Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Friday, August 03, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney attracting 47% of the vote, while President Obama earns support from 43%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

Following Romney’s overseas trip, 44% believe the president is better able to deal with America’s allies. Another 44% say Romney is better for that task.

Republicans continue to follow the election more closely than Democrats or unaffiliated voters. This is a key indicator of potential turnout.

A president’s Job Approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s Job Approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. That matches the president’s lowest level of approval in 2012. Approval has been this low on seven days earlier in the year.

Fifty-four percent (54%) at least somewhat disapprove. Currently, 22% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-five percent (45%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -23. This is the president’s lowest Approval Index rating of 2012.

Thirty-three percent (33%) give the president good or excellent marks for handling the economy. On national security matters, the president gets positive reviews from 45% and negatives from 35%.

Fifty-one percent (51%) consider Romney’s views to be in the mainstream while 37% say they’re extreme. Voters are more evenly divided on the president. Forty-six percent (46%) say Election 2012 offers a choice between the lesser of two evils.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

NC Susan

Deceased
Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide

by Michael Tomasky Aug 4, 2012 4:45 AM EDT Liberals don’t want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romney’s path to victory is getting harder every day.



http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/04/michael-tomasky-on-the-possible-coming-obama-landslide.html


There’s a secret lurking behind everything you’re reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders know—or should—but few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like you’ve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isn’t really up for grabs. Romney’s paths to 270 are few.


First, let’s discuss Pennsylvania. There has been good reason for Democrats to sweat this state. True, Obama won it handily in 2008, by 10 points. But it’s a state that is older and whiter and more working-class than most of America. Obama benefited from all the unique circumstances of 2008 that helped him across the country, but if ever there were a state where the “well, we gave the black guy a chance and he blew it” meme might catch on, it’s the Keystone State.

But the jobless rate there is 7.5 percent, well below the national average. Democratic voter registration has held its own. The Philly suburbs have grown. And this odious voter ID law is facing meaningful challenges. A hearing on the law’s validity has just been concluded. A state judge says he’ll rule on the law’s constitutionality the week of Aug. 13. It sounds as if the law’s opponents made a stronger case at the hearing than its supporters. In any case, the losing side will appeal to the state Supreme Court.



But whatever happens with that law, Pennsylvania has been trending back toward Obama lately. He now holds a lead there of nearly seven points, and he’s close to 50. And as I wrote the other day, Nate Silver now gives Barack Obama a slightly better chance of winning Montana than he does Romney of winning Pennsylvania. That tells you something.

The Democrats’ Pennsylvania sweat also had to do with its size—20 electoral votes, tied with Illinois for fifth biggest in the country. Democrats have been able to count on those votes for 20 years. Losing them would be a dagger right in the heart, a maybe irreparable sundering of the party’s electoral coalition. Imagine Republicans losing usually reliable Missouri (10 EV’s) and Arizona (11). Big ouch.

So if Pennsylvania is off the boards, let’s look around. Imagine it’s election night, say 10:45 east coast time. Four eastern states haven’t been called yet: Ohio (18), Virginia (13), North Carolina (15), and Florida (29). Also, in some Western states, the polls haven’t closed, or the races are too tight to project just yet—Colorado and Nevada, say. Arizona has just been called for Romney. At this point, Romney actually leads, 188 to 182. In this scenario I’m assuming Obama has won Iowa (6), which is admittedly close but where his lead has been stable at three or four points, and New Hampshire (4), where Obama has a similar fairly small but stable lead, and Michigan (16), where the gap appears to be opening up a little.

So it’s a six-vote Romney edge. They’re feeling great up in Boston. Especially with the big Eastern four still up in the air. Right?

Not really. Let’s look at these West Coast states. Even though they’re still voting in California, obviously Obama is going to win it (55). And equally obviously, he’s going to win Washington (12) and Oregon (7), where neither side even bothered to spend a dime. Throw in Hawaii (4). Those 78 votes haul Obama up to 260. That’s something to keep in mind for election night: Whatever Obama’s number is at 10 pm Eastern, add those 78 EV’s—they’re a mortal lock, and a hefty insurance policy. If he wins Nevada (6) and Colorado (9), it’s over.

In other words, Obama can lose the big Eastern four—Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of ’em!—and still be reelected.

And barring some huge cataclysm, he’s not losing all four of those states. If he wins even one—say Virginia, the smallest of the four—then Romney has to win Colorado, Iowa, and New Hampshire; all possible, certainly, but all states where he has been behind, narrowly but consistently, for weeks or months.

The list of states where Obama holds that narrow but consistent lead is long: Ohio, Virginia, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, and New Hampshire. Michigan and Wisconsin are no longer really narrow. Florida is more or less a dead heat. The bottom line is that of the dozen or so key swing states, Romney leads only in one: North Carolina. And that lead developed only over the summer. We’ll see whether the Democrats’ decision to convene in Charlotte has any impact on Romney’s three-point margin.
It’s beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern four—Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of ’em!—and still be reelected.
All this explains the interesting :shkr::shk: :shkr: little chart :boohoo: toward the lower right-hand corner of Nate Silver’s home page, headed “Electoral Vote Distribution.” It rates the probability that Obama receives a certain number of electoral votes. Most outcomes, in a range running from 150 EV’s up to 400, rate around a 2 percent chance of Obama receiving that number. The highest spike on the chart? It’s at around 330 EV’s, which Silver reckons Obama has a 14 percent chance of hitting. Now, most political journalists would chuckle derisively at the idea that Obama is going to carry home 330 EV’s. Deride away. And while you do, bear in mind that Silver called 50 out of 51 states last time (counting D.C.; he missed only Indiana) and every single Senate race.

Sure, something big could happen to alter the dynamic completely. But we’ve watched these guys go, what, six or seven rounds now (out of 15). After seven rounds, you can pretty well tell some things. All the supposedly game-changing events of the last few weeks haven’t changed much of anything. This is a paradoxical situation that has little or no modern precedent, which makes it hard for people to accept. Liberals are too nervous to think it, reporters too intent on a “down to the wire” narrative, and conservatives too furious and disbelieving, but it’s shaping up to be true: An extremely close election that on election night itself stands a surprisingly good chance of being not that close at all.
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Why Obama Will Lose in a Landslide

;) A lot of things can happen between now and the election. I think it is too soon for anyone to call it. -- Terri

Most political predictions are made by biased pollsters, pundits, or prognosticators who are either rooting for Republicans or Democrats. I am neither. I am a former Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, and a well-known Vegas oddsmaker with one of the most accurate records of predicting political races.

Neither Obama nor Romney are my horses in the race. I believe both Republicans and Democrats have destroyed the U.S. economy and brought us to the edge of economic disaster. My vote will go to Libertarian Presidential candidate Gary Johnson in November, whom I believe has the most fiscally conservative track record of any Governor in modern U.S. political history. Without the bold spending cuts of a Gary Johnson or Ron Paul, I don’t believe it’s possible to turnaround America.

But as an oddsmaker with a pretty remarkable track record of picking political races, I play no favorites. I simply use common sense to call them as I see them. Back in late December I released my New Years Predictions. I predicted back then- before a single GOP primary had been held, with Romney trailing for months to almost every GOP competitor from Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Newt- that Romney would easily rout his competition to win the GOP nomination by a landslide. I also predicted that the Presidential race between Obama and Romney would be very close until election day. But that on election day Romney would win by a landslide similar to Reagan-Carter in 1980.

Understanding history, today I am even more convinced of a resounding Romney victory. 32 years ago at this moment in time, Reagan was losing by 9 points to Carter. Romney is right now running even in polls. So why do most pollsters give Obama the edge?

First, most pollsters are missing one ingredient- common sense. Here is my gut instinct. Not one American who voted for McCain 4 years ago will switch to Obama. Not one in all the land. But many millions of people who voted for an unknown Obama 4 years ago are angry, disillusioned, turned off, or scared about the future. Voters know Obama now- and that is a bad harbinger.

Now to an analysis of the voting blocks that matter in U.S. politics:

*Black voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. His endorsement of gay marriage has alienated many black church-going Christians. He may get 88% of their vote instead of the 96% he got in 2008. This is not good news for Obama.

*Hispanic voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. If Romney picks Rubio as his VP running-mate the GOP may pick up an extra 10% to 15% of Hispanic voters (plus lock down Florida). This is not good news for Obama.

*Jewish voters. Obama has been weak in his support of Israel. Many Jewish voters and big donors are angry and disappointed. I predict Obama's Jewish support drops from 78% in 2008 to the low 60’s. This is not good news for Obama.

*Youth voters. Obama’s biggest and most enthusiastic believers from 4 years ago have graduated into a job market from hell. Young people are disillusioned, frightened, and broke- a bad combination. The enthusiasm is long gone. Turnout will be much lower among young voters, as will actual voting percentages. This not good news for Obama.

*Catholic voters. Obama won a majority of Catholics in 2008. That won’t happen again. Out of desperation to please women, Obama went to war with the Catholic Church over contraception. Now he is being sued by the Catholic Church. Majority lost. This is not good news for Obama.

*Small Business owners. Because I ran for Vice President last time around, and I'm a small businessman myself, I know literally thousands of small business owners. At least 40% of them in my circle of friends, fans and supporters voted for Obama 4 years ago to “give someone different a chance.” I warned them that he would pursue a war on capitalism and demonize anyone who owned a business...that he’d support unions over the private sector in a big way...that he'd overwhelm the economy with spending and debt. My friends didn’t listen. Four years later, I can't find one person in my circle of small business owner friends voting for Obama. Not one. This is not good news for Obama.

*Blue collar working class whites. Do I need to say a thing? White working class voters are about as happy with Obama as Boston Red Sox fans feel about the New York Yankees. This is not good news for Obama.

*Suburban moms. The issue isn’t contraception…it’s having a job to pay for contraception. Obama’s economy frightens these moms. They are worried about putting food on the table. They fear for their children’s future. This is not good news for Obama.

*Military Veterans. McCain won this group by 10 points. Romney is winning by 24 points. The more our military vets got to see of Obama, the more they disliked him. This is not good news for Obama.

Add it up. Is there one major group where Obama has gained since 2008? Will anyone in America wake up on election day saying “I didn’t vote for Obama 4 years ago. But he’s done such a fantastic job, I can’t wait to vote for him today.” Does anyone feel that a vote for Obama makes their job more secure?

Forget the polls. My gut instincts as a Vegas oddsmaker and common sense small businessman tell me this will be a historic landslide and a world-class repudiation of Obama’s radical and risky socialist agenda. It's Reagan-Carter all over again.

But I’ll give Obama credit for one thing- he is living proof that familiarity breeds contempt.

http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneallynroot/2012/05/30/why_obama_will_lose_in_a_landslide/page/full/
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Sunday, August 05, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows Mitt Romney attracting 47% of the vote, while President Obama earns support from 45%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided.

A president’s Job Approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s Job Approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-two percent (52%) at least somewhat disapprove. Currently, 23% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -20.

New polling shows Romney with a big lead in Indiana. The president continues to lead in the Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Projections. However, there are 12 states with 156 Electoral Voters that are either Toss-Ups or Leaners that are likely to determine the victor.

There are three times as many fiscal conservatives as fiscal liberals in America. The number of social conservatives and social liberals is much closer to even. Overall, 28% are both fiscal and social conservatives. Sixteen percent (16%) are moderates in both areas; 13% are fiscal moderates, social liberals; 12% are both fiscal and social liberals; and 10% are fiscal conservatives but social moderates.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Tuesday, August 07, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows President Obama attracting 46% of the vote, while Mitt Romney earns support from 45%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided.

This is the first time the president has led on back-to-back days since late June. See tracking history. As with all bounces, it remains to be seen whether it reflects a lasting change in the race or is merely statistical noise.

The Rasmussen Consumer Index, which measures consumer confidence on a daily basis, fell another point on Tuesday to 81.5. Consumer confidence is down two points from a week ago, down eight points from a month ago and down 10 points from three months ago.

Obama has called upon former President Bill Clinton to address the Democratic National Convention this year and help make the case for the current president’s economic plans. However, just 32% of voters believe that Clinton and Obama share similar views on how to fix the economy.

Forty-eight percent (48%) believe Hillary Clinton is at least somewhat likely to run for president in 2016.

Republicans continue to hold a three-point advantage on the Generic Congressional Ballot.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 49% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty percent (50%) at least somewhat disapprove. Currently, 27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -13.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Saturday, August 11, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 44%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided. See tracking history.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 43% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. That’s the lowest level of approval for the president since December 2, 2011.

Fifty-four percent (54%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing (see trends). Currently, 24% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-four percent (44%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -20.

Just three percent (3%) of voters nationwide believe elected politicians should be allowed to prohibit a business from opening if they disagree with the political views of the business owner. Sixty-one percent (61%) of voters nationwide have a favorable opinion of Chick-fil-A, but 13% plan to boycott the company. By way of comparison, 17% favored a boycott of General Motors following the government bailout.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Sunday, August 12, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 44%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 45% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing. Currently, 24% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -19.

Just three percent (3%) of voters nationwide believe elected politicians should be allowed to prohibit a business from opening if they disagree with the political views of the business owner. Sixty-one percent (61%) of voters nationwide have a favorable opinion of Chick-fill-A, but 13% plan to boycott the company. By way of comparison, 17% favored a boycott of General Motors following the government bailout.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Monday, August 13, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 44%. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 45% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing. Currently, 23% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-four percent (44%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21.

These results are based upon interviews conducted nightly and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. As a result, two-thirds of the interviews conducted for today’s update were completed after it was announced that Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan will be Romney’s vice presidential running mate. The announcement so far has had little impact on the numbers.

Most voters (56%) continue to favor repeal of the president’s health care law. A majority of government employees oppose repeal. However, most private sector workers favor it.

Just 25% believe the bailouts of the U.S. financial industry were good for America. Opinion of the auto bailouts is more evenly divided. Forty percent (40%) believe they were good for the country, but 46% hold the opposite view. Many Americans, however, believe incorrectly that the government made money or broke even on the auto bailouts. Upon learning that the government will lose money, most Americans have a negative view of those bailouts.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Friday, August 17, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows President Obama attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 45%. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

This is the first time in 10 days that Obama has had the lead.

New polling shows Romney up two points in Florida and up one in Paul Ryan’s home state of Wisconsin. In Ohio, the candidates are tied at 45% each. All three are among the 12 states with 156 Electoral Voters rated either Toss-Ups or Leaners in the Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Projections.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 48% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-one percent (51%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing. Currently, 26% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -16.

On the economy, 45% trust Republicans more than Democrats, while 40% hold the opposite view. The GOP also holds a five-point edge on the issue of taxes. On health care, 44% trust Republicans more, but 41% prefer the Democrats. In both Wisconsin and Florida, more voters fear the impact of the president’s health care law on Medicare than fear Romney running mate Paul Ryan’s reform plan for the government health insurance program.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Tuesday, August 21, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 45% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 44%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Romney leads by 20 points among entrepreneurs, while Obama leads by 17 among government workers. Seventy-two percent (72%) of all voters believe that people who start small businesses are primarily responsible for their success or failure. Seventy-seven percent (77%) believe small business owners work harder than other workers.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 49% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty percent (50%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing. Currently, 23% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17.

The Republican advantage on the Generic Congressional Ballot is down to a single point.

Americans are divided as to whether they fear the government will do too much or too little in trying to help the economy. However, those who want the government to do more are also divided between those who want government to spend more or cut spending. Overall, 60% of voters believe that the best thing the government could do to help the economy is cut spending. Twenty-two percent (22%) hold the opposite view and think the government should increase spending.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Wednesday, August 22, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 44%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

Forty-seven percent (47%) of voters believe media bias is a bigger problem in the campaign than big campaign cash. Forty-two percent (42%) take the opposite view. That’s less concern about the media and more about cash compared to four years ago.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 48% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-one percent (51%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing. Currently, 24% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -18.

In the Montana Senate race Republican Congressman Denny Rehberg continues to hold a modest lead over incumbent Democrat Jon Tester. In the Rasmussen Reports Senate Balance of Power projections, the Montana race remains a Toss-Up. However, following recent remarks by Republican candidate Todd Akin, the Missouri Senate race is being shifted from Leans Republican to Toss-Up. Rasmussen Reports will soon be polling in the race and make further adjustments if needed. At the moment, 47 seats are at least leaning in the GOP direction and 46 leaning to the Democrats. Seven races remain toss-ups.

The housing numbers are still discouraging. Just 47% of homeowners believe their home is worth more than the mortgage. More believe the value of their home will go down than up over the next year. However, the Country Financial Security Index improved slightly this month.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Sunday, August 26, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows President Obama attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns 45% of the vote. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 49% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty percent (50%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing. Currently, 27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -14.

Fifty-one percent (51%) now believe that buying a home is the best investment a family can make. That attitude has been generally consistent throughout 2012 but remains down from 73% in September 2008.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Wednesday, August 29, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows President Obama attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns 45% of the vote. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 50% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty percent (50%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing. Currently, 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -15.

The ov.erwhelming majority of interviews for this update were conducted before last night’s prime time speeches at the Republican National Convention. It will take the rest of this week to fully measure the Romney “bounce” from this convention and another week to measure the Obama “bounce” from the Democratic event. However, an indication of the trends should become visible day-by-day.

While many pundits have obsessed about the gender gap, a bigger emerging story may revolve around the generation gap. The gender gap is a stable feature of the political landscape and appears little different this year from other years. The generation gap is huge and appears to be growing much bigger than in either 2008 or 2010.

Voters under 30 are once again poised to go heavily for Obama. He leads by 35 among those younger voters, very similar to his 34-point margin in 2008. For Obama and the Democrats, that’s a better result among young voters than they managed in 2010.

Among seniors, however, Romney leads by 21 points. That matches the Republican edge among seniors in 2010 rather than the margins from 2008. Four years ago, Republican candidate John McCain won seniors only by eight points.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Friday, August 31, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 45% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns 44% of the vote. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and seven percent (7%) are undecided.

Today is the first time Romney has held the advantage in a week. Forty-four percent (44%) of voters now see Obama as Very Liberal, and 30% see Romney as Very Conservative.

This update is based on nightly interviews and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. As a result, nearly all of the interviews were conducted before Mitt Romney’s speech to the Republican National Convention last night. Some interviews for today’s update were conducted before the prime-time speeches on the first night of the convention. However, the daily tracking so far does indicates that Romney has received a modest “bounce” from the convention. It will take another few days to fully measure the size of that bounce and another week to measure the Obama “bounce” from the Democratic convention.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 49% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-one percent (51%) at least somewhat disapprove of the job Obama is doing. Currently, 26% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Thirty-nine percent (39%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -13.

Still, just 35% give Obama good or excellent marks for his handling of the economy. Forty-four percent (44%) believe he’s doing a poor job.

Forty-eight percent (48%) trust Romney more than Obama on the election’s top issue, the economy. Forty-four percent (44%) trust the president more. The good news for Romney is that he still has the edge on this issue. The good news for Obama is that Romney’s advantage has been shrinking over the last few months.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Thursday, September 06, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns 44% of the vote. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

These updates are based upon nightly interviews and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. As a result, virtually all of the interviews for today’s update were completed before Bill Clinton’s prime-time speech last night at the Democratic National Convention. Only one-third of the interviews were conducted following the first night of the convention.

Fifty-six percent (56%) of the president’s supporters are Christians as are 83% of Romney supporters. These figures include Evangelical Christians, other Protestants and Catholic voters.
Among those who rarely or never attend church or other religious services, Obama leads by 22 percentage points. Among those who attend services weekly, Romney leads by 24. The candidates are even among those who attend church occasionally.

Romney leads by seven among Catholic voters and holds a massive lead among Evangelical Christians. Among other Protestants, the Republican challenger is ahead by 13. Among all other Americans, including people of other faiths and atheists, Obama leads by a 62% to 26% margin.

Intensity of support or opposition can have an impact on campaigns. Currently, 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-four percent (44%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -19.


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Sunday, September 09, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows President Obama attracting support from 49% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns 45% of the vote. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 52% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. That’s his highest approval rating in more than a year-and-a-half, since January 2011.
Forty-seven percent (47%) at least somewhat disapprove. Currently, 32% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10.

This is the president’s biggest lead over Romney among Likely Voters since March 17. See daily tracking history. Obama’s convention bounce is evident both in the head-to-head numbers with Romney and in his Job Approval ratings. The president has made significant gains among voters aged 40-64.

The president’s bounce began the night after Bill Clinton spoke to the convention and received rave reviews. Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters nationwide have a favorable opinion of the former president. Democrats overwhelmingly believe Clinton and Obama have similar views on how to fix the economy, but few Republicans and unaffiliated voters share that assessment. Among all voters, 59% see Clinton as a better president, while 19% prefer Obama. Democrats are evenly divided.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Wednesday, September 12, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows President Obama attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns 45% of the vote. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

The president received a modest convention bounce, but that's now gone. On the day the conventions began, Obama was up by two points. Now the numbers are essentially back to that starting point with the president leading by a point.

When “leaners” are included, it’s Romney 48% and Obama 47%. Leaners are those who initially indicate no preference for either candidate but express a preference for one of them in a follow-up question.

Currently, 51% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. That's down a point from yesterday’s total which marked Obama's highest approval rating since January 2011. Currently, 28% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -12.

On the issue of job creation, 47% trust the president more, while 45% have more confidence in Romney. Forty percent (40%) think new government programs to fight unemployment will do more to create jobs. But slightly more (44%) feel cuts in government spending are a better job creator.

If Romney is elected president and Republicans win control of Congress, 45% think it will help the ability of private companies to create new jobs. Thirty-five percent (35%) believe it will hurt private sector job creation. If Obama and the Democrats win, 39% think that will help in the creation of private sector jobs, while 44% believe it will hurt.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Wednesday, September 19, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns 46% of the vote. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided. See daily tracking history.

When “leaners” are included, the race is tied with both Obama and Romney at 48%. Leaners are those who are initially uncommitted to the two leading candidates but lean towards one of them when asked a follow-up question.

Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 49% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty percent (50%) at least somewhat disapprove. Currently, 30% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -12.

Romney has now edged ahead of the president in Colorado, but it remains one of seven states still rated as a Toss-Up in the Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Projections.

The Swing State Daily Tracking Survey shows the race remains close in the battlegrounds.

But 55% of voters nationally who are not affiliated with either of the major political parties still consider the choice between Romney and the president as voting for the lesser of two evils.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

TerriHaute

Hoosier Gardener
Tuesday, September 25, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows President Obama attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 46%. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided. See daily tracking history.

When “leaners” are included, the candidates are tied at 47% apiece. Leaners are those who are initially uncommitted to the two leading candidates but lean towards one of them when asked a follow-up question. Beginning October 1, Rasmussen Reports will be basing its daily updates solely upon the results including leaners.

Just 23% of voters believe the recent attacks on U.S. embassies in the Middle East were sparked by an anti-Muslim video. Most (57%) believe the attacks were pre-planned. Only 18% believe U.S. relations with the Muslim world have improved over the past four years.

A president’s job approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s job approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 48% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-one percent (51%) at least somewhat disapprove. Currently, 27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove, giving him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -16.

Obama has a one- or two-point lead in each of the Key Three States in this year’s election, Ohio, Florida and Virginia. The president is also up by three in Wisconsin and up two in Nevada. Romney is now up two in Colorado and ahead by three in Iowa and New Hampshire. All these states remain Toss-Ups in the Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Projections. The president has big leads in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

On the Generic Congressional Ballot, Republicans are clinging to a one-point advantage. For most of the time since mid-2009, the GOP has enjoyed a solid lead on this basic measure of partisan support. However, over the past six weeks, that advantage has disappeared. For the past six weeks, the results have ranged from a one-point Democratic advantage to a two-point lead for Republicans. This decline has coincided with a decrease in the likelihood that the GOP will take control of the Senate this year.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
 

Flippper

Time Traveler
It is just so amazing that there are people alive in the US as I type this that have no freaking clue what is going on, nor what the importance of this November's election cycle is to their daily lives. It's mind blowing. TPTB have done a fine job of brainwashing, I'll give them that.
 

NC Susan

Deceased
it has got to be mass hypnosis. those who are not God filled have no problem following in adoration our government.

http://newswithviews.com/Masters/roy114.htm

MEDIA HYSTERIA AND THE REMOLDING OF THE AMERICAN MIND
PART 1 of 2



By Roy Masters
Author of "Hypnotic States of Americans"
April 10, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

[This article originally appeared in New Dimensions magazine in April 1990, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union.]

The same trauma conditioning that drove Patricia Hearst to embrace the ideology of her terrorist kidnappers also occurs between weak and strong countries. A nation's media, depending on how it reports the news, plays a decisive role in either strengthening or weakening the mental and moral integrity of the population.

The downfall of the socialist republics in Eastern Europe has amazed the world, but even more amazing is the rise of socialistic and anti-democratic forces in America.

Over there, people seem to have become imprinted with our ideals, while over here, many Americans have become imprinted with socialist attitudes. You see them demonstrating for "fair distribution of wealth" or similar causes having to do with what they call social justice. They have nothing but contempt for free enterprise; chanting, angry slogans and burning the American flag, they burn with envy against those who are more energetic, idealistic, and creative.

How can such a thing happen? Are we in danger of losing our freedoms? Is it possible for nations to switch roles or identities? The answer to this question is absolutely yes. Nations can swap identities as the result of prolonged intrigues or conflicts in much the same way some people do.

Generally speaking, identity projection is a one-way street. In a famous case during the '70s, Patty Hearst, a member of the wealthy Hearst publishing family, took on the behavior and the identity of the SLA terrorist group that kidnapped her. After a protracted period of deprivation, intimidation, and stress, Hearst took part in an SLA bank robbery, and even carried a gun in the "cause." In a classic case of the "Stockholm Syndrome" (see article below), the young heiress was unable to deal with her captors' psychological methods and thus succumbed to their agenda and mind-set.

These psychological tactics work equally well on groups of people, as we know from the terrible events at Jonestown, Guyana, where hundreds of men, women, and children drank poisoned Kool-Aid on orders from Jim Jones. Of course, with nations it is more complicated because there has to be a way to reach the people in order to intimidate them. Modern communications technology has made this relatively easy, since the mass media, especially television, reaches tens of millions of people every day. If the dominant message happens to be one of fear and vulnerability, the public can succumb to its influence just as Patty Hearst did.

However, there is an important factor that mitigates the danger of mass hysteria on a national scale, and that is political leadership; as we all know, proper leadership can have a very calming effect on a nation. Many of us remember Franklin Roosevelt's reassuring words at his Inauguration in 1933 when the economy of the country was in such dire shape: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." And in England, Churchill's jutting jaw and "stiff upper lip" gave the British courage during the incessant Nazi bombings.

In the late '70s, under the weak leadership of Jimmy Carter, America could have reached a point where it succumbed to Communist intimidation—just like the victim wife who submits to her bully husband, hoping to placate his rage, but in the end just gives him more power. After Carter, however, under the strong leadership of Ronald Reagan, the tension of the Cold War took on a dramatic new turn, and intimidation went both ways. In other words, the Communist intimidators also became the intimidated.

Surprisingly, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics lost the game of intimidation. It has been one of the most intimidating nations in history and yet, somehow it's leaders had the tables turned on them and were actually out-intimidated. Before I explain in detail the psychology behind these international relations, allow me to give you some background concerning socialism.

A friend of mine, who owns a large radio station here in the West, visited his native Czechoslovakia in 1969. He told of an old woman who lived in a room inside a run-down, 200-year-old building—with no running water, no toilet facilities, and only a meager ration of food available to her. All of this was a gift from the Communist bureaucracy to live out the rest of her miserable existence. Her husband once owned and ran a machine shop employing 24 mechanics and craftsmen. They had a modest home and lived happily until the Communist takeover. Things suddenly changed; the Communists gave her husband's executive position to the company janitor and in turn they made her husband the janitor. When the poor man died, his wife was left to rot in her miserable dungeon of a room as a dependent of the state. Is it any wonder why that system had to fail sooner or later?

Socialism proved to be a great idea for the lazy wastrels and have-nots who couldn't wait to get their hands on that old man's business, the kind of people who burn with envy toward those who have managed to keep what they earn or what their family earned. And where does the legal plunder of the middle class and the so-called rich lead? Once initiative and executive ability are destroyed in order to create socialist jobs (either through excessive taxation or by decrees making janitors into executives), then the infrastructure has got to collapse—because if you don't create wealth, then you have to take it from others, and eventually the supply of rich citizens or affluent countries runs out.

Economist Ludwig von Mises, one of the century's great experts on socialism, declared that particular political system to be incapable of rational economic activity. And yet in the hippie days of the 1960s, in a country that should have known better, there were plenty of people who believed the socialist lie. I know a man who lived on a Communist commune around Seattle. A member would join the commune with a Volkswagen and the entire group would ride the auto into the ground. When the VW was no longer working, they would meet and vote on who would fix it instead of asking a skilled mechanic. As a result, they were always without transportation and decried the evils of capitalism.

There are those who can make something out of nothing. They can make a million dollars starting with a dollar. And there are those with the special knack of turning a million dollars into one dollar. The latter group tends to be angry and envious of those who are wiser and more industrious. Suffering from feelings of inferiority, these people burn to evolve to the stature of those whom they hate. What hope is there for these malcontents to achieve this, except through the use of power? Plunder, whether by violence or by vote, is their only answer, since they have rejected the real path to wealth through their socialist philosophy.

Eastern Europe had socialism imposed on it; despite promises of equality, it got a system where some were more equal than others—a system driven by a socialist elite, i.e., bosses with janitorial abilities. My Czech friend told me that in 1969 he could see the factory furnaces lighting the night sky. Even as inefficient, unmotivated, and unimaginative as the Communist labor bosses made them, the people managed to turn out busses and tractors, and even some consumer goods. But these products were never seen in Czechoslovakia. For the most part, they all went to provide for their Russian masters. Czechoslovakia had become a satellite slave state; the people got nothing they were promised.

For the record, I believe it is safe to say that the poor will always be with us, but the Soviet Union proved during this century that "equal distribution of wealth" is actually equal distribution of poverty. The poor are better off under a free enterprise system. Under socialism, the downtrodden will remain downtrodden, and the power mongers will rise up through the bureaucracy to rule.

What I have described above is an obvious forced role change that can occur within a society. But before that can happen, a more subtle change of identity must occur to enable the rise to power of the unworthy and the worthless (the have-nots who hate you for having). For 40 years now, the two systems have squared off, Communism versus free-market capitalism—in one, capital is controlled by the state; in the other, it's controlled by people. The first rewards dependency, envy, and sloth. The second rewards innovation, entrepreneurship, and hard work. This struggle between two diametrically opposed political ethics was called the Cold War.

The Communists hated what America stood for because America proved them wrong. We were successful—not just materially, but in our national spirit. American ingenuity was world famous. Even now in the era of Asian and European resurgence, the majority of technica1, medical, and intellectual innovations come from America. In comparison with the combined accomplishments of the free world, the socialist republics have been a pathetic failure. And yet, those in charge were obsessed, not with learning from us, but with defeating us—America represented a dangerous truth to the socialist elite. However, America was too strong and powerful for direct confrontation. So they waged "Cold War" as a means of breaking down the moral fiber of our people, of getting under our skins, so to speak. Remember, we are talking about a kind of political fundamentalism that is capable of heinous crimes, as in Cambodia, where thousands were executed just for being teachers.

And so through the '50s, at the peak of American influence, the Soviet ruling class glared hatefully at us from the other side of the world. Through the media, they boasted how they were going to bury us. Through our news media, they shook their atomic sabers. Some of us over here began to shake as well. Many of us, especially the timid pseudo-intellectuals, began to get intimidated. Many Americans began to live in fear of a nuclear disaster. We were surrounded and inundated by a news media that harped and nagged, day in and day out, week in and week out, year after year, about the bleak future of our young and our certain imminent annihilation.

Hollywood joined in whenever it could. Millions watched the television movie, "The Day After," a frightening rendition of what a nuclear holocaust would be like. Unbelievably, teachers all over the country assigned students to watch the movie as if somehow twelve-year-olds needed to be traumatized with scenes of the end of the world. The absurd logic behind this was that there would be peace, if only there were more fear.

The more suggestible among us felt insecure, stressed, almost exactly like we were being held captive by terrorists. No one really held a gun to our heads—there were no real terrorists present. But there was a hysterical media with all its hype and thoughtless distortion of events. This was our only reality. This was our only means of knowing. All this "fear broadcasting" was having the controlling effect that is every terrorist's dream—our people were becoming terrorized and imprinted with sympathy toward socialist thought, just as Patty Hearst eventually came to sympathize with the "Symbionese Liberation Army," seeing them not as her captors, but as her saviors.

The Communist elite knew they could not win a nuclear war, or even a conventional one, in mortal combat with America. But they knew they might well win a psychological war of nerves. It is one of the oldest stories in man's history, dealing with a bully. If you do not stand up to him today, you will have to stand up to him tomorrow. And if you make him your friend out of fear, you lose your integrity. If that happens, the danger is that you will rationalize your cowardice as noble—as if you were some kind of peacemaker. That is where we are right now—in the middle of a battle for the hearts and minds of America. However, thanks to the decade of the 1980s, we almost won the day—but not quite. A certain kind of wisdom will be needed to see the present circumstances to a happy conclusion.

Under President Carter, we might well have weakened and compromised our values to placate the Bear, in much the same way Prime Minister Chamberlain did with Adolph Hitler. But providentially, because of the strength of President Reagan, the psychological warfare they waged backfired. We ended up influencing them. The intimidator became the intimidated. That is what strength will do.

Because America is still basically a nation of strong-spirited, pioneering, hard-working, creative men and women, we were able to out-produce the Russians and their satellite slave nations in what was called the arms race. Their crumbling socialist economy could not cope with this, and we broke its back. Sure, they had big guns, but they had no butter for the people. In turn, the people could see America's riches—and its principles. They could see the success of the free-market system and the democratic process. They became enamored and imprinted with our values, our spirit of freedom and democracy. The truth finally dawned about what a lie they had lived, as their suffering became a catalyst for the renaissance of democratic values.

So the far-sighted, steadfast wisdom of Ronald Reagan won the peace by out-intimidating the Russians and breaking their spirit. Few people in the media recognized the international impact of Reagan's arms build-up and especially his visionary announcement of the Strategic Defense Initiative. Some Americans may have forgotten that the U.S. put a man on the moon in under ten years, but the Soviets hadn't forgotten. They feared American technology. Just when they spent billions on radar, we came up with Stealth bombers, and just after a decade-long Soviet missile build-up, Reagan announced SDI. That kind of thing can be unnerving to say the least. And all the while President Reagan talked of freedom and what America stood for. As a result, their people became imprinted with American principles.

Most of us have the same principle work effectively in our personal lives and battles. If we simply stand firm in our beliefs without being intimidated into feelings of resentment—lo and behold, the intimidator becomes the intimidated. Strangely, the bully sometimes even comes around to your way of thinking. The principle is simple: you affect others by not being affected by them. But if you fail to stand your ground—fail to hold fast to principles—or if you have no principles—then you will find it difficult to resist the will of the intimidator.
 

NC Susan

Deceased
PART 2 of 2 (same link)



By Roy Masters
Author of "Hypnotic States of Americans"
April 17, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

[This article originally appeared in New Dimensions magazine in April 1990, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union.]

In the international battle of wills between the Soviets and America, there was a problem. America is not one person with a singular resolve. It is millions of people, and as in any country, some of them are weak—living their lives in com¬plete submission to willful parents, employers, spouses, never really finding their identity. It is here that the Soviet propaganda machine scored some victories.

With the help of the hysterical press, the Cold War difficulties caused some casualties on our side. We have a kind of Trojan Horse in our midst as a result. The Soviet leadership counted on fear and ter¬ror—the Stockholm Syndrome—to implant socialist sympathies in the hearts of Americans for their cause.

Patricia Hearst's "conversion" was a case of the "Stockholm Syndrome."

The "Stockholm Syndrome" is a phenomenon in which a set of positive feelings develops between the captive and the captor. It is named after the 1974 incident in Stockholm, where two men held four captives in a bank vault for five days. Later, the ex-hostages sided with their captors, and two women hostages even became en¬gaged to their former captors.

According to psychiatrists, the sympathy results from the mental trauma of being held unharmed but helpless. "Once a hostage really believes his life is in jeopardy, then for each moment that he's not killed, he feels a great and irrational gratitude to the hostage taker," said Dr. Charles Bahn of John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

"The hostage is suddenly placed in an infantile situation," explained psychiatrist Dr. Frank Ochberg, expert on hostage psychology and Director of Michigan's Department of Mental Health, specializing in the psychology of terrorism. "The hostage literally can't eat, can't move, can't use the toilet facilities, sometimes can't even talk, without permission. This is demeaning and frightening—throwing a person back to a set of emotions that are very primitive. These same infantile emotions are also the precursor to affection and love. It's what a one-year-old infant would feel toward a parent who, as the powerful being, takes away the terror of infancy. Hostages don't recognize that their feelings are primitive. They usually describe their emotions in adult terms such as trust, compassion, or love .... In the Stockholm Syndrome, part of the reason why terrorists reciprocate positive feelings toward hostages is that they themselves are in danger and depend on their hostages for safety."

Dr. Ochberg, who served as a consultant to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Secret Service, points out that once the hostage situation has been resolved, it may take a while for the hostages to recover from the syndrome: "[T]he hostage can continue to have strong positive feeling about the hostage taker after captivity, and these emotions can color their interpretation of the terrorists' cause. This sympathetic feeling will eventually go away, ... t's something primitive that is difficult to shake with reason." He adds that "[h]ostages don't make good witnesses for the prose¬cution."

During the Cold War, Soviet leadership counted on fear and ter¬ror—the Stockholm Syndrome—to implant socialist sympathies in the hearts of Americans for their cause. Americans, who felt helpless before their dark fears of impending doom, started to look to the Soviets for relief from this fear. To some extent Reagan slowed this process in the two key ways suggested in Part I of this article—strong defense and values. Knowing what we stood for helped us stand against tyranny, and with SDI, for the first time it seemed like there was an alternative to living in fear. But both of these things were made light of by the liberal media who considered SDI a "star wars" fantasy and American values somewhat corny—like Reagan himself. So with certain Americans, the Soviets still enjoyed considerable success.

Watching angry "peace" demonstrations must cause most Americans to scratch their heads in wonder. Nothing America does seems to satisfy these people. Jeane Kirkpatrick described them as people who "blame America first." What's really going on is straightforward enough; living with fear and resentment, many Americans were going through what Patty Hearst experienced—a conversion. Forty years or so of intimidation have transformed the thinking, feeling, emotional lives of these Americans. Through fear, rage, and intimidation, they have developed a subconscious affinity with the other side.

The technique is simple enough. Place a person under extreme pressure. Threaten his or her life over a long period of time without rest, and just as you see the terror transforming the victim, change the face of cruelty and smile sweetly at your victim; you become his friend after the terror does its work. Now you reward the slavish submission with approval and validate your victim's altered belief system as the truth, and give them new direction. Police sometimes use this bad guy/good guy routine to break down a suspect and obtain confessions.

Of course, you can't terrorize people if you can't reach them. The point is, the media must bear great responsibility for what has happened in America. They are supposed to report the news, but not in a dis¬torted manner that frightens people. I remember during the Second World War in England the calm, mat¬ter-of-fact manner of the newscast¬ers. They told us the most unpleasant truth with great dignity. They didn't try to panic the British people as they reported the Nazis were overrunning France and poised at our doors. On the contrary, the honesty and the dignity with which the bad news was presented seemed to bolster British morale. It made us all the more resolute to fight "the Jerries," as we called them to make light of the matter.

We all became more courageous and stronger in character thanks to the way the news was handled. Even Adolph Hitler felt the British confidence—despite the fact that we were close to defenseless thanks to liberal peacetime disarmament, Adolph Hitler hesitated in invading England and made the mistake of attacking the Soviets instead. He was afraid of the British resolve. We out-intimidated him.

The American media has not done so well; it has been used to instill fear and break down resolve in many of us. Because of some mindless journalistic policy, reporters have caused many young Americans to become severely traumatized into feeling hostility and blame toward their own country. Some bury their conflict with drugs or alcohol—a reaction sadly indicative of the take-care-of-me socialist attitude.

This implanted feeling for socialism is self-perpetuating because their lack of productivity causes them to blame capitalism, like some people spend their lives blaming parents for their unhappiness, never finally taking responsibility for themselves. They have been prevented from functioning as they should by media-generated feelings of hope-lessness and despair.

In recent years, there has been developing in America a groundswell of sympathy for the Soviets, as if somehow the collapse of the socialist republics is really a renaissance of socialism ("with a human face"). The inevitable parallel attitudes are there too—a growing hatred for leaders like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Reagan is now being blamed for presiding over a decade of greed, not really surprising when you realize that greed to the socialist mentality is synonymous with business—a successful capitalist is a greedy capitalist. Behind that anti-business prejudice is the inevitable "you-owe-me" attitude, thinly disguised as ''you-owe-them'' charitableness. All this leads directly to discussions of fair distribution of wealth, i.e., plundering the productive through taxation supposedly meant to help the poor, while really creating more bureaucracy and welfare dependency.

You can see the implanted socialist identity becoming an electorate represented by leftist American Congressmen who almost lost the arms race by voting down the military budget in favor of social causes. For these politicians, military strength equals "Rambo," profit equals greed, freedom equals selfishness—while poverty is nobility, welfare is love, disarmament is peace, and in general, socialism is fairness.

Patty Hearst got her peace when she broke down in sympathy for the SLA. All she needed was the smiling face of terrorist acceptance to validate her new identity and give it a bank-robbing directive. The altered identity always craves the nurturing, approval, and direction of those responsible for the change in the victim's consciousness.

Most Americans accept that, in a very real sense, liberty is a spirit, an identity that can be communicated as it was in Eastern Europe. The spirit of '76 became the spirit of '89 from China to Czechoslovakia. This feeling, this longing for freedom gets inside of people—it changes their attitudes. Eastern Europe will never be the same. Ironically, the spirit of socialism is here in America, with its own parasitic version of freedom. A police officer recently told a friend of mine about a new reality in his rural community. He said we are "growing monsters," kids whose entire attitude is "sex, drugs, rock 'n' roll—and you owe me a job."

We have almost won the Cold War. We have almost won the arms race. We have almost won the peace. But alas, many Americans have been infected, implanted, with the socialist spirit. Too many burn flags, hate free enterprise, degrade the military, denigrate traditional American values, and all the while, demand more and more social programs at the expense of defense. They even call the Constitution an outdated document. Under the influence of their changed loyalty, they accuse someone like Ronald Reagan of war-mongering—and yet, see Castro, Ortega, or Gorbachev as their smiling, approving friend.

Intimidated people can have a change of heart and turn against their own values, their own families, their own country—in much the same way a child disobeys his conscience under the influence of peer pressure. If Gorbachev were up for vote in this country, there are many who would try to elect him. So, during the next few years, if we start to see a renaissance of socialism, "free-market" or otherwise, we will know what is at work. And when we are told that perhaps there should be a blending of their system and ours, it will be a good time to remember that if you have a clear glass of water and another person has a muddy glass of water, mixing the two is not compromise, it is capitulation.

Time will tell what is in store for the people who live under socialist tyranny now. Mikhail Gorbachev may indeed be another Anwar Sadat, a leader who has radically changed his thinking for the better. Or he may simply have no other choice but to let go of the ill-gotten empire he leads. Or, he may end up as just another Marxist/Leninist following the historical Communist agenda of "retreat only to attack again." History will be the judge of his deepest motivations. Either way, America is in danger of creating her own political nightmare by submitting to the idealistic socialist dream. Perhaps many of us have taken for granted what our forefathers died for—the chance to be a free man or woman, to live and prosper in a blessed land free of the misery, degradation, and forced servitude that are the everyday reality of almost every other nation on the earth.
 

NC Susan

Deceased
we are still a Nation divided in a 50/50 stalemate of half approve/ half disapprove

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Monday, January 14, 2013


The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 54% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat approve of President Obama's job performance. Forty-four percent (44%) at least somewhat disapprove (see trends).




Forty-six percent (46%) of voters have a favorable opinion of the president’s health care law. But there is tremendous support for reforming the law by giving voters the right to choose how much insurance coverage they would like and how much they are willing to pay for it. “Giving voters this type of choice would do more to win support for the health care law than any other reform,” Scott Rasmussen says. "Giving consumers more control over their own health care choices would also do more than anything else to reduce the cost of medical care while improving the quality of care.”
In his weekly newspaper column, Scott looks at how the Republican establishment has declared war on GOP voters. “Mature party leaders would spend a lot more time listening to Republican voters rather than further insulating themselves from those voters,” he says.
 

NC Susan

Deceased
Friday, June 21, 2013

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 44% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Obama's job performance. That’s his lowest overall approval rating since last August - 10 months ago (see trends). Fifty-five percent (55%) now disapprove.

Today’s figures include 23% who Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president and 41% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -18.
 

NC Susan

Deceased
Obama approval high with Muslims but not Mormons

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/0...st-108797.html

Obama approval high with Muslims

The survey underscores a religious divide when it comes to presidential approval. | AP Photo
By JONATHAN TOPAZ |

7/11/14

President Barack Obama’s approval rating is higher among Muslims than any other religious group, a new poll says.

According to a Gallup poll released Friday that tracked responses for the first six months of 2014, 72 percent of Muslims said they approve of the president, compared with just 20 percent who disapprove.

Mormons were the least approving religious group, with 18 percent of Mormons approving and 78 percent disapproving of the president. Mormons in the past have ranked as the most conservative major religious group in the U.S.

The survey underscores a religious divide when it comes to presidential approval —

Obama is more popular among non-Christians and less popular among Christians.
Those who classify as “Other non-Christian” gave the president a 59 percent approval rating, while Jewish Americans gave Obama a 55 percent approval rating and atheists or those who subscribe to no religion have a 54 percent approval rating.

Catholics, on the other hand, have only a 44 percent approval rating of Obama, compared with 51 percent disapproval.
Protestants and other Christians are more critical, with 37 percent approving and 58 percent disapproving.

Friday’s findings are in line with Gallup results on religious groups’ approval ratings of Obama since the beginning of his presidency — the relative rank of the groups have not changed in the six years Obama has been in office. The president’s approval rating in every group for the past six months has dropped 5-7 points from the average of his entire presidency.
Gallup reported that Obama’s overall approval rating for the past six months is 43 percent.

The survey was conducted January-June 2014 with a random sample of 88,801 adults from all 50 states and Washington, D.C.

The margin for error for the entire sample is plus-or-minus one point — though that number is higher for some of the individual religion samples.
 
Top