In what is perhaps the best election related news that I’ve seen in a long time, Gallup’s latest national poll numbers show what I have been predicting all along; a November blowout of Obama of Reagan-Carter proportions.
Gallup released their annual state-by-state presidential approval numbers yesterday, and the results should have 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue very worried. If President Obama carries only those states where he had a net positive approval rating in 2011 (e.g. Michigan where he is up 48 percent to 44 percent), Obama would lose the 2012 election to the Republican nominee 323 electoral votes to 215.
Gallup adds:
Overall, Obama averaged 44% job approval in his third year in office, down from 47% in his second year. His approval rating declined from 2010 to 2011 in most states, with Wyoming, Connecticut, and Maine showing a marginal increase, and Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Jersey, Arizona, West Virginia, Michigan, and Georgia showing declines of less than a full percentage point. The greatest declines were in Hawaii, South Dakota, Nebraska, and New Mexico.
The entire article can be seen here.
Tags: Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden
Thanks Huckfunn! Here’s what I would like to see….
Bumped from main thread…
Oregon being red surprises me, but then again, outside of Pornland and Salem, it’s pretty conservative. Unfortunately those two areas ruin the state.
/lurk
Put a Republican name and that map changes.
It would be nice to see it turn out like this, even if Mittens is our nominee (as seems likely). Maybe he’ll pick a good VP and have the common courtesy to die (of natural causes, of course) shortly after taking office.
Macker wrote:
How’d you do that?
@ Rodan:
@ Iron Fist:
Inasmuch as I don’t like Mittens, I feel that a spotted dog could run against O-Hole and win. The majority of peeps simply don’t share his views of the U.S. or the world.
huckfunn wrote:
Easy. Goto 270towin.com and click on the states that you want to change color to.
I just emailed Rodan, Speranza and m when I saw this at Ace. Also, as I told them that while you look at this map and see the blue-55 of California, here’s something that people may have forgotten.
In August 2011, the California legislature passed and Governor Moonbeam signed, a bill that gives all 55 of California’s electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Which means that if the GOP candidate wins the popular vote, those 55 votes go to the GOP candidate. So Bamster may very well be looking at 160 electoral votes, once you subtract California, and the GOP candidate is looking at 378. I call that a landslide.
Of course, if Bamster looks like he might need all the help he can get, it will be fascinating to see the legislature try to backpedal to get the law reversed.
CynicalConservative wrote:
I was surprised at Oregon being projected red. But it’s probably pretty much like the rest of the country; the Obamunists will take the urban population centers. Flyover country will be red.
Beautiful map! We’ve got to remember though that we’ve likely got Romney as our nominee, it’s still 9 months to election day, the Dems have yet to bring out the dead & the illegals/felons & other voting chicanery (‘found’ ballots; New Black Panther thugs; union thugs, etc) & the attack ads against the Republican party (throwing grandma off a cliff) have yet to start.
@ huckfunn:
I’d prefer a spotted dog to either of them. They are both Northern (read Yankee) Liberals. It is just that Obama is an outright Marxist who hates America. Mittens is an incompetant boob Big Government Nanny-Stater. He will be able to be reigned in by a conservative House and Senate, I hope.
Carolina Girl wrote:
I had not heard of that, but it’s great news. I’d love to see Kolifornia painted red. Sounds like Clint Eastwood style justice.
@ huckfunn:
For the inland counties, for sure! But you watch, if it even smells like the GOP could win the popular vote, they’ll immediately repeal the law. They said it was to keep a Bush v. Gore from happening again, but if I recall correctly, Cali’s electoral votes went to Gore anyway, not Bush, so there’d have been no difference.
Meanwhile, we’re all still waiting for an election law from Sacramento that means something — you know, like maybe having to show ID????
Why the blue?
@ Carolina Girl:
What good would that do? You all give IDs to illegal immigrants, anyway. Besides, asking for ID is RAAAAACIST. It’s the raciest racism ever!
@ Carolina Girl:
I did a little more follow-up on that Cali electoral law. They were the 8th state to approve such a law; the intent being to render the electoral college null. Those new electoral laws have not been litigated in the SCOTUS, but you can bet that they will be at such time as they are actually implemented.
huckfunn wrote:
You are underestimating Obama. This man has a cult and the most formidable electoral machine ever assembled. This poll means nothing since its Obama vs. a Generic Republican. Currently Obama is beating the whole GOP field.
Don’t underestimate Obama.
@ huckfunn:
Very interesting – I had no idea 8 states had passed such law. Were they all traditionally blue?
Of course, SCOTUS will need someone to bring some action in order for its voice to be heard. Here’s one scenario I see. GOP candidate wins popular vote. California Legislature – the largest collection under one roof of Dumber than Dumb Dumbocrats west of the Mississippi, immediately meets on November 7, 2012 to repeal “all in” electoral votes for winner of popular vote. They pass the law, Moonbeam signs it, and they think “well, that’s done with.” Because they’re stupid. Amazingly, blindingly stupid.
Except GOP winner of popular vote says “hold on – this was the law on the date of the election and this is the law you have to obey.” Takes a writ to the Supreme Court (because we need the answer NOW). I wonder how the Court would rule in such a case.
I’ve always wondered why electoral votes are “winner take all” in most states anyway. We actually wanted to make California an apportioned state like Maine, but of course our legislature wouldn’t hear of it. They’re all worried about disenfranchising the Pooo-er by asking for ID, meanwhile my vote hasn’t counted in California since Reagan’s second election.
Rodan wrote:
I don’t underestimate him. I think he’s capable of any act and any lie to win reelection and to expand his already dictatorial powers. The Gallup poll shown is a fallible poll just like those from NBC, CBS, USA Today, et al. Not only fallible, but constructed and presented in such a way to deceive. Having said that, I just don’t see how he wins in November. There are also polls out there which reflect the fact that 70% of the electorate do not share the same views of the U.S. or the world that Obama has.
@ Carolina Girl:
I have to go run some errands, but here is an article about the electoral law. California’s Gov Signs Bill Giving State’s Electoral Votes To National Popular Vote Winner
bbl
@ Carolina Girl:
Cali libs heads would explode!
@ The Osprey:
Oh dear. I work in San Francisco. I better keep my hooded poncho handy.
@ huckfunn:
If we lose the electoral college, it is open revolution as far as I’m concerned.
We’ve obviously, for all intents and purposes, lost the nomination process.
Carolina Girl wrote:
The court would have no choice or option in the matter, Ex Post Facto would come into play.
Carolina Girl wrote:
I find it very interesting that O’Bummer only has 50.1 percent support in California right now, once the campaign get’s serious I can see that changing big time.
Hawaii was among the states with greatest declines in approval for Obama?
But isn’t he a keiki o ka aina? I guess the brotha isn’t coming through for da bruddahs.
He’s failed to bring home the Kalua pig, or the mahi-mahi.
@ The Osprey:
It’s a load of Ka’a Ka’a.
The Osprey wrote:
ROTFLMAO… and here I thought he was just another howlie or fruitfly…
@ Bumr50:
15.3 TRILLION UPDINGS!
@ doriangrey:
Oh, I’ve no doubt he’ll win California. Just barely. They’ll be sure to get the illegals lined up early at the polling places.
I actually challenged a guy at a polling place during the primary in 2008. He couldn’t speak any English and they were yammering at him in Spanish. I said “wait a minute. If this guy is a citizen, he should have a basic understanding of English, as there is a language requirement for citizenship. He appears to understand NO English at all.” At that point a couple of people in line behind me piped up as well. I think if it had just been me, they’d have told me to shut up and let the man vote, but there were quite a few people in line agreeing with me. One guy said “have him show his ID – we’ll show ours!” He did have to leave without voting.
And California has no excuse. We give people who can’t afford them ID’s and you need a California issued ID to pick up your food stamps and use your EBT card at the grocery store (or at a Casino near you!).
The Osprey wrote:
Child of the Land?
@ Carolina Girl:
You know what they say about Excuses being like Assholes….
Macker wrote:
Ummm… Everybody in California has one????
@ Macker:
And ours biggest collection is occupying the same real estate up in Sacramento. Here’s a great one for ya. The California Indian Tribes, who are going to be renegotiating their Compacts with Gov Moonbeam (to get lower payments to the State, I’m sure), have donated $300,000 towards Brown’s tax initiative – which will raise income taxes on those making over $250,000 (cough-MILLIONAIRES-cough) and will raise the sales tax by 1/2 cent (making it almost 10% in some cities).
Mind you, the Tribes will not be paying this higher income tax or in many cases the sales tax. But they’re happy to help Jerry stick it to the taxpayers of California.
@ doriangrey:
NOT YOU, Dorian! Same goes for everyone on Blogmocracy who lives in Kah-lee-for-nia!
Rodan wrote:
Exactly.
Macker wrote:
Yup.
@ The Osprey:
So since you lived there, do you get to claim that title also?
Every state Obama touches turns to crap.
Macker wrote:
Nope…means you were born there.