[Posted by Karl] Jim Geraghty (among others) , relying on Gallup , notes Pres. Obama’s job approval rating for 2011 is anemic in most swing states. Just as notable are Obama’s disapproval numbers in swing states, as they show an incumbent underwater, often with majority disapproval: IA (45.6/45.9); PA (45/47.8); VA (44.5/49); NC (43.7/48.5); FL (43.6/47.8); OH (42.1/50.2); NM (41.7/51.2); NV (41.3/50.6); CO (40.4/52.2); and NH (38.7/54.4). Geraghty adds that this does not necessary translate to votes which is true, but probably not good for Obama. In 2004 — a polarized, close election — Bush lost states where he had net positive job approval, but did not win one state where he had a net negative job approval. As Jay Cost notes, the only two years where we see a substantial amount of support for the incumbent president among disapprovers — 1972 and 1980 – are also not good news for Obama. National Journal’s Josh Kraushaar correctly reminds us the Gallup data is from “throughout 2011, reflecting as much the past year as the present,” while noting Obama’s national job approval hasn’t moved much this year. Where recent polls are available, they generally confirm Kraushaar’s hypothesis. I covered IA and NH earlier this month; those states are marginally better than Gallup, but they’re also less economically distressed than most (and Obama is still underwater in NH). In PA , recent polls have Obama at 45/50 and 40/49. In VA , it 48/47 and 42/51. In NC , it’s 47/49 or 50. In FL , it’s 44/49. In OH , it’s 44/51. In NV and NM , GS Strategies has Obama at 41/57.3 and 43.3/56.8 (the firm did not provide a complete breakdown of the sample, but the firm’s polls for FL, OH and VA are close to other public polls). In CO , Ciruli Associates (a local firm) had Obama at 39/53 in December 2011. The news is marginally better for Obama in January’s Purple Poll (.pdf), even though it spotlights FL (40/56). Obama is underwater in the Southern Swing states (FL, NC & VA) at 42/53 and the Rust Belt (NH, OH & PA) at 41/51. However, he’s above water in the Heartland (WI, MN & IA) at 48/47, and only marginally underwater in the Wild West (CO, NV & NM) at 47/49. That showing in the West is improved from the September poll; his numbers have not moved significantly in any of the other regions. I might trust that uptick, as I doubt it’s coincidence that Obama spent last week in Iowa, Colorado and Nevada. Time is the candidate’s most valuable resource. Obama needs to spend his in states where he has the best odds of goosing his job approval rating to a net positive. –Karl
View post:
States of Disapproval
One last kick to the face. (IBD) — The Labor Department today announced that it had approved Trade Adjustment Assistance for the former employees of the bankrupt solar panel maker Solyndra. That means all of the firm’s 1,100 ex-employees are eligible for federal aid packages, including job retraining and income assistance. The department has valued
The rest is here:
Obama’s Labor Department Approves Deal Giving Ex-Solyndra Staff $13,000 Each In Federal Aid…
Raising Cain. Via NRO’s Jim Geraghty: I’m not terribly familiar with this firm, Poll Position, and they’re using automated voice survey techology (robo-pollsters, like Rasmussen) but their new survey result is worth mentioning because of the tidal shift it might represent: Herman Cain beating Barack Obama in a head-to-head matchup. Yes, that Herman Cain, the
Visit link:
New Poll Finds Herman Cain Beating Obama 43% to 41%…
In happier times, the firm had been celebrated as a harbinger of the future. The political connections it enjoyed were the fruit not only of well-placed contributions but of a self-imposed ideological mission: It was going to deliver cheap energy in amazing ways. Top executives had dismissed accounting irregularities. The normal rules, it was said, did not apply.
More here:
Solyndracracy
Assploding hypocrisy. (NYP) — This one’s truly, uh. . . rich: Billionaire Warren Buffett says folks like him should have to pay more taxes — but it turns out his firm, Berkshire Hathaway, hasn’t paid what it’s already owed for years. That’s right: As Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson notes, the company openly admits that it owes back taxes since as long ago as 2002. “We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years. . . within the next 12 months,” the firm’s annual report says. It also cites outstanding tax issues for 2005 through 2009. Obvious question: If Buffett really thinks he and his “mega-rich friends” should pay higher taxes, why doesn’t his firm fork over what it already owes under current rates? Likely answer: He cares more about shilling for President Obama — who’s practically made socking “millionaires and billionaires” his re-election theme song — than about kicking in more himself. Buffett’s free to back Obama, of course. And if his firm wants to keep its tax bill low, well, that’s its right, too. But it would be nice if this “pro-tax-hike” tycoon were a bit more honest about it. Start, for example, with his grossly disingenuous recent claim that, as he wrote in The New York Times, he paid only 17 percent of his income last year to the government — even as many working stiffs who make far less than him coughed up higher percentages. Fact is, unlike most other folks, Warren Buffett gets most of his income from dividends and capital gains, which are nominally taxed at 15 percent. Keep reading…
Original post:
Obama-Loving Billionaire Warren Buffet’s Firm Hasn’t Been Paying Its Tax Bill For Years…
