President's Approval Sunk To 35%! Unemployment Over 10%! But, Some Say Greatest POTUS Ever???

[TomCADem]

I am not talking about President Obama you ninny. I am talking about Ronald Reagan! President Reagan did not inherit near the mess President Obama did. In fact, during President Reagan's first nine months in office, unemployment remained stable at 7.5 percent, which is not much different from President Carter before. Indeed, President Reagan even managed to get his tax cut enacted early in his Presidency. But, how successful were President Reagan's policies? What do you think?

<>

Yet, here is the "liberal" NY Times putting a positive spin on Reagan's comeback from a 35% approval rating back in 1983.

###

Gallup Poll Finds Rise In Approval of Reagan

Public approval of President Reagan's handling of his job increased significantly last month for the first time in more than a year, according to the Gallup Poll. Key factors in the rise were enhanced support of Mr. Reagan from Republicans and independents.

Forty percent of the public approved of his job performance in a poll conducted from Feb. 25 to 28, up from 35 percent in January. The last time that the Gallup Poll measured an increase of more than one percentage point was in October 1981, when approval of Mr. Reagan rose to 56 percent from 52 percent the month before. These polls have a margin of sampling error of three percentage points.

There was some indication in the poll that belief that the economy was improving helped Mr. Reagan's standing. Two-thirds of those who approved, but only one-sixth of those who disapproved

###

And here is Gallup's historical review of Reagan. Oddly, due to the Republicans continuing efforts to place Reagan on a pedastal, Reagan's approval rating has grown higher after his Presidency than during it:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/11887/ronald-reagan-from-peoples-perspective-gallup-poll-review.aspx

###

<>

Reagan came into office on a fairly high note, with initial job approval ratings as high as 60% by mid-March 1981. Then, on March 30, Reagan was shot on the streets of Washington by John Hinckley Jr., and the resulting concern and sympathy helped lift his ratings to 68% by May. But even as Reagan personally recovered from his wounds, the public's concerns about the bad economy did not, and the president's ratings began to fall as each month went by.

By the end of 1981, Reagan's job approval rating had drifted down to 49%.

Things got worse for Reagan in 1982. The public's view of the economy remained sour, and the president's ratings during 1982 stayed concomitantly low, in the 40% range, ending the year at 41%. The 1982 midterm elections were not good ones for Reagan and for the GOP. The Republicans lost about 25 seats in the House.

A clear cause for all of this was the economy. Still, Gallup analysts at the time presciently noted that there was some cause for optimism for Reagan:

Throughout the year 1982 a solid majority of Gallup's respondents have taken the position that Reaganomics will worsen, rather than improve, their own financial situation. Yet, Gallup consistently has found somewhat more public faith that Reaganomics will help the nation as a whole and even more faith in the president's program when the question is posed with regard to the long run. Surveys also indicate that the public has more confidence in Reagan than approval ratings of his performance would suggest. While only one third approve of the way he is handling the economy, close to half express some degree of confidence that he will do the right thing with regard to the economy.

Indeed, although 1983 began for Reagan with a 35% job approval rating -- the worst of his administration -- things started to look better.

His ratings moved back above 50% by November 1983 -- not only because the economy was picking up, but also in part as a result of rally effects associated with the U.S. invasion of Grenada and the terrorist explosion that killed 241 American Marines in Beirut, Lebanon.

By 1984, Reagan's job approval ratings were consistently above the 50% line that is a symbolic standard for an incumbent president seeking re-election. In Gallup's last October poll before the November 1984 election, Reagan received a 58% job approval rating, and he went on to soundly defeat Democratic nominee Walter Mondale by a 59% to 41% popular vote margin, receiving 525 electoral votes to Mondale's 13.

<>

###

[Clio the Leo]

1. During the sucky times, when the President's approval numbers are in the low 50s.....

..... (smile) ..... we have to remind ourselves, there's only one poll that matters.

And it's a long way away.

........ miles to go before we sleep.

(not a knock agianst your OP btw, which is spot on)

[TomCADem]

2. For Comparison, Unemployment Started To Rise Well Into Reagan's Presidency While Obama ...

...was left trying to catch the falling knife dropped by Dubya. By January 2009 when President Obama took office, unemployment had already risen from under 5 percent to close to 8 percent. Yet, in just seven months, President Obama's administration has begun to slow the dramatic rise in unemployment that began in the last few years of Dubya's Presidency:

<>

In contrast, notice how unemployment is pretty stable under Carter, then the first seven months of Reagan's Presidency (the point we are at now with Obama), but then it shoots up beginning in August. Indeed, look at how unemployment remained steady at about 7 percent for about a year from Carter through the first half of Reagan's first year.

<>

Now, which situation would you rather inherit economically? President Obama following Dubya or President Reagan following President Carter?

[Clio the Leo]

3. Yep and I'm actually surprised the polls dont show him even lower...

..... I think it's a testament to his PERSONAL approval rating which is actually higher than it was before the election.

[TomCADem]

5. True - Its Not Fair, But So Long As Unemployment Remains High

President Obama's approval ratings will take a hit, particularly with Fox News running a 24/7 attack ad against him.

[depakid]

4. Gary Hart would have beat Reagan in 1984

But the Democratic machine insisted on nominating Mondale....

[mkultra]

9. probably, he was a relative unknown but more of a centrist

He didn't have the money or machine that Mondale had and Mondale went on the offensive against Hart as being new and having new ideas. The interesting correlative is that when Hart was a clear loser in delegate count he still held that the supers would sweep him into office.

[LittleBlue]

6. lol @ "you ninny"

I lol'd, that was so random it was funny. :spray:

[formercia]

7. * Gang started a War as a distraction.

We know how that turned out.

[Phx_Dem]

8. Yeah, he was great.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[fuelman]

10. Measure Obama with the same Yard Stick arwalden...

Per Arwalden on Dec. 9th, 2003 post:

arwalden (1000+ posts) Tue Dec-09-03 05:46 PM
Original message
Why Should I Be Impressed When "First-Time Unemployment Claims" FALL?
Okay... big deal. So the number of people filing for unemployment benefits for the first time fell? Yes? And?

What does this mean for the people who are still out of work? What about the people who have stopped looking? What about the people whose benefits have expired?

Or... do those people not count?

Or... is there some other magical mathematical formula that balances the actual number of unemployed not receiving benefits, the NEWLY-reemployed, and the first-time-employed and subtracts that from the FIRST TIME unemployment claims?

It's all FUZZY to me.

-- Allen

To you Mr. Arwalden I say;
Interesting how the people who were losing unemployment benefits then was an issue, however it is not today when the actual unemployment percentage is more like 18% when accounting for them. May I remind you that the unemployment rate on December 2003 was 5.7%.
Allen, Mr. Arwalden may I suggest you measure the anointed ones accomplishments with the same yardstick you used when you made this ridiculous post.
What a tangled web you have weaved, when you first practiced to deceive, sir the shoe fits you to a T

[4lbs]

11. The marginal tax rates for the highest earners were also higher than what President Obama wants,

yet why didn't any Repukes complain back then?

During the 1980s, the marginal tax rates were at about 50% for those making over $200,000.

Nothing about Reagan being a "tax and spend" loser from the GOP since Reagan had the federal government spend hundreds of billions into a large deficit.

President Obama wants them raised a little from 35% to 39% (or at the level right before * was selected) for those making over $250,000. He also wants to close subsidies and tax loopholes for corporations that have made tens of billions in profits over the past 5 or 6 years. That will help pay for the additional programs he wants.

We are hearing "tax and spend liberal" cries from the Repukes over that one.