Interersting Facts From Latest WaPo/ABC Trump Poll

With only a week left before Donald Trump completes his "First 100 Days", the Washington Post/ABC News teams released the results of their last polling on Trump (and, also Hillary).  The lead story appears to be that Trump has the lowest `100-day approval' of any President in modern history.  While the average approval of those "modern" Presidents is 69%, Trump's number is just 42%. Of course, the biggest dig on Trump from these two liberal-leaning news agencies is the fact that Obama had a 69% approval as most of his predecessors did.  I guess, from this, we are supposed to regret that Obama isn't still President.

What isn't talked about in the Washington Post polling story is the fact that if the election was rerun today, Hillary would still lose to Trump: 43% to 40%. Another buried but interesting tidbit is the fact that only 4% of Trump voters regret voting for him, while 15% of Hillary voters regret voting for her. As a result, if the election was rerun, Trump would have won the popular vote.

And, guess what?  The Russians had nothing to do with these polling results!

References:

Nearing 100 days, Trump’s approval at record lows but his base is holding: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nearing-100-days-trumps-approval-at-record-lows-but-his-base-is-holding/2017/04/22/a513a466-26b4-11e7-b503-9d616bd5a305_story.html?utm_term=.0b34eccf70dd

ABC: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-trump-100-days-honeymoon-regrets-poll/story?id=46943338

Wash Post poll hides: Trump still beats Clinton, 43%-40%: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wash-post-poll-hides-trump-still-beats-clinton-43-40/article/2621016

Pope Francis' Catholic Problem On Global Warming

Some people refer to Catholics as a flock shepherded by its Pope.  But, when it comes to Pope Francis' stand on global warming, the flock may need some extra herding to come around.

Just a day before the Pope released his encyclical on climate change and global warming, Pew Research released the results of a poll asking Democrat, Republican, and Independent Catholics about their stands on the issue.

When asked if the earth is getting warmer, 71% of all Catholics said "yes". This is higher than the general population where only 68% believe that warming exists, but below that 71%, the breakdown between political affiliations of Catholics tells a varied story.  The primary reason that the number of Catholics believing in the earth's warming is higher then the general public is because 85% of Catholic Democrats say it's so.  On the other hand, only 51% of Catholic Republicans believe it to be the case.  72% of Independents sided more closely with the Democrats by saying 'yes' on warming.

Where Catholics really go off the rails against the Pope is on the question as to whether global warming is man-made and whether its a serious problem.

As far as whether global warming is man-made, 62% of Democrats, 48% of Independents, and 24% of Republicans agree.  Overall, only 47% of Catholics believe the warming of the earth is due to man's activities.  At the same time, considering it to be a serious problems had almost identical results.  Again, it was the Democrats that showed the most concern (64%).

These numbers wouldn't be so bad if most Catholics were Democrats, but, here too, the Pope loses. As this chart from Pew shows, white Catholic political affiliations have become increasingly more Republican while, I assume, Blacks and Hispanics have remained more solidly Democrats:

The bottom line is that Catholics as a whole aren't buying the whole global warming thing because, like the general population, the climate change alarmists have over predicted the impending disasters, and the Pope's encyclical is just more of the same. Because of this, I don't think its going to move the needle very much as far as how many Catholics are embracing climate change.

References:

PewResearch: Catholics Divided Over Global Warming: http://www.pewforum.org/2015/06/16/catholics-divided-over-global-warming/

PewResearch: Politics by Religious Affiliation: http://www.pewforum.org/2012/02/02/trends-in-party-identification-of-religious-groups-affiliation/

Pope Francis, in Sweeping Encyclical, Calls for Swift Action on Climate Change: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/19/world/europe/pope-francis-in-sweeping-encyclical-calls-for-swift-action-on-climate-change.html

Are People Really Working Longer Hours?

In a recent article in the 'Business Insider' titled "The 40-hour workweek is on its way out", the author detailed the findings of a poll of 9,700 workers in 9 countries regarding hours worked. Here are some of the key findings pertaining to the U.S.:

• 58% of U.S. managers -- the second worst of all countrys surveyed -- said they worked more than 40 hours a week; and, 40% of those said their hours have increased over the last 5 years.
• Higher percentages of parents complained of having to work longer hours than non-parents.
• One-third said its gotten harder to balance family and job over the last 5 years.
• 10% said flex-hours may have cost them things like promotions.
• Two-thirds said they would consider quitting if flex-hours were eliminated.

The problems with this study are many:

• The survey group is relatively small. Less than 1100 people per country. As such, we are then supposed to believe these findings can be generally applied to the more than 116 million businesses employing 157 million workers in this country. Also, the sample of opinions is even smaller when you consider that those being sampled are managers, supervisors, salaried non-supervisors, and hourly workers.
• The entire survey is emotionally based on what people "said" and not fact based on actual hours worked.
• The quality of management is not being assessed. Many managers don't utilize their time wisely by being paper shufflers and subsequently work longer hours because of it. All too often managers who work very long hours have a habit of picking up a piece of paper and, instead of acting on it, set it aside to mull it over again at a later time, repeating this process many times. 
• Are we really supposed to believe that parents are being forced to work longer hours than non-parent?

However, the biggest problem with the survey is that it flies in the face of the facts.  Workers in the U.S. have seen their hours steadily drop from a high of 36.9 hours/week or 1918 hour/year in 1951, as this graph from the St. Louis Federal Reserve's database clearly shows:

Support of a lower than 40 hour week also comes from the monthly employment report.  Referencing Table B, in March, the average work week was only 34.5 hours. Also understand, that 34.5 is an average. So, it is safe to say that some number of workers are working longer than 34.5 hours and others are working less.

Sadly, as flawed as this report is, it is being hyped all over news and business stations.  As such, the seed is being planted in a lot of people's heads, that they are being taken advantage of by their employers.  When, in fact, the average worker in America is working less than his or her counterpart of 65 years ago.

References:

The 40-hour workweek is on its way out: http://www.businessinsider.com/working-more-than-40-hours-a-week-2015-5

St. Louis Fed: Hours Worked Per Year: https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AVHWPEUSA065NRUG

USA Quick Facts: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

March 2015 Employment Report: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

68% Of Those Polled Aren't Really Worried About Climate Change

In a recent poll, Gallup respondents were read a list of 6 environmental issues and, in each case, they had to indicate how much and if they were worried about it.  The top issue turned out to be "Pollution of drinking water" with 55% expressing a great deal of worry.  At the bottom was "Global warming or climate change" with only 32% expressing a great deal of worry.  So, conversely, 68% don't see global warming as a very serious issue.

I personally think that all the climate change/global warming believers are themselves responsible for this. Their continual claims that every single weather event is a result of climate change only cheapens their story.  Saying Hurricane Sandy is proof of climate change is a little hard to swallow when, in fact, we have had years of quiet hurricane seasons.  The seas aren't rising as projected and the temperatures have remained flat.  The frozen Himalayas have not turned into a sunbather's paradise.  The fact is that many of the dire predictions of the climate alarmists aren't even close to happening; and, if people can't see it happening their not going to believe that it's a problem.

References:

Gallup: In U.S., Concern About Environmental Threats Eases: http://www.gallup.com/poll/182105/concern-environmental-threats-eases.aspx?version=print

What's Up With All These Quiet Hurricane Seasons?:http://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/news/whats-up-with-all-these-quiet-hurricane-seasons/

New York Times: January 14, 2015: Researchers have reported that the ocean did not rise quite as much as previously believed:  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/15/science/earth/new-research-may-solve-a-puzzle-in-sea-levels-rise.html?_r=0

Seas have been rising and falling for thousands of years – without help from the EPA or IPCC: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/02/history-falsifies-climate-alarmist-sea-level-claims/

Alarmists Are In Way Over Their Heads On Rising Ocean Claims: http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/09/24/alarmists-are-in-way-over-their-heads-on-rising-ocean-claims/

'Global warming has been on pause for 19 years': http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2740788/Global-warming-pause-19-years-Data-reveals-Earth-s-temperature-remained-CONSTANT-1995.html

Claims Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035 were false: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jan/20/himalayan-glaciers-melt-claims-false-ipcc

pb

Is It Now Open Season On Our Nation's Police?

The attempted murder of two cops in Ferguson was inevitable. My guess is, it won't just stop there.

When the two top law enforcement officials -- President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder -- declared that the Ferguson cops are racist, it became music to the ears of those who already hate police.  Further, to some, it may have been a green light to even the score for the shooting death of Michael Brown and others.

But, Obama and Holder didn't just label the Ferguson PD as being racially biased, they went on to say that the problem wasn't limited to Ferguson.  Thus, the crazies who may be inclined to murder police officers may not be limited to that now-famous town in Missouri.

Simply, racial tensions are on the rise because of the way Ferguson and other similar racial issues have been handled by the President, the Attorney General, and many black leaders.  In a CNN/ORC poll in 2009, 6% of whites and only 2% of blacks thought race relations had gotten worse.  After 6 years of Obama's presidency, that same poll -- taken just last month -- found that 45% of whites and 26% of blacks think race relation have worsened.

These stats are horrible and not what was expected to happen with a supposed post-racial President in charge.

References:

Eric Holder believes all cops are racists: http://nypost.com/2014/12/07/eric-holder-believes-all-cops-are-racists-targets-unconscious-bias/

President Obama Acknowledges Ferguson's Racist Police Practices. Not an 'Isolated Incident':   http://www.politicususa.com/2015/03/06/president-obama-acknowledges-fergusons-racist-police-practices-isolated-incident.html

Chief: 2 officers shot in Ferguson were 'ambushed': http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/12/shots-fired-ferguson/70194012/

2009: Henry Louis Gates arrest controversy: Obama: "police acted stupidly":http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Louis_Gates_arrest_controversy

CNN/ORC poll: http://www.pollingreport.com/race.htm

CNBC Poll: Only 24% Give Obama Good Marks On The Economy

Just last week, President Obama gave a speech at Northwestern University to hype his economic accomplishments.  But, as I have said before in this blog, people aren't feeling real good about their particular economic situations because their incomes are still lower than when Obama took office; and, most of the jobs created are low paying.  Note this pictorial from a New York Times article on that very topic:

Click on image to zoom

This is why, in the latest CNBC poll, Obama only gets a 24% approval rating on the economy; down from 33% a year ago.

However, this seems to escape the folks at CNBC.  They seem perplexed by the fact that the President's poll numbers are so low even with an improving economy.  In the video (see first link below), CNBC's Chief Economist, Steve Liesman can't understand why improving unemployment numbers haven't helped the President.  But, Liesman, like so many other cheerleaders and apologists for Obama, would be well advised to look at the low quality of those falling unemployment numbers.  Maybe, then, he would understand why people don't like the current handling of the economy.

References:

October 7th: Confidence in Obama on economy sinks to new low: http://www.cnbc.com/id/102063107?trknav=homestack:topnews:1

October 2nd: Obama Touts Economic Gains Under His Watch: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/obama-speak-economy-northwestern-25909807

Recovery Has Created Far More Low-Wage Jobs Than Better-Paid Ones: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/28/business/economy/recovery-has-created-far-more-low-wage-jobs-than-better-paid-ones.html

Blaming the House Republicans On Immigration Reform Isn't Working Mr. President

In an effort to deflect responsibility for the current unaccompanied child border crisis, President Obama has tried to lay the blame at the feet of the House Republicans for not passing the so-called "comprehensive" immigration reform bill.  However, apparently, Americans aren't buying the latest Obama blame-game tactic (as noted by the results of the latest Gallup poll):

By more than two-to-one, they are critical of the President for his handling of immigration; with a 4-year high in those disapproving of his actions or inaction; depending on your particular political viewpoint. There's a problem with this poll.  It really doesn't tell us if people are upset with the President for not taking more action by executive order or for not working with Congress.  But, the sudden jump in his disapproval rating from 55% to 65% does seem to track with the current parent-less child entries from Central America.  For that reason, I think it seems to indicate that Americans feel that, once again, the fault lies with Obama.

Reference:


American's object to Obama's handling of immigration: http://www.gallup.com/poll/171755/approval-obama-handling-immigration-falls.aspx

Dumb CNN Poll? Romney Beats Obama

On July 27, CNN released the results of a head-to-head poll indicating that, if an election were held today, Romney would beat Obama by 53% to 44%.  This was a big change from the actual Obama win of 51% to 47% in the 2012 presidential election.  Immediately, the supporters of the President jumped all over this poll as being stupid and immaterial because there is no way that the 2012 election will ever be rerun.  Nor, is there any way that Romney's imagined performance could be judged against the actual crises that Obama is being forced to handle at this particular juncture in his second term.

But, the focus on the Romney portion of the poll is a diversion away from something else it also reveals.  In a head-to-head Romney versus Hillary contest, Hillary beat Romney 55% to 42%.  Whether or not this gives some insight into the 2016 election, should both Hillary and Romney decide to run, is anyone's guess.  What it does show, through deductive reasoning, is that Obama loses significantly to both Romney and Hillary.  Obviously, if Romney beats Obama and Hillary beats Romney, we can also assume that Hillary would beat Obama and, a result, it reveals that Obama, today, would lose against two past competitors.  That speaks volumes about the poor opinion that Americans now have about the President's performance. In other words, buyer's remorse. For that reason, the poll is not dumb, but  fairly enlightening; especially when you consider that Obama can't beat a fellow Democrat.

References:

CNN Poll: Romney tops Obama but loses to Clinton: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/07/27/cnn-poll-romney-tops-obama-but-loses-to-clinton/

Washington Post: Mitt Romney leads President Obama — and other ‘dumb’ polls: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/07/28/romney-leads-obama-and-other-dumb-polls-that-are-still-interesting/

Obama's Legacy: Being the Worst President?

In two separate, recent polls, Barack Obama has found himself in the unenviable position of being the "worst" of his presidential predecessors.

In a Gallup poll, he found himself dead last among all other living presidents.  Adding insult to injury he even trailed behind Jimmy Carter -- arguably, the previous worst president in modern times. Along with finding himself at the bottom, those polled awarded him with a favorability rating of less than 50%. All others managed to at least score over 50%.

And, in a Quinnipiac poll, the current President found himself, once again, at the bottom of the heap with 33% of those respondents labeling him as the "worst".  Second from the bottom was George W. Bush -- the same guy that Obama seems to blame for everything that's gone wrong since he's taken office.  Obviously, Americans don't share his opinion of George W.

I think that both of these polls reflect the incompetence of Obama's handling of both domestic and foreign policy.  Like or not, he is not a strong President.  Unable to negotiate or compromise, he is constantly going around Congress by issuing executive orders; many of which, are overreaching, violate the Constitution, and are being struck down in the courts.  On the foreign policy front, one is hard pressed to find a success. Most of the Middle East is in flames, or on the verge of it. China and Russia are flexing their muscles against their neighbors, and both of those countries are vying to be the biggest kid on the block.

Sadly, Obama is not listening to what the polls are saying because he just continues to barrel down his ideological highway by declaring that he will continue his planned end-runs around Congress and the Constitution.  While some pundits might be pooh-poohing either of these polls in isolation, the reality is that two separate sources independently came to the same conclusion: Obama is the worst President in modern times.

References:

Of Living Presidents, Obama Has Least Favorable Approval Rating: http://www.gallup.com/poll/171794/clinton-elder-bush-positively-rated-living-presidents.aspx

POLL: Obama Worst Modern-Day President: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/poll-obama-worst-modern-day-111329150.html

Another Reason For Obama To Hate Fox News

Last Fall, an internet-based polling firm, YouGov, asked people to tell them what source they trusted most to get any information about ObamaCare.  The results are reflected in this graph:

Almost 2-to-1, people trusted Fox News over President Obama as a source of news about the health care law.  Worse yet, the Democrats of Congress and the Obama Administration Officials only got 2% of the vote each as trusted informants.  Also, all the other news agencies did horribly. This just further proves that Democrats are suffering from a severe lack of trust over ObamaCare; re-enforcing the belief that they will suffer another tsunami of losses in this coming Fall election.

It's not too surprising that this polling data got zero coverage in the mainstream media.  What is surprising is that Fox News, itself, seemed not to be aware of this data.  A search of their site produced no results.

Now, if you think YouGov is some obscure or right-wing, 2-bit operation, they were the only polling service that accurately predicted that Obama would win by exactly 2% of the vote in 2012.

References:

Fox News: The Most Trusted Name in Health Care News?: http://today.yougov.com/news/2013/11/12/fox-news-most-trusted-health-care-law/

Wikipedia: YouGov: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yougov

The GOP Can't Win The Fiscal Cliff Negotiations

Abraham Lincoln once said: "In this age, in this country, public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail; against it, nothing can succeed."

In a new Washington Post/Pew Research poll, 53% of the respondents said that they would blame the Republicans if the Fiscal Cliff negotiations fail. Only 27% said they would blame Obama.  In other words, public opinion is siding with Obama on his solution to stave off the Fiscal Cliff; include tax hikes on the rich.

The problem is that the Republicans have lost the public relations war.  Just as Obama won the election, he has also won on this issue.  For him, the win was simple.  He has the presidential bully pulpit to paint the GOP as only being concerned about the rich and, he had a liberal media that sided with him.  Now, his is a position of strength and, the Republicans, even if they continue to stand on principal, will ultimately lose in the end.   The GOP know that tax hikes on the rich will weaken the economy but people just don't believe it.  Only if the tax hikes are passed and the economy falters will the American public finally realize that the President is wrong to hike taxes on higher-end earners, businesses, and entrepreneurs.

--- Pew Poll: http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/12/04/National-Politics/Polling/release_181.xml

Americans Favor One-Party Rule?

Recently, NBC and the Wall Street Journal teamed up to take the pulse on whether or not Americans were tired of gridlock in Washington.  Now, if we are to believe the results, 52% of those polled said they would prefer one-party rule.   Democrats, 2-to-1, wanted single-party rule while only 50% of Republicans wanted that status in D.C.

To me, this totally flies in the face of what has happened in the last 4 years.  In 2009 and 2010, America had one-party rule in our nation's capital and it was that party, the Democrats, who dished up ObamaCare without any input from Republicans.  Everything was done behind closed doors.  Even, we, the voters, had no idea what was being discussed or planned. To date, a majority of Americans are still unhappy with that turn of events.  So, for 1,000 people in some poll to say we need one-party control in Washington is ridiculous.  In fact, the best poll around as to whether or not America wants it was the 2010 election where, around the country, and in D.C., Democrats were soundly defeated.

Personally, I would prefer "zero" political parties in America. We have too many unqualified people being elected on the simple basis that they have a big "D" or big "R" after their names.  In effect, political parties dumb down the electorate because party bias prevents many voters from doing their homework on the past political activities of each, individual candidate.  

--- WSJ/NBC Poll: Majority Favors One-Party Control: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/10/02/wsjnbc-poll-majority-favor-one-party-control/

Under Obama, Muslim Respect Of U.S. Falls By More Than Half

With many Muslim countries in flames, it is important to look back at the President's commitment to improving America's standing in the Muslim world.  After being elected, the Obama transition team posted this statement with regard to overall foreign policy:

"Barack Obama and Joe Biden will renew America’s security and standing in the world through a new era of American leadership."

Then, there was the Cairo speech in June of 2009 where the President said:

"I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings."

But, after more than three years of Obama, our standing in the world -- especially in the Muslim world -- is less than it was under that supposed "cowboy" of foreign policy: George W. Bush.  In June, Pew Research issued the results of a worldwide poll.  At the same time, comparing those results to the results of a similar poll taken in 2009:

Except for increases in Japan and Russia's favorable opinion towards America, every other category, by country, in this poll has fallen under Obama.  What's most disturbing is that Muslim support for U.S foreign policies has fallen by more than half from 34% in 2009 to just 15% this year.

When this poll was released, most of the left-leaning media didn't report it because it reveals another major Obama failure.  His problem is that he demonstrates weakness not strength  Arabs, by their nature, have a history of respecting strongmen as their leaders. You can't go on a worldwide apology tour and expect the world to respect us.  The President seems to think that his words speak louder than his actions; when, in fact, we all know that the reverse has always been true.  To me, the Pew results speak volumes as to why there is so much turmoil now in the Muslim world, and, let's not forget that this poll was taken long before any dumb YouTube video appeared.  With Obama, there is no leadership or strength for the Muslims to respect.  Only perceived weakness.  Just the opposite of Bush when the U.S. favorability numbers were higher.

-- Change.gov: Obama's Foreign Policy Plan: http://change.gov/agenda/foreign_policy_agenda/

-- Cairo Speech Text: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/us/politics/04obama.text.html?pagewanted=all

--  Pew Research: International Poll Results: http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/

Obama's Worrisome Erratic Polls

Over the last three weeks, the Rasmussen daily tracking polls have had Obama's approval ratings bouncing around between 41% and 50%; sometimes changing direction by as much as 3 points in a day. And, the same has been true over at Gallup, with the approval ratings jumping up and down, daily, in a range between 43% to 49%.

All this volatility should be quite unsettling to Obama's reelection team because it becomes almost impossible to determine what the actual driving force is behind such erratic daily numbers. To me, it simply appears that Obama numbers are being driven by the news du jour and not by anyone's absolute comfort level with this President and his policies. And, if that is true, it bodes well for the election of a Republican president in the fall; as long as that candidate can grab the headline by hammering Obama on his all too many shortcomings.

Obama Is Making G.W. Bush Look Good

When George W. Bush left office, his approval rating was between 30 to 34 percent. In a newly taken poll, 44 percent of the respondents said that they would rather have Bush back than have Obama (Click to See Full Story: "Ben Smith: Bush closes the gap").

That says a lot about the job that Mr. "O" is doing. At this rate, Obama only has to be in office for another year before Bush starts looking like the greatest President this country ever had.

Socialism Versus Capitalism

In a recent Rasmussen Poll, only 53% of Americans being polled said they liked capitalism. Of the remaining, 20% said they would prefer socialism and 27% were apparently too dumb to know the difference between the two different kinds of societies (See Full Story).

To those who would prefer socialism, I would like to point them to France where, every night, cars are being burned in protest to a society that takes care of their every need but gives them no self-gratification in terms of employment and upward mobility (See Full Story). For the poor with any ambition, that's what socialism is all about.

Believe me, the expression, known the world over, of "Living the American Dream" didn't come to be out of any form of socialist government. The "American Dream" is why so many leave their socialist counties behind to come and stay in the warm, capitalist confines of the United States.