 

      Just about any hypothetical heads up vote poll isn’t worth anything because the public hasn’t engaged sufficiently.  Even GHW Bush was way ahead the Spring before the election.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7FMXY3DZP7JF7SGSPIOSLLXNE Stephen

      Why else do you think deepthinker Rodney chose to post “approval numbers” rather than head-to-head election polls?

      Simple. He’s simple and doesn’t know the difference.

      You candidate can stink but people will still vote for them if the opponent is stinkier and thats exactly what recent polls show – that Obama will beat Romney by a nice margin and beat Gingrich by an even larger margin.

      But Rodney doesn’t want you to know that…. so he posts this crap instead.

      Kinda sad when the bloggers on this site put their stupidity on display in this manner. Clearly Wodney doesn’t understand how elections work.

      He thinks if a president’s approval numbers are down the Pres just resigns and we the opponent doesn’t have to run for President they just “are”….

      Cracks me up to read this stuff. You can’t make up crap this funny…

      • hyperboliszt

        He knows the difference. He just thinks that people who read this might not (and some won’t!), and that he has some wherewithal to influence and reinforce opinion.

      • JayDickB

        Actually approval numbers are not that bad an indicator.  Below 50% shows an incumbent in trouble.  Head-to-head polls are not as reliable because an actual candidate has not yet been selected and the real campaign hasn’t started.  If Romney or Gingrich (whichever is nominated) runs negative ads about Obama as they have about each other, and you imagine the result?  And, with Obama, the ads could be true, not distortions like they have run so far.

        Of course lots could change between now and November.  But if Obama’s approval numbers are below 50% in October, it is not likely he will be reelected.  By then, though, head-to-head polls will be more reliable.

  • Hugh_G

    Dream on. I don’t say it’s a lock but with the current bag of crap running for the Repubs nomination I like his chances. 

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      Oh, 0bama will win the darkest blue states easily (as shown above).  Every where else Ron Paul can beat Teh One.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_425GVKQCLFZMQYYENR7CJBRDVA jb

        Uh huh.

        What are Ron Paul’s fav/unfav rates for the same states?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7FMXY3DZP7JF7SGSPIOSLLXNE Stephen

      You’re right, but don’t bother explaining that to Wodney. He’s not the brightest bulb on the tree.

      • Sky__Captain

        Why don’t you quit ducking my global warming questions and answer them, instead of taking immature shots at other people?

        Oh, wait – it’s L’il Stephen. Immature is all he does.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7FMXY3DZP7JF7SGSPIOSLLXNE Stephen

          lol.. uh, thanks for the “immature shot”, moron.

          • Sky__Captain

            You’re quite welcome, little boy.

            Now, are you going to answer my AGW questions in the other threads?
            Or are you just going to post some more immature personal attacks?

          • Sky__Captain

            Let the record show that the little boy named Stephen responded in character (or lack thereof) to my AGW questions in the other thread with yet another immature personal attack.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7FMXY3DZP7JF7SGSPIOSLLXNE Stephen

             Still ignoring you…oh, that hurts, don’t it?

  • herddog505

    Good heavens!  Would you look at all those racist states!

    /sarc

  • 914

    “Excuse Me Bruce Henry Stephen!!  Would You like some Grey Poupon with your landslide?”

    • Brucehenry

      Who said anything about a landslide?

      I happen to think Obama will probably pull this out, but it’s entirely possible I’ll be wrong.

       However, posting a map and claiming that presidential approval numbers in January will translate directly into electoral votes in November smacks of desperation and wishful thinking on Rodney’s part. If that’s what passes for prognostication in Rodney’s book I suggest my guess is as good as his.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7FMXY3DZP7JF7SGSPIOSLLXNE Stephen

        I keep telling ya… when it comes to Wodney he really doesn’t know the difference.

      • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/EU5DQWQTTHTPO4A4ZYSL3AAV2U Adjoran

         Of course, the post claimed nothing of the sort.  Anyone can just scroll up and check for themselves, and see you are lying again.  It must be a pathological condition with you.

        • Brucehenry

          “Nothing of the sort”???!! “Lying”???!!

          OK, OK, it’s true that the claim wasn’t explicit, but it was implied. Otherwise what was the point? And whether a “claim” was made or not, the post still smacks of desperation and wishful thinking, IMO.

          Anyone can just scroll up and check for themselves, and see that you are being an asshole again. It must be a pathological condition with you.

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        He could pull it out – but he’d have to change his tactics and go against pretty much everything he’s been taught.  I don’t see much chance of that, really.

        One thing for sure – if gas goes up the way some are forecasting ($5/6 or more by the end of the summer) Obama’s going to be toast.  All the Repubs will have to do is run that clip of him going “Under my plans, the price of genergy will necessarily skyrocket” – remind them of how his administration’s done all it can to block energy exploration and infrastructure here in the US under the green banner… and then go “When Obama entered into office, gas was $1.86 a gallon. Just how high do you want the skyrocket to go?” … and he’s done.

        Hell, even ol’ Jimmah wasn’t against the Trans-Alaska pipeline like Obama’s been against everything petroleum-related…

  • ackwired

    Still looks like it is the Republicans to lose.  But more people are talking about voting third party than in a long time.  It is going to be a fun year.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_425GVKQCLFZMQYYENR7CJBRDVA jb

      I actually think it’s Obama’s to lose. The GOP’s own base doesn’t even like their candidates. When Newt Gingrich can run as an “outsider” you know they’re desperate.

  • Sky__Captain

    No matter who the Republicans eventualy pick as their nominee, in 2012 Barack Hussein Obama will remain the weakest candidate.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_425GVKQCLFZMQYYENR7CJBRDVA jb

      Fixed your comment for you:

      “No matter who the Republicans eventualy pick as their nominee, in 2012
      Barack Hussein Obama will remain the President.”

  • ombdz

    Great post.  State by state is really the only way to look at Obama’s reelection prospects.  If history is any guide, Democrats are greatly overestimating their chances for success in November … http://bit.ly/qVdDUt

  • Brian_R_Allen

    Wizbang was Mister Tea was Wizbang.
    Bring back Mister Tea!

  • Olsoljer

    Who the hell IS going to vote for obama?  He has totally alienated Evangelicals, Catholics, Mormons, gun owners, most all individuals in energy industry (the real one, not green one), many of the rank and file in the unions, small businesses, individuals who SERIOUSLY want a job, the military, “overweight” people, legal immigrants, border states (except Kalifornia) most law enforcement groups, independent truckers, and most voters who adhere to and want the return of government by and for the people.  (just to name a few).
    Who does that leave?  Environmentalists, muslims, government employees, and racists.  (In the confines of the voting booth, even some of those may not vote for him). 

    • 914

      “Who the hell IS going to vote for obama?”

      He will still get the dead vote! 

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        Not from MY folks!  They’re nowhere NEAR Chicago!

        • 914

          Well??  I guess he can always lie..