Skip to main content

If the GOP wins the Senate, it is NOT a referendum on President Obama

So, what's the reason for the GOP likely winning control of the Senate tonight? If you ask ten conservatives, at least nine will likely tell you, "It's a referendum on President Obama and his policies."

I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. President Obama's approval numbers aren't great, but they are a heck of a lot better than that of Congress. In the the three most recent such polls, Obama's approval rating is at 42.7% and his disapproval is at 53.0% (net -10.3%). As far as Congress goes, the four most recent polls have its approval at 12.0% and their disapproval at 78.5% (net -66.5%). So, President Obama's approval is 3.56 times that of Congress and Congress' disapproval is at 1.48 times that of the president.

The fact of the matter is the American people can't stand Congress and want to vote incumbents out. Due to Republican gerrymandering, however, they will continue to control the House. On the other hand, the Senate will likely switch parties from Democrat to Republican.

Not only that, but this change in party control is a trend historically during mid-terms of a president's second term.

Pretty much from day 1 of President Obama's first term, it's been the Republican Party's goal to either make him a one-term president or to make him a lame-duck president in his second term. It's been their goal to minimize his effectiveness to try and win control of the House, the Senate, and the Oval Office. Even if tonight's election results follow that mid-terms-of-a-president's-second-term trend and the GOP takes control of the Senate, it's more due to the country being angry at Congress than at President Obama. It cracks me up to hear Congresspeople or individuals running for Congress talking about the president's low approval ratings. The president's approval is near 43%, compared to 12% for Congress. That'd be like a student saying a fellow student's 80% grade on a test was low when his was 22.5%.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/?state=nwa

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"