Arguably the most interesting poll you'll see today doesn't mention either presidential candidate or political party. It's this one from Gallup on Americans' attitudes towards their own economic conditions.
As the pollster reported, "For the first time in more than five years, slightly more Americans are feeling financially better off, rather than worse off, compared with a year ago, by 38% to 34%. This represents a significant improvement since May of President Barack Obama's first year as president, when the majority -- 54% -- said they were worse off."
As for the electoral implications, in the three modern presidential elections in which Americans were less upbeat about their economic prospects -- 1976, 1980, and 1992 -- the incumbent lost. On the other hand, "the 38% of Americans feeling better off today is on par with what Gallup found before the 2004 and 1984 elections, when Presidents George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan won their re-election bids."
Mitt Romney desperately wants the electorate to believe Obama made the economy "worse," and is urging voters to feel discouraged, pessimistic, and frustrated. The problem, of course, is that the Republican is not only combating quantifiable evidence -- lower unemployment, a recovering housing sector, a strengthening auto industry, rising consumer confidence -- he's also running into Americans' improving attitudes about the status quo.
What's more, the Gallup report found more Americans who believe their financial status is improving and believe conditions will continue to improve in the near future.
To be sure, it's important not to overstate the optimism. Millions of Americans are still struggling and haven't seen economic improvements in their own lives, and that's reflected in the Gallup results, too. But in general, after a brutal recession, public perceptions are clearly and finally changing in ways we haven't seen since before the crash, which in turn benefits the incumbent and makes it that much more difficult for the challenger to persuade the nation to dramatically change course.
Leave a Comment:
This post reminds me of all the trouble that House and Senate Republicans have gone through to deliberately sabotage our economy in order to regain the White House and congressional majorities. It's a real shame that there are so many uninformed (swing) and misinformed (Republican) voters who have missed and continue to miss this seemingly obvious truth (thanks, in part, to the "liberal" media).
I am better off today than I was 4 yrs. ago. We got out of the roller coaster ride of the stock market in time.
CJ, It is truly a tragedy that we have such an uninformed electorate, especially when the stakes are this high. This election will literally mean the difference between a Democratic America and one run by a small minority of the wealthy elite: A corporatocracy. A Plutocracy, actually, where the Friedmanite economists run, not just this country, but the world.
Which is, by the way, the GOP's goal. That is the New World Order they won't tell you about. Instead, Romney and his group will lie to you, try to stop you from voting, promise you freedom, and then steal their way or buy their way into the white house. They HAVE to lie! The truth is not palatable to anyone but them!
Because the truth will not benefit anyone but them.
Most economic new's has been good as of late.I just hope it's not to late.Romney would get credit for an improving economy should (god forbid) he be elected.He has already said the job market would improve without him doing anything if he is elected.He know's that's going to happen anyway,and he want's the credit.Later he can hand out big tax cut's to the wealthy like himself,and republican's and low information voter's will be none the wiser.But we'll know wo'nt we.
Joca, Yes. We will know. It will just be too late.
So let's see if I have this straight... we should re-elect Obama because we're almost making progress? Heh.
Let me suggest that the more evident it becomes that Romney will win, confidence will rise right along with it.
No, you should re-elect the President because he *has* made progress--in the stock market, in employment, in the housing market, you name it. And although it took a while for Joe Average to notice (what with the GOP lying to him all the time), now he sees it too.
Let me suggest that the more evident it becomes that Romney will win, confidence will rise right along with it.
Right, the magic fairy dust theory of economic recovery. We tried that under Bush - Didn't work.
In the unlikely event that Romney does win, he will be handed a recovery already in the making, as long as he doesn't screw it up, like Bush did with the surplus Clinton left.
largenose, #4.2,
Depends upon what you mean by screwing it up. When they install their policies, we, the people, will be harmed, but they will be fine.
The will own, not just American wealth, but the world's.
Think what Friedman's policies did in Chile and Bolivia, to name a few, when those countries were building a viable middle class. They destroyed them. The Corporatists do not care about the middle class. Their wealth does not depend on it. They will do to us just what they did to Chile and Bolivia, and other countries which were coming into their own.
I am a 63 year old working stiff with a high school education. I have been working in transportation [trucking] since I was 17. One thing I learned was to watch what our business was like. When President Obama took office Many of our customers had over 50% of their fleet setting .this meant that no one was shipping goods and that meant that the economy was down the tubes, Now I am seeing our base expanding their fleets and the tonnage going up- this tells me that our economy is picking up. I don't need polls to tell me what to think -I can see it for myself. I know where my info comes from but I don't know where or how theirs [The polls] come from. I was told once that statistics are like a woman in a bikini -what it reveals is very interesting but what it hides is fundamental- I do believe it's time that we Americans start thinking about the past ;present and future- and not what others tell us to
"But in general, after a brutal recession, public perceptions are clearly and finally changing in ways we haven't seen since before the crash, which in turn benefits the incumbent and makes it that much more difficult for the challenger to persuade the nation to dramatically change course."
This is quite a conjecture. How can the incumbent consider these numbers a "benefit" when they are, at their best, 12 points lower than Bush's 50 in "better off" and, at their worst, 32 - that's right, 32 - points lower than Bush's 50 in "better off". Not to mention that "worse off" has skyrocketed over the course of Obama's term. You're going to point to the last 10 months of data when the entire term of a president shows that when we moved from Bush's economic policies people thought we were way better off, by a margin of 32 points?
I thought you were smarter than that. You actually think these statistics are good for the incumbent?!
"Bush's economic policies". You mean the ones that turned a budget suplus into a deficit? The policies that allowed, even abetted, the stock market crash? Those policies that almost killed the US auto industry?
THOSE economic policies?
Or are you griping about the fact that just possibly, enough citizens recognize the mess that GWB left and aren't holding the slow recovery against President Obama? Maybe because those citizens mhave noticed the reason the economy hasn't rebounded very quickly from the pit it was left in by GWB is solely due to Republican partisanship in Congress?
Is that what you're griping about?
'Cause if it is, you're in the wrong place, bub...
Has anyone noticed that there is a consistant 33-34% of the polls taken that are againts any and everything other than right wing stuff? Is that the Tea party base?