Grim Milestone: Public Finally Starting To Think Obama's Been President Long Enough To Call It His Economy

Obama's had a hell of a run. President Obama has been in office going on three years but thusfar he's only had difficulties with Bush's Guantanamo policy, Bush's War in Iraq, Bush's War in Afghanistan, and Bush's Economy.

Of course, along the way, he did get a polling boost from President Obama's Takedown of Usama Bin Ladin.

Like that old joke between husband and wife: "Your kids need to be disciplined." But our kids managed final round in the spelling bee.

Obama's might have to start taking responsibility for his misbehaving, surly, underachieving brat of a Depression.

Asked who they trust to do a better job on the economy, 45 percent named congressional Republicans while 42 percent chose Obama. That’s a marked turnaround from a mid-March Post/ABC survey when 46 percent said they trusted Obama to do a better job handling the economy and just 34 percent named Republicans in Congress.

Among electorally critical independents, 44 percent said they trusted Republicans more to handle economic issues while 39 percent preferred Obama. In March, independents favored Obama on the question 40 percent to 29 percent.

Now you've probably noted that what I quoted does not actually implicate the "Who has the burden of blame question?" I am trying to get an answer here; the article says that the public has shifted pretty far to the blame-Obama position, but they seem to have forgotten to include the actual figure. That's not a partisan thing -- the headline is about just this finding -- but they do seem to have brain-farted and forgotten to include the figure the whole article's about.

So, I'll make up a number. It used to be 25% that blamed Obama; now it's 42%.

Where did I get that? I made it up, what did I just say?

Lots of other findings, including Obama's Usama Bounce now lost, and more than 60% of the country saying they've ruled out a vote for Sarah Palin as President.

(By the way, why do these articles keep resorting to locutions like "almost two thirds" or "more than six in 10" when they could just use the actual number, like 64% of whatever? Annoying. I can guess at the rough rounded number and be right "seven in 10" of the time. It's the exact number that's interesting.)

And, while I am inclined to support T-Paw, he only fares a little better than Palin in a head-to-head with Obama; Palin runs 17 points behind, T-Paw, 11 points.

But there is someone who's actually ahead of Obama. He's not my guy, and I don't know how he can possibly win the argumentative case on ObamaCare while claiming that RomneyCare was good and necessary, and ohmygod this latest thing about global warming, it's like he's walking around with a baseball cap that says "PLEASE DON'T SUPPORT ME," but....

Among all Americans, Obama and Romney are knotted at 47 percent each, and among registered voters, the former governor is numerically ahead, 49 percent to 46 percent.

That's a real grim milestone for Obama. Even if you don't want to just jump on Team Romney over a single poll (I'm resistant to that myself), that is, I think, the first time a named Republican has been ahead of Obama in a poll.

Isn't it?

posted by Ace at 03:15 PM

| Access Comments