Obama, the best friend the Republcian Party ever had.

[Phier]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ca_s_best_days

America's Best Days
66% Favor Smaller Government With Fewer Services, Lower Taxes

Thursday, December 17, 2009



Sixty-six percent (66%) of U.S. voters prefer a smaller government with fewer services and lower taxes over a more active government with more services and higher taxes.

That's the second highest finding of the year: In August at the height of the congressional town hall controversies over the health care plan, 70% felt that way.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 22% prefer a government with more services and higher taxes. Eleven percent (11%) aren't sure which is best.

Eighty-eight percent (88%) of Republicans and 63% of voters not affiliated with either major party like a smaller government better. Democrats are more narrowly divided: 51% favor a smaller government, but 37% opt for a larger, more activist government.

Sixty-five percent (65%) of liberals chose a government with more services and higher taxes. Eighty-six percent (86%) of conservatives think a smaller government is better.

Sixty-two percent (62%) of all voters say tax cuts are a better way than more government spending to create jobs and fight unemployment. Only 21% say additional stimulus spending is a more effective tool.

Voters overwhelmingly believe that the bigger problem in the United States is the unwillingness of politicians to control government spending rather than voters' unwillingness to pay enough in taxes.

Seventy four percent (74%) of voters say U.S. society is generally fair and decent, up seven points from early November and the highest level measured in two years. Just 17% percent disagree and feel society is generally unfair and discriminatory, the lowest level measured since November 2006.

Whites are more inclined than African-Americans and voters of other ethnicities to believe U.S. society is generally fair and decent.

Just under half (49%) of voters nationwide believe President Obama views American society as generally unfair and discriminatory, while 36% say he sees society as fair and decent. Fifteen percent (15%) are not sure. These findings have remained fairly consistent since late July.

Thirty-six percent (36%) believe America’s best days are in the future, up slightly from early November. Meanwhile, 47% say America’s best days are in the past, down five points from the previous survey. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.
Sixty-two percent (62%) of voters also now believe it would be better for our allies to follow America's lead more often. This is up 12 points from when Obama took office in January and is the highest level measured since Rasmussen Reports began regularly tracking this question in November 2007.

Just eight percent (8%) now say it would be better for the United States to do what our allies want more often. That's the lowest level measured in a little over two years. In November 2007, 29% of Americans felt America should follow our allies more often. Since then, the number of voters who feel this way has steadily declined.

But 23% of voters say the president thinks it’s would be better for the United States to do what our allies want more often. The plurality (47%) feels the president believes it would be better for our allies to do what the United States wants more often, the highest level measured since the beginning of the year.

The latest survey was conducted a little over a week after the president detailed his plan, for winning – and ending – the war in Afghanistan in a speech at West Point. Fifty-three percent (53%) of voters support his plan to send another 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, and nearly as many (47%) support his plan to begin withdrawing troops from that war-torn country in 18 months. But put them together, and overall support for the plan falls to 37%.

In his speech, the president stressed how important it is for America’s NATO allies to pitch in. However, 61% of voters are not confident that America's NATO allies will help us win the war in Afghanistan.

Well this is excellent news, don't you think? Since Obama took office the majority of DEMOCRATS think the government needs to be smaller. Again DEMOCRATS. America wants a smaller government with LESS services and lower taxes, tax cuts to spur on the economy NOT pork, and to enforce OUR interests before being worried about our near worthless allies (UK, AU, and a few notables excepted).

Top this with Obama having his lowest approval rating to date today, and it makes the future seem a little bit brighter

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._index_history

[Mikelus Trento]

And then Miss Bubblehead throws a shadow over your wishful thinking.

[Boer]

Top this with Obama having his lowest approval rating to date today, and it makes the future seem a little bit brighter

Its true his ratings are low (49 approval, 46 disapprove), but on the other hand he is actually fairly close to what Regan was at the same point in his presidency ( 49 approval, 41 disapprove). So, if he actually does something next year, he could still have a turn around.

(http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...er-year-are-w/ Could not quickly find the information from gallop itself).

[Gaidin]

Is there anything really special with the lowest approval rating of the presidency being just below 50? I mean...it's not like he's got an approval rating of 20.

[motiv-8]

None of this appears particularly new, alarming, nor surprising. But if it makes you sleep better at night and keep up your verbal tirades...

[Phier]

None of this appears particularly new, alarming, nor surprising. But if it makes you sleep better at night and keep up your verbal tirades...

Rah rah rah!

Polls like this are meaningless.

Lets look at the reality of what voters want. You don't need polls, just look at the reality of California with the initiative/referendum/recall system.

The reality from the past 40 years is that California voters (who are actually pretty representative of the nation as a whole) vote themselves less taxes and more services continually.

You quote from Rasmussen all you want but polls like this are utterly meaningless as a predictor for how people actually vote.

"Voters overwhelmingly believe that the bigger problem in the United States is the unwillingness of politicians to control government spending"

Posting meaningless drivel like this means absolutely nothing.

Seems like you do not understand the psychology of public opinion polling at all.
This statement alone can be interpreted many ways by many different people to the point where it really has ZERO information value.

For instance a Democrat partisan will agree with this thinking "politicians in the US cannot control government spending ON THE WAR IN THE IRAQ. That was out of control. Government should be giving us universal health care"
where a Republican partisan will agree as well but for the opposite reasons thinking "the money in Iraq was worth it but government spends way too much on medicare, social security".

ANYONE will agree the government "spends too much" when it comes to programs they personally do not support.

66% say smaller government with LESS services, aka LESS socialism. Its not about which programs you like, its about cuts.

We also gave the whole 'US has a poor image' the finger.

The question was services not the spending on the Iraq war.

[antares24]

Rah rah rah!



66% say smaller government with LESS services, aka LESS socialism. Its not about which programs you like, its about cuts.

We also gave the whole 'US has a poor image' the finger.

The question was services not the spending on the Iraq war.

everyone agree that is better for his government to spend less and cut the crap expense. The problem start when the actual cuts are proposed. I wonder what the reaction would be if the USA government proposed big cuts on military spending, education, medicare, medicaid and pensions.

[Valiant Champion]

I was watching CNN the other day and even they were whacking Obama over some stuff. I had to do a double take and make sure I wasnt watching FOX

[justicar5]

I was watching CNN the other day and even they were whacking Obama over some stuff. I had to do a double take and make sure I wasnt watching FOX

you can tell when it's FOX the rabid tirades, xenophobia, religous fundementalism and hate mongering give it away.

On topic, what would you see cut?

[Pickle_mole]

you can tell when it's FOX the rabid tirades, xenophobia, religous fundementalism and hate mongering give it away.

On topic, what would you see cut?

So over the top is sad

[justicar5]

So over the top is sad

oh yes coz the FOX sponsered Birther and tea party movements are so sane and reasonable, so fair and balanced.

[Gaidin]

I was watching CNN the other day and even they were whacking Obama over some stuff. I had to do a double take and make sure I wasnt watching FOX

This isn't exactly a special event on any news channel.

[motiv-8]

This isn't exactly a special event on any news channel.

The media simply jumps on what is fashionable.

First it was "Hope", now it's "Failure." Meanwhile, those that don't buy into the hysteria scratch their heads and ponder, what has actually happened in the meantime?

To build upon chilon's post a bit... Polls signifying a wish to make government interaction and spending smaller are great, but try to get rid of Medicare/whatever (ie, actually act upon that general feeling)? You'll hear more moaning than a George Romero film.

[chilon]

Polls like this are meaningless.

Lets look at the reality of what voters want. You don't need polls, just look at the reality of California with the initiative/referendum/recall system.

The reality from the past 40 years is that California voters (who are actually pretty representative of the nation as a whole) vote themselves less taxes and more services continually.

You quote from Rasmussen all you want but polls like this are utterly meaningless as a predictor for how people actually vote.

"Voters overwhelmingly believe that the bigger problem in the United States is the unwillingness of politicians to control government spending"

Posting meaningless drivel like this means absolutely nothing.

Seems like you do not understand the psychology of public opinion polling at all.
This statement alone can be interpreted many ways by many different people to the point where it really has ZERO information value.

For instance a Democrat partisan will agree with this thinking "politicians in the US cannot control government spending ON THE WAR IN THE IRAQ. That was out of control. Government should be giving us universal health care"
where a Republican partisan will agree as well but for the opposite reasons thinking "the money in Iraq was worth it but government spends way too much on medicare, social security".

ANYONE will agree the government "spends too much" when it comes to programs they personally do not support.

[chamaeleo]

I could care less what pollsters and major media outlets are saying. The most troubling thing about Obama right now, is how he's seemingly selling out the wishes of his popular support to the corporate lobbyists. I DID NOT vote for the guy to see him cater to Wall Street and Pharmoceutical interests! He still has 3 years to get wise and return to the path which got him elected, but I'm afraid he's gained too much inertia.

Still, I vastly prefer Obama's brand of politics to that of the (thankfully) avoided McCain/Palin's "do-nothing / hope for the best", Conservative duck-n-cover routine.

However you feel about Left vs Right politics, I hope we can all agree that the will of the voter is ultimately secondary to that of the biggest campaign contributors...which would be Industry. THAT is the fundemental problem, the root of all that is evil in American politics: esentially, LEGALIZED BRIBERY!

[Enemy of the State]

On topic, what would you see cut?

Personally, I'd bring the troops home before we start cutting any social services. Pro-war conservatives are such hypocrites, complaining about government spending that might actually help someone, but favoring government spending that ends up killing people.

[Phier]

Personally, I'd bring the troops home before we start cutting any social services. Pro-war conservatives are such hypocrites, complaining about government spending that might actually help someone, but favoring government spending that ends up killing people.

So you would cut spending on something the collective government should do, defense/war, to support spending on something the government shouldn't do, redistribution of wealth?

Hypocrites indeed.

[Enemy of the State]

So you would cut spending on something the collective government should do, defense/war, to support spending on something the government shouldn't do, redistribution of wealth?

Hypocrites indeed.

I support neither. My money being spent to build bombs instead of schools is worse though.

[motiv-8]

Pro-war conservatives are such hypocrites, complaining about government spending that might actually help someone, but favoring government spending that ends up killing people.

Exactly, the military is doing nothing but kill people! Literally that's all we're doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. We're certainly not helping other countries improve their own situations, which in turn provides greater security and political and economic gains for us. None of that.

. . .

[Nietzsche]

Exactly, the military is doing nothing but kill people! Literally that's all we're doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. We're certainly not helping other countries improve their own situations, which in turn provides greater security and political and economic gains for us. None of that.

. . .

Yeah that 10+ trillion dollar debt, and growing, has absolutely nothing to do with future security or economic gains, but a handful of peasants hiding in the mountains is infinitely troubling. But let's all go on being smug about how great things are becoming foreign countries while the wellspring back here is running dry. Please do continue sir.