The Washington Post reported this morning, "Even as he runs evenly with Barack Obama in national polls, Mitt Romney -- the newly official Republican presidential nominee -- continues to trail the president in one regard: basic popularity."
I put the latest Post/ABC favorability ratings in a chart.
Maddow Blog chart based on Post/ABC data
Obviously, President Obama's numbers aren't exactly soaring, but Romney isn't just trailing; he's faltering. Ten weeks before Election Day, his unfavorability rating has reached a new high of 51%, while his 35% favorability score has dipped to its lowest level since the spring.
No major-party candidate in a generation has entered the final stretch of a national campaign with this problem.
As we've discussed before, this offers reason for some optimism among Democrats, but it comes with caveats. If the American mainstream is deeply dissatisfied with the status quo and blames the president, even if he doesn't deserve it, voters may very well hold their nose and elect the guy they dislike.
But the fact that people don't seem to care for Romney makes his task inherently more difficult.
Leave a Comment:
Will anyone investigate this story?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/28/republican-cnn-attack-animal-peanuts-racist_n_1838249.html
It is such a sad commentary on the state of today's Republican Party.
Please do not let the Republicans get away with the lies they tell and the hate they show.
Yeah, even the "Sieg-Heilers', er, I mean the "Ameners!" at the Nuremburg Party Rally, er, I mean the GOP convention, don't seem to like him, not the way they like Rudolf Hess, er, I mean Ryan.
If someone throws peanuts, or has racists signs at rallies, or makes a totally idiotic remark about rape, those individuals should be called out and shunned. The same thing should happen when someone on the left, oh I don't know, compares the GOP to Nazis. It shameful when either party does it.
Although I do agree with you Eric. But with all due respect. It was the GOP who first started calling elected officials and their party, Nazis. Along with Communist, Marxist, Fascist and Socialist. Which is ironic, considering it is highly improbable almost impossible. For any political party to be all of those things. At the same time. But considering who Fox News, Rush, Coulter and Beck are talking too. Most do not know the difference between them anyway. So I guess that is a mute point in itself.
The only comparisons I've heard of the GOP to 'Nazis' is when 1) they actually deploy Goebbelsian big lies to get elected (very, very common tactic for them) -- a tactic that characterizes many of Romney's ads and his Superpac ads and 2) when they never, ever denounce neo-Nazis.
I dimly recall a neo-Nazi holding a WH staff post under GHW Bush, though he brushed it off.
I don't believe this.
Not that it matters, but Bush was refereed to a Nazi and murderer constantly, I know some from our side call BO a "Socialist" and other stupid #@$%. I don't think BO is a bad guy, I don't think he's malicious in his actions, I simply don't think he is good at his job. I'm sure he has similar goals for America, but getting there is a huge difference.
Nixon was the original 'red' baiter. In his 50's senate run against Helen Douglas, he stated that, sic, 'she was such a red sympathizer, that she wore pink underwear!' Name calling belies the issue that you can't get over with facts, and you can't win on intelligence. It is wrong for whatever side does it.
And erick*&!!! is pushing robme's talking points. Next.
It's sad when your post-convention bump will just get you back to where you were a few weeks ago.
The fact is that Willard will not get 61 percent of the white vote. Watch the 2016 election; the republicants will be the party of minorities and women!!!!!!!!
Lesman-- You may be right about the white vote in 2012, but you are surely wrong about the voters in 2016. The GOP has basically written off any hope of gaining the support of women or blacks or hispanics or immigrants or any sort. The GOP chose to make these people the hated "others", to grasp support now among fearful older whites. None of these groups, after being targeted and mocked, will vote for the GOP in the future, and there are more of them every day.
Demographics are destiny, and the GOP has no future.
PS edit--I just re-read your message, Lesman, and I think my snark detector failed the first time. Sorry. But I'll still leave my response up because I still believe the point I made.
I wish someone would ask Mitt or Ann, just what Mitt will do if he wins and the Democratic Senate decide to block everything he wants to do like the Republicans have done Obama. I am guessing that Senators won't respond to his methods in the same way that an employee or board member might.
The problem with that is if the Dems. lose the senate, too, the senate can change the fillibuster rules to 51 votes, then the crap hits the fan.......
I think this is a much bigger thing than the pundits make it out to be.
While the job is vastly more more important, in many ways people vote for President of the U. S. in the same way they vote for high school student body president. Relatively few people analyze policy positions and make logical judgements, based on the relative merits of the candidates.
A significant percentage of people base their votes on "gut feeling." As with high school elections, they ask themselves a couple of pretty basic questions:
1. Do I like this person?
2. Do I trust this person?
3. Does this person care about me and people like me?
Beyond those, at the level of U. S. President, they also ask:
4. Does this person share my values?
5. Will this person keep my (and my country) physically safe?
Only after those questions do most people consider whether or not the candidate will pursue policies that will maintain or improve their economic situation, or work towards one or another economic or social goal that they value.
Maybe someone can help me, but I can't think of a time when a presidential candidate who was generally unpopular won the election. (Nixon???)
Very few news and media outlets are reporting that:
Tampa, Florida (CNN) – Two people were removed from the Republican National Convention Tuesday after they threw nuts at an African-American CNN camera operator and said, “This is how we feed animals.”
Multiple witnesses observed the exchange and RNC security and police immediately removed the two people from the Tampa Bay Times Forum.
Why is there so little coverage of this? Any ideas?
Thanks for posting this... Wow Just WOW !!
had I'd been that cameraman the headlines would have been ... "CNN Camea Opeartor gives two free colonoscopies at RNC, news at 11 "
I forget where I was reading about that, but isn't that rather unusual for anyone running for president to take a dive in popularity while the convention is going on?
Gotta be fair, this chart doesn't reflect the convention; the latest point is just before.
True. I guess I was assuming it was also just before the convention began.
and here's yet another example of why !!!
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/romney-party-yacht-flies-cayman-islands-flag/story?id=17105028#.UD5VxNZlRTU
Hopefully, every time RoMoney says "Trust Me", he will remind folks of the sleazy car salesmen they refused to buy a car from.
I find it hard to believe that a majority of voters really like it when he says, elect me and then find out what my policy/plan is. Not too many people will like that. The problem is one has to be paying attention to hear him repeat it and I'm putting vibes out into the Universe to bring voters in droves to the TV for the debates. I am so looking forward to the debates and can't wait to hear RoMoney hem and haw when asked to explain his "plan" because he has to try to satisfy his "friends that own the team" as well as the lunatics awaiting the rapture AND all the racists in this country. No easy task that!
Perhaps he will get some circular language lessons from Palin! Yeah, that's the ticket! Round and round he goes . . . .spin baby spin!
I don't know that Romney can help his unfavorable ratings. Every time he appears on TV he has that fake half smile which screams phoney. Romney has no genuine side because he is not a personable guy. The man has spent most of his life sheltered from the real world while he lives in his life of private schools and wealth. His offshore accounts, Bain Capital, a car elevator and so many other things have painted him for what he truly is as a human being. How does this sort of man make a connection to the middle class or poor when he acts like he disdains anyone who is not wealthy?
I am sure that Ann Romney is a nice person. The platitudes spoken last night told me nothing of Willard's governing style, his personal platform, how cool he could be as a world leader with ICBM codes, what he's going to cut out of the budget, etc. They are not revealing these answers, no matter how much Ann sugar coats (straight out of 'pour some sugar on me') last night. The proof of the man is Seamus; lack of people and animal skills, humanity towards others, lying, etc., all show me the true nature of the man. This is the reason for low ratings; the truth!
I don't think candidates wives do much to move numbers so I would agree that it is Romney himself that is driving the unfavorable rating. There is nothing Ann Romney or the rest of the family can do to help Romney's image. In fact, I think Ann Romney hurt the image when she talked about the tax returns; she exuded the same arrogance her husband delivers.
A convention speech won't help. The more Romney talks the more people don't like him.
He campaigns like a candidate from another era. People are more sophisticated nowadays.
People expect a little phoniness from politicians. But, Romney is particularly bad at hiding his phoniness.
good point. Why doesn't mitt just stick with what he's good at, looking presidential in photographs....
“As we've
discussed before, this offers reason for some optimism among Democrats, but it comes with caveats. If the American mainstream is deeply dissatisfied with the status quo and blames the president, even if he doesn't deserve it, voters may very well hold their nose and elect the guy they dislike.”
O.K., let’s get something straight:
The majority of voters DON’T blame President Obama for their economic suffering, the polls say the majority of people still blame George W. Bush. The polls say voters believe Barack Obama inherited a mess, but they don’t think Barack Obama can fix the economy. But, they don’t “blame” him. There’s a difference. But, before you get too comfortable: the polls say they don’t think Mitt Romney can fix the economy, either. Barack Obama, and Mitt Romney are about tied in polls on this question.
The polls say the majority of voters think if Mitt Romney is elected, the economy will stay the same as it is now, or they believe the economy will get worse. The majority of people don’t think Mitt Romney will make things better, either. Basically, voters expect the “status quo” from Mitt Romney, too. The majority of voters don’t think either candidate can fix the economy. That’s not exactly a strong position for Mitt Romney to be in, if he is counting on voters holding their nose for to vote for him, so that he can unseat an incumbent president.
People need to remember that this is the second worse economic cycle of all time, and it took President Roosevelt 16 years to dig the country out of the worst. This fact is so overlooked, without pointing the finger at W. There is a lot, a lot, of blame to go around on the economy.......
More often than not, incumbent presidents are re-elected.
And, past history,- regarding unemployment, etc,- are irrelevant in today's political climate.
I would not rely on any historical voting patterns to predict this current race. There is a jobs issue at the same time the Republicans have gone off the deep end. I expect to see a larger voter turnout than what pollsters are predicting. There are a lot of angry voters and that anger is going to be directed at a lot of incumbent politicians so there will be an unusual number of upsets this November. My gut feeling is that pollsters are not gauging the depth of voter anger and that is what is going to bring people to vote.
One can only hope.