by Mark Silva
It's looking like a 50-50 nation again.
A little more than a year before the midterm congressional elections, Americans are now roughly evenly split in their stated preference for a Democratic or Republican candidate - a "generic'' question that handily overlooks the actual candidates whom voters will face in 2010. And President Barack Obama's approval rating has slipped to 50 percent again in the Gallup Poll, a low-point for his first year last reached in late August - placing him once again at a point where he could slide below 50 for the first time.
Unemployment is nearing 10 percent, with no prospect that joblessness is likely to abate in the near-term. Congress is mired in a protracted debate over something which most Americans want, better health-care insurance and access to it for those who lack it, and Congress faces a raft of contentious issues ahead: Climate change, immigration and perhaps another economic stimulus.
The landscape for congressional elections is looking a lot more volatile than it did at the start of Obama's term, when his own approval rating stood at 69 percent and Congress had taken swift action on the first economic stimulus..
.
For all the Democrats' attempts to label the Republicans as "the Party of No'' in the standoff over health-care reform and the economy, the public could be growing more inclined to say no to more incumbents of all stripes in next year's elections. Public approval of Congress in general has slipped to 21 percent in the Gallup Poll - down from 39 percent earlier this year and well below a two-decade average of 36 percent in Gallup polls.
Democrats had held a slight advantage in the generic congressional question earlier this year - 50 to 44 percent.
"However,'' Gallup's Lydia Saad notes today, "both 2009 results show a more competitive political environment than Gallup has generally seen since before the Democrats regained control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2006 midterm elections.
And here's one indicator of a potential shift:
"The Republican Party's relatively strong position on the generic ballot in the latest poll, conducted Oct. 1-4, stems from the support of political independents, who now favor Republican over Democratic candidates by 45 percent to 36 percent,'' Saad notes.
"Closer to elections, Gallup bases its results on "likely voters." Doing so typically improves the Republicans' positioning by several points; thus, when Democrats lead slightly among registered voters, it is possible for Republicans to be ahead among likely voters,'' she notes.
"The challenge for congressional Democrats is underscored by today's low approval of Congress. While it is far too early to say whether these indicators spell real trouble for the Democrats in 2010, they could provide some encouragement to the Republicans.''
The latest survey of 1,013 adults conducted Oct. 1-4 carries a possible margin of error of four percentage points.
Comments
I am an independent voter and I weigh the issues carefully before voting as I have done for over 40 years.
What has me concerned the most since the last election is the economy and the rapidly rising deficit and the probability of massive tax increases.
It does not appear that the Obama/Pelosi/Reid plans will address these concerns and for this reason I will probably vote for Green or Republican candidates in the next election.
Posted by: Pat H | October 7, 2009 8:15 AM
Yes,you are right about the 50-50.There is always such situation in this nation.There will be more drama about it.
Posted by: handy zubehör | October 7, 2009 8:19 AM
Obamacare is killing Obama's rating as the public doesn't want it.
Looks as if the Democrats in Congress are determine to push it down the public's throat. Make you wonder if some of Congress has already got the political Donations from the issue and can't back down.
Posted by: inky | October 7, 2009 9:27 AM
stems from the support of political independents, who now favor Republican over Democratic candidates by 45 percent to 36 percent,'' Saad notes.
Come on over independents!!!! You are much more conservative (as is the country) then you may think.
You just needed the Fringe Left to show you how far into the ditch they'd try to drive the country!
THANKS: Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of you Loony Lefties!!!!!
Posted by: The Real Bobbie Mobbie | October 7, 2009 9:39 AM
Here's one for ya. NObama's Safe School Czar saying: "Kids are being aggressively recruited to become heterosexual in this country." Ya think?!?!?!
We shouldn't be reading Romeo and Juliet because it's hetero propaganda????
Wow, you Loony Lefts never seem to amaze!!!!
Check this out:
http://www.breitbart.tv/uncoverd-audio-obamas-safe-schools-czar-criticizes-schools-for-promoting-heterosexuality/#comments
Posted by: The Real Bobbie Mobbie | October 7, 2009 9:50 AM
I hope Harry Reid picks out a nice retirement home.
Posted by: Chris | October 7, 2009 9:50 AM
So much for transparency . . .
Congressional leaders fight against posting bills online
What you don't know can hurt you:
» House energy and global warming bill, passed June 26, 2009. 1,200 pages. Available online 15 hours before vote.
» $789 billion stimulus bill, passed Feb. 14, 2009. 1,100 pages. Available online 13 hours before debate.
» $700 billion financial sector rescue package, passed Oct. 3, 2008. 169 pages. Available online 29 hours before vote.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Congressional-leaders-fight-against-posting-bills-online-8340658-63557217.html
Keep it up Loony Lefties, you'll be sent packing before you know what hit you!
Posted by: The Real Bobbie Mobbie | October 7, 2009 10:03 AM
My the rabid are cheery today. Over a year away and it's in the bag. 10-4
Posted by: bill r. | October 7, 2009 11:22 AM
YOu right winger dont get it! FDR had to spend gazillions to get th economy back on track. You all complained that your children and grandchildren would be paying for it for the rest of their lives. Well guess what? They didnt. Because of FDR's domestic government spending more jobs were created which meant more people were spending money, which means more companies had to hire more people to keep up with the deman, which means the debt was wiped out during the 50's when bread was 5 cents!
Since nobody is buying now the only one who is is the government. The government needs to spend more now and worry about the economy and creating jobs right now rather than worrying about the deficit, that if these policies work, will be non existant in les than 10 years. It worked fro FDR and it can work for us now!
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | October 7, 2009 11:31 AM
You are right, I don't get it. Further bloating a bloated government is going to get us out of this mess??!??!!
Don't think so . . .
Posted by: The Real Bobbie Mobbie | October 7, 2009 2:02 PM
You are right, I don't get it. Further bloating a bloated government is going to get us out of this mess??!??!!
Don't think so . . .
Posted by: The Real Bobbie Mobbie | October 7, 2009 2:02 PM
Obviously you didnt read my post or comprehend it properly or no nothing about our history! If it worked for FDR against all odds then explain to me why you dont think it can work again? NOBODY is buying! Therefore companies need less workforce, which means less jobs, which means this disaster we are facing. If nobody is buying then who will?? Only the government has the ability to do it right now.
I suppose you thik giving a tx break to theupper 1% will help right? Kind of like the last one that actually led to this disaster!!
SO whats your plan man?
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | October 7, 2009 6:11 PM
Scottie,
Your conclusion is wrong - it wasn't FDR's gazillions of spending that brought the country out of depression. Also, FDR didn't have to deal with the effects of deficits and entitlement programs that were draining the treasury.
What got the American economy out of the Great Depression was not the alphabet soup of FDR's federal works programs, but WW2.
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/recovery.htm
Posted by: Terry | October 7, 2009 7:45 PM
FDR's domestic government spending programs did not resolve the problems of the depression. Only when the federal government began its buildup to WW II did the depression begin to ease. Because the populace was forced and coerced into cutting back on consumption during the war years, domestic consumption was reduced to match domestic production. The government cannot "spend" its way out of financial recession, as proven by the FDR years.
Posted by: A Once and Future Skeptic | October 7, 2009 8:00 PM
Sorry Terry and Skeptic but I and most historians and economists disagree with you. Conservatives have railed against the New Deal from the start. You people and your anti-New Deal line is wrong as a matter of economics! F.D.R.’s spending programs did help the economy and created millions of new jobs. The first problem, we now know, is not that F.D.R. spent too much priming the pump, but rather that he spent too little. It was his decision to cut back on spending on New Deal programs that brought about a nasty recession in 1937-38.
The second problem is that the conservative criticism overlooks the relief Roosevelt’s programs brought to millions. When hetook office, unemployment was 25 percent, and families were losing their homes, living in shantytowns, even fighting for food at garbage dumps!!
The difference that the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Works Progress Administration and other New Deal public works programs made in people’s lives is incalculable!!
The New Deal spending boosted consumption, thereby increasing production, reducing unemployment, and ending the Depression. Well before WW2!! The GDP had returned to pre-Crash trend by 1940. Did WW2 help boost the economy for sure. Was it the sole reason? NO!
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | October 7, 2009 10:15 PM
FDR's spending programs did help with the Depression but you must remember that one of his first acts as President was to cut federal spending deeply ($500 million, in fact). He took fiscal responsibility very seriously and moved to provide a strong dollar and restore faith in an efficient gov't.
Posted by: Matthew | October 8, 2009 12:06 AM
It only takes a close look at the left's agenda to destroy the country to make every one remember that Republicans are the lesser of the two evils.
How deep is the ditch Obama, Pelosi, and Reid ran us into anyway? I hope there is a way out of this mess.
Bush was a genius compared to this...
Posted by: Shauna | October 8, 2009 2:13 AM
Bush was a genius compared to this...
Posted by: Shauna | October 8, 2009 2:13 AM
OMG What a joke! I gues you forgot that Bush created the largest government in history, the largest deficit in history ( up to now) more people below the poverty level, more uninsured children, lower wages than ever and hundreds of thousands of deaths in a war based on blatant lies. Ya you must be joking. Phew.
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | October 8, 2009 9:21 AM
Scottie,
Unemployment in 1940 - over 14%. Eight years of alphabet soup and massive gov't spending and that is what we had to show for it.
Please show where you get "most" historians and economist. Did you count them?
Posted by: Terry | October 8, 2009 10:29 PM