Gallup: Most American’s Believe President & Congress Doing Poor Job: Includes 40% Dems and 79% Independents – Democrats Enthusiasm Lowest Since 2004 -

2012 the Year of the Un-Washington Candidate? image Baaiusa.org

From: Gallup Polling’s Headline: “Half Say President, Congress Doing Worse Than Predecessors” speaks to the second poll segment shown in the article, with 52% of respondents noting that the current makeup of the Congress and Administration is doing worse than those who governed in the past. The first question and the answers by party, however, are quite stunning: “In your view, how good a job are President Obama and the current congress doing in dealing with the United States’ Most Important Problems” draws an overwhelming negative of 67%, with 40% of Democrats, 78% of Independents and 89% of Republicans voting Poor or Very Poor.

The general mood, therefore, of the nation has grown to one of severe anti-incumbency, with the emphasis on the President (given the wording of the polls questions – and the natural placement of the President before the Congress, giving those who have a strong negative on the President’s job performance, with a lesser negative on Congress, the impulse to lump the two together. The outcome may also be viewed as anti-Washington establishment, which gives further acceptance to the Tea Party and the candidates that have risen from its ranks. This is especially true when one honestly assesses the makeup of “Tea Party” constituents as a blend of all political party affiliations, the emphasis being on an adherence to the U.S. Constitution and what is seen as an overwhelming tax burden, and little to no fiscal restraint shown by those in Washington.

Further, a poll released by Gallup on the 29th “Democrats Dispirited About Voting in 2012” indicates that over 44% of Democrats and Democrat leaning independents are unlikely to vote in 2012. Compared to 2004 and 2008, with 2008 being a year with high enthusiasm, the level of voter enthusiasm among Democrats and leaning Independents is in line with both the 2000 and 2004 elections. Among Republican and leaning Independents, the mood is quite different – enthusiasm is up over 2000 and 2004 election levels (given the chart included with the article (Link here) – 51% in 2000, 53% in 2004, and 58% going into 2012).


What 2012 elections forecasters may derive from these two poll series is the rise in political fortunes of those candidates who appear less “Washington” and have the ability to identify with the voters. This would include all candidates for both Houses of Congress as well as the White House and explains the rise in polls for those running for the Presidency that are considered “less experienced politically”, but having more “public sector” experience, and, in addition, a policy of strict fiscal conservatism and adherence to the U.S. Constitution. That general distaste for “Washington” would give Tea Party candidates, although dismissed by Pundits and the Major Party Elites, the proverbial “edge”, with the President as most vulnerable compared to those party affiliates in Congress and the Senate.
Although reading crystal balls is beyond anyone of those who live for the Beltway or those bloggers an and analysts on the sidelines (this blog defined as sidelines), it appears to be the general nature of the political ‘junkie’ in the beltway to either forecast in deference to one party or candidate over another, often based on partisan politics, contrasted with those blogs deferring to the poll results and the stark reality of a growing movement that is anti-Washington. Using this theory, logic follows, therefore that candidates such as Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin and Chris Christie (the later: Palin intentions not yet announced, Christie, announced intentions not to run incessantly), an immediate edge over more “polished” candidates who have extensive experience in government and appear more in sync with Washington and the Beltway.

Although money and the huge sums raised by candidates during election cycles (this one being no exception, even with the current economic crisis), is said to play a factor in outcomes, that is more to the general rather than the primary, and that is a risk that the Beltway pundits and Elites are now repeating. Cain and Bachmann may indeed pull out of Iowa, with the South and Midwest following suit: given the early voting schedule being imposed by key states in the process, it is no wonder that the Establishment GOP is concerned. It may be that Cain, Bachmann, or Palin should she decide to announce either before or after her return from the World Knowledge Conference in South Korea, would take the lead with states such as Iowa, South Carolina and Florida now in the mix, with more establishment candidates such as Romney or Perry taking New Hampshire; with Romney leading most likely in the same states as in the 2008 general. As it now stands, one would be foolish not to watch the “underdogs” (as described by “Washington”) due to the high probability that one will be the nominee, Republican’s less likely to use the nuclear option of “Super Delegates”, possibly understanding that their constituency would increase exponentially among those independents, democrats and Tea Party identifiers if this was taken off the table, ensuring a candidate who may not be to the liking of Washington but would bring out the vote in unprecedented numbers in a general.

At this point in the case of the President, one has to take a second look at pundit Dick Morris’ assertion that the President may pull out of the General, and give his resignation allowing Clinton to run in his stead” Although Morris, like any other pundit, should be taken with a grain of salt, (this blog included), Morris’ past affiliation with the Clinton administration, makes his ability to read Democrat “Tea leaves” a bit better than most. That said, although Clinton would be more preferable than Obama in a general, the brand would be of concern, and it is more probable that 2016 would be the year to challenge, depending upon how well the Generic Republican and Congress are faring.

At this point, it would not be going too far out on a limb to project that Republicans/Tea Party Conservatives will maintain the House of Representatives, take the Senate and also the White House, which is why, with a concern over establishment candidates, would place those who are more Tea Party, in the White House. As of now, polling by the conservative (in this respect conservative to mean careful) Gallup organization, gives the Generic Republican a 6 point lead over President Obama, this figure has continued to rise over the past several months. Which is why, those listening to candidate Michelle Bachmann at the debate, and her recent speech at Liberty University, noting “do not settle”, understand that with the generic ballot giving such an edge to Brand X versus Obama, those who vote, should be able to elect a candidate who shares principles based on Strong adherence to the Constitution, shows leadership qualities and an ability to understand the needs of the people. It is a rallying cry for all Conservative leaning voters (be they Democrat, Republican or Independent) to choose wisely, and “not settle” for a candidate until they have been fully vetted – one must agree that would be of import, regardless of experience and of party.