LF: Gallup Predicts A Ruling Party Rout In The Midterms Based On Obama's Popularity Rating

Title: Gallup Predicts A Ruling Party Rout In The Midterms Based On Obama's Popularity Rating
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.zerohedge.com/
Published: Aug 9, 2010
Author: Tyler Durden
Post Date: 2010-08-10 20:06:33 by Capitalist Eric
Keywords: None
Views: 20401
Comments: 43

Gallup Predicts A Ruling Party Rout In The Midterms Based On Obama's Popularity Rating

Gallup presents [1]some troubling statistics for the democrats as we approach mid-term elections (a mere three months away). In a nutshell, the party of a president who has a sub-50% rating into midterms, has lost, on average, 36 seats since 1946. Alternatively, presidents with a popularity rating over 50%, lose just 14. As Gallup says [1]: "The clear implication is that the Democrats are vulnerable to losing a significant number of House seats this fall with Barack Obama's approval rating averaging 45% during the last two full weeks of Gallup Daily tracking. The Republicans would need to gain 40 House seats to retake majority control."

Of course, the administration (and its dwindling members) is well-aware of this fact, which is why the next three months will likely see a record amount of pandering, populism and outright manipulation of everything that can be manipulated: that includes mortgages rates, and of course, stocks. Which leads us to observe the calendar of FOMC meetings until November: there are two [2]- tomorrow and September 21. However, for a Fed loosening decision to have a material impact, the September meeting is likely cutting it too close to the election date, as the market will likely not have enough time to digest a favorable outcome, or in turn will be into its reactionary phase by the time November rolls around. Furthermore, the traditionally busy post-Labor day docket will likely mean events on the economic front already have to be in motion by then. Lastly, the fact that the Fed will have just a bare minimum quorum of just four directors through September 10 (at a minimum), means that any decision in the 11 days between then and the 21st will likely be far more problematic than one which has to be taken tomorrow. Which is why from a purely political calendar point of view, tomorrow's Fed meeting is likely seen by the administration as a make or break. The tenuous 40 seat lead which will likely disappear should the current economic trajectory not change, is certainly on the radar for both Obama, and the very independent Federal Reserve.

More observations from Gallup:

On a historical basis, the Democrats under Jimmy Carter suffered the slimmest seat loss of a party whose president was below 50% approval, losing 11 seats in the 1978 midterms. More recently, Bill Clinton in 1994 and George W. Bush in 2006 saw their parties lose enough seats in the House to turn party control over to the opposition party when they had less than majority approval.

The president's party nearly always loses seats in midterm elections, regardless of how well the president is rated by the public. Since World War II, only Clinton in 1998 and Bush in 2002 saw their parties gain seats in a midterm. Both men had approval ratings above 60% at the time of those elections. However, the parties of the other three presidents with ratings above 60% (Eisenhower in 1954, Kennedy in 1962, and Reagan in 1986) lost seats.

In general, though, the more popular a president is, the fewer seats his party loses, as presidents with approval ratings above 60% have averaged just a three-seat loss.

Bottom Line

With the Democratic Party in control of the White House and Congress, and key predictors of midterm seat change -- including presidential approval, congressional approval, and national satisfaction -- below average historically, the Democrats are clearly fighting an uphill battle this midterm election year.

And below is the empirical evidence:

Source URL: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/gallup-predicts-ruling-party-rout-midterms-based-obamas-popularity-rating

Links:
[1] http://www.gallup.com/poll/141812/Avg-Midterm-Seat-Loss-Presidents-Below-Approval.aspx
[2] http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomccalendars.htm

So when the Republocrats gain seats this fall the difference from now will be what, exactly?

The only time the GOP has actually behaved like they talk is when they ran Congress in opposition to Clinton.

During the last 6 years of the Clinton administration, federal spending dropped from 22.4% of GDP to 18.4%. It was magnificent achievement.

Unfortunately, under Bush when the GOP ran it all they ratcheted spending up again.

What GOP will we get this time??? Given the the GOP's current leadership I am not encouraged.

No, you've said this before and it's not true. Yes, there were defense cuts but they only amounted to half of the total budget savings. They also did this:

Reform Welfare(removed from entitlement status); Limit Medicaid eligibility; Cut funding for the space station; Cut federal employee retirement plans; Froze federal employees pay for one year; Cut agricultural subsidies; Cut housing subsidies; Cut rural electrification administration loan subsidies; Cut veterans benefits; Cut prison construction funding; and much, much more.

Clinton also signed a capital gains tax cut -- reducing the rate from 28% to 20%.

Clinton didn't inherit the largest economic downturn since the great depression. Clinton did exactly what Keyensian theory argues should be done during an upturn - cut spending, raise taxes.

The problem came when George W. Bush and crew massively cut tax taxes and increased spending during an up-turn.

I've finally figured out your problem - your standard for POTUS' is George W. Bush!

Seriously - how long is your hero Zero going to be able to blame Bush for the fact that Zero is in waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over his head? Is there an expiration date for "blame Bush?"

And does Bush's "crew" include Nancy and Harry - who controlled the House and Senate since 2006?

Tell me how Boy Blunder was any diffrent from Poppy, who was bored in the job, Red Ink, who was absolutely as clueless and Nixon, who spent like it was his last day on earth...?