Obama 2010 Approval Looks Like Reagan's in 1982

From Gallup:

Surmises Gallup: "Still, Obama's initial approval rating in his second year as president is among the lowest for elected presidents since Dwight Eisenhower. Only Ronald Reagan -- who, like Obama, took office during challenging economic times -- began his second year in office with a lower approval score (49%). However, Obama's disapproval rating is slightly higher than Reagan's was (44% vs. 40%)."

How bad would Ronald Reagan-like electoral results be for Barack Obama and the Democratic Party? In the 1982 midterm elections, which landed at the same point in the Reagan presidency as the 2010 midterms will land in Barack Obama's, Republicans lost 26 seats in the House but had no net loss in the Senate -- a bad, but not terrible showing. Should 2010 be for the President Obama and the Democrats anything like 1982 was for President Reagan and the Republicans, the Democrats would hold on to both the House and Senate with still fairly robust majorities (though narrower than they had before).

Tags: Barack Obama, House 2010, Senate 2010, Ronald Reagan, Approval Rating, 1982 (all tags)

Comments

3 Comments

That "No Net Loss in the Senate" Looks Good

Not that the 60-vote majority has proven particularly helpful, but it would be nice to rub it in the repubs faces that they couldn't gain a single senate seat.

 

26 in the house is a little higher than I would like--keep it to 22-23 and a draw in the senate and I say it's a win.

by Davidsfr 2010-01-06 09:43PM | 0 recs
RE: That "No Net Loss in the Senate" Looks Good

Does the similarity portend the shape of things to come in 2012? In other words, will 2012 be similar to 1984? At present there is one similarity between elections 2010 and 1982..the latter was held on November 2 and 2010 would be held on November 2..and 2012? In 1984 the Presidential elections were on November 6, and in 2012 it would also be on November 6!

by Boilermaker 2010-01-08 01:04PM | 0 recs
Historical perspective

The following is one of my favorite graphs, showing Ronald Regan's approval rating versus unemployment.

In modern times, therer has been a very healthy correlation between unemployment numbers and Presidential job approval. Eisenhower had an even strong correlation in his approval graph.

I wonder if people on the supposed left were always so willing to run around in a panic back in those days before the Internet? My theory has been that Obama's pragmatic, less progressive than desired approach to economics has been pursued to lower the unemployment rate as fast as possible, and that if midterm losses are inevitible, why egage in a futile attmept to avoid them? I can see the merit of the counterargument, that Obama needs to do what is best for America long-term, but if he's not in office to see it through, what's the point? Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with losing three Senate seats and a handful of house seats. It's not like we really have a supermajority in the Senate to begin with.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-01-06 09:44PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads