frankhagan.com

President Obama’s “approval rating” fell below 50% for the first time in the Gallup Daily Tracking Poll on Tuesday. A dust up between press secretary Robert Gibbs and Fox News’ Major Garrett resulted in this comment from Gibbs:

“If I was a heart patient and Gallup was my EKG, I’d visit my doctor,” Gibbs said in the morning, off-camera briefing with reporters. “Five days ago there was an eleven-point spread. Now there is a one-point spread. I’m sure a six-year-old with a Crayon could do something not unlike that.

Gibbs’ sensitivity is probably not helped by similar numbers from other polling organizations, which may not have crayons: Quinnipiac has Obama’s approval rating at 46% today. And there is no evidence that Obama’s approval rating slid 11 points in five days; certainly not in Gallup’s numbers.

But Gibbs can take comfort that today’s approval rating in the Gallup daily tracking poll is back up to 50%. Such is the nature of a daily tracking poll.

The reason the 50% number is significant is that most presidents don’t fall under that number in their first year in office. One notable exception: President Ronald Reagan. The most apparent similarity between the two is that both started their presidencies in the midst of a deep recession. (President Clinton’s approval rating was a similar 53% during his first year in office under similar economic conditions).

Historically, most presidents dip below 50% approval rating at some point in their presidency (JFK did not). What may be more surprising is the confidence expressed by a new poll by Public Policy Polling:

Perhaps the greatest measure of Obama’s declining support is that just 50% of voters now say they prefer having him as President to George W. Bush, with 44% saying they’d rather have his predecessor. Given the horrendous approval ratings Bush showed during his final term that’s somewhat of a surprise and an indication that voters are increasingly placing the blame on Obama for the country’s difficulties instead of giving him space because of the tough situation he inherited.

I was unable to find similar polling data for past presidents; during Reagan’s unpopular first year, did people pine for the old days of the Carter administration?

The slippage in poll numbers is down three points among Democrats and seven points among independents:

In the new Dec. 4-6 Gallup Daily results, Obama’s approval rating is 14% among Republicans, 42% among independents, and 83% among Democrats. Compared to his ratings in early November, when he averaged 53% job approval overall, his ratings are down three points among Democrats, seven points among independents, and four points among Republicans.

Cross posted to Donklephant

Politics approval rating, Bush, Gallup poll, obama

Several media outlets are reporting a donneybrook in Denmark as the Copenhagen climate summit attendees grapple with a leaked document.

The UK’s Guardian reports:

The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN’s role in all future climate change negotiations.

The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.

. . .

“It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process,” said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.

Australia’s News.com.au expands on the controversy:

The agreement, leaked to the paper, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol’s principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act.

The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.

The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as “a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks”, the paper reports.

President Obama is expected to commit the US to a “politically binding” goal of reduction of our emissions of carbon dioxide to 17% of 2005 levels by 2050. If this goal is a total reduction, rather than a per-capita reduction, it means the average American in 2050 will be “allowed the carbon dioxide emission of the average citizen in 1867″ according to the Cato Institute.

Can you cut your CO2 emissions by 82 points? Just over a quarter of America’s CO2 emissions are from automobiles; driving a Prius or similar car can help reduce your CO2 emissions from driving by half, so you are 12 points along the way already. Reduction in energy use from other sources, including electricity … remember it has to be generated somewhere … can help you gain a few extra points. Forgoing the expensive big screen TV in favor of a used tube set will save another point or two, and turning off appliances when not in use can shave a fraction of a point.

Today’s technology can’t get us there without large disruptions. We can wait to see if technology will help empower our efforts, but those individual efforts, while noble, are probably not a practical way to reach the goals.

Replacing coal as an energy source would provide the most bang for the buck, with wind, solar and nuclear as the most viable of the clean alternatives. But the time-line on those efforts is measured in decades rather than months.

From a political standpoint, being able to pollute more than the developing nations will be popular (here, at least). One of the most potent objections to the Koyoto Protocol was the feeling that developed nations would have to sacrifice while developing nations could continue to pollute. That was the primary reason the Bush Administration refused to consider it. President Obama seems to have a better idea: change the game to allow the rich countries more leeway.

Of course, the poor countries might not see it our way.

Cross posted to Donklephant

Climate climate change, copenhagan, obama

The Obama administration is reacting to recent events:

Item 1:
The public feud with Fox News ended with the premature departure of Communications Director Anita Dunn and the follow-up announcement that President Obama will grant an interview with Fox News White House correspondent Major Garrett. Evidently he is now considered a “real journalist”. As the Huffington Post gently puts it:

Fox News executive Michael Clemente met recently at the White House with Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, and since then the tensions between the two parties have cooled; senior adviser David Axelrod granted an interview to Garrett last week.

The president’s interview, coupled with Dunn leaving her interim post, are further signals that the administration is ramping down its battle against the cable news outlet.

“Ramping down”? I think the phrase is “full retreat”.

Item 2:
Exit polling showed economic issues to be predominant on voter’s minds in the recent off-year elections. While the Press Secretary emphasized that the elections were about local issues, the administration is reportedly concerned about the “tax and spend” charges being levied against them:

OMB is also reviewing a host of tax changes. The President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board will submit tax-policy options by Dec. 5, including simplifying the tax code and revamping the corporate tax code.

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is pressing for substantial spending cuts to go with any tax increases to try to avoid the “tax and spend” label that has bedeviled Democrats, according to administration and congressional officials.

The current target is $200 billion in TARP funds not allocated that could be used to help reduce the deficit.

Item 3:
Jobs, jobs, jobs. With unemployment numbers proving that the Administration either lied or was mistaken when selling the stimulus bill and promising unemployment below 8%, a new focus comes on the heels of dire economic predictions. Reuters reports on remarks made by Janet Yellen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco:

Addressing the nation’s battered housing market, Yellen said signs of stabilization were an important positive. But she cautioned that the high unemployment rate, currently at a 26-year high of 10.2 percent, raised the threat of a renewed wave of foreclosures that could again pressure home prices.

Today, President Obama announced an upcoming “Jobs Summit”, as reported by ABC White House correspondent Rachael Martin:

The jobs conference will include chief executives from around the country, economists, non-profits and representatives from labor unions. The president said he’s open to hearing “any good idea” to stimulate job growth and incentivize employers to start hiring again.

These initiatives may help counteract the growing dissatisfaction independents have with the Democratic Party. A recent poll shows Democrats losing a generic congressional ballot, a sea change from the two most recent elections. But independents have proven to be hard taskmasters; they want more than just eloquent speeches and catchy sound bites. As Republicans found out in the last two elections, they want results. And this administration has, so far, disappointed them.

Cross-posted to Donklephant.

Politics Fox News, obama, TARP, Unemployment

Along with the head scratching regarding President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize came quite a few humorous quips. Including from the President himself:

After I received the news, Malia walked in and said, “Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it is Bo’s birthday!” And then Sasha added, “Plus, we have a three-day weekend coming up.” So it’s good to have kids to keep things in perspective.

The President reflected the general feeling that the Nobel Peace Prize award was, at best, premature. He chose to turn the attention to the country itself, and the hopes and dreams of all people. Good on you, Mr. President.

But look closely at the text of the speech. The President recognizes another fact, that the Nobel Committee awarded this prize on the eve of the decision to expand the war in Afghanistan:

And even as we strive to seek a world in which conflicts are resolved peacefully and prosperity is widely shared, we have to confront the world as we know it today. I am the commander in chief of a country that’s responsible for ending a war and working in another theater to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies.

Ego is one of the core character traits of any world leader, and some have noted that our President is in possession of one himself, to put it mildly.

His frustration with a single media outlet that does not genuflect at the altar of his personality, Fox News Network, leads to a public spat, crossing a line not even the ego-mania of President Nixon would breach: shooting downhill. Fox News can only benefit from the attention, and gain even more viewers as they realize only one media outlet is catching the attention of the administration.

His speeches are peppered with self references, and his “World Apology Tour” found him apologizing on our behalf. Yet, I don’t recall that he ever apologized for saying the Cambridge Police Department “acted stupidly”, even though his subsequent actions showed he knew he blew it. Ego gets in the way of many things with our leaders. And the Nobel Committee knows that.

Can a man who accepts the Nobel Peace Prize live with the diminished reputation as the only winner to immediately escalate a war, sending tens of thousands of troops into harm’s way?

The Nobel Committee sent the Peace Prize in a box large enough to house our President. Mr. Obama’s immediate response indicates that perhaps he won’t climb into the box. Let’s hope not.

Cross posted to Donklephant

Politics Afghanistan, Nobel Peace Prize, obama

The Administration’s rush to show the public just how naive it is resulted in it’s first official act: a public ceremony showing the new President signing an order to close Guantanamo within a year.

Its not uncommon for a new administration to take a few missteps along the way. Fixing those mistakes is always a lot harder than making them. The person on point for closing Guantanamo was White House counsel Gregory B. Craig according to the Washington Post. Craig, like the rest of President Obama’s political advisors, evidently believed their own BS instead of listening to the national security experts:

I thought there was, in fact, and I may have been wrong, a broad consensus about the importance to our national security objectives to close Guantanamo and how keeping Guantanamo open actually did damage to our national security objectives.

“Broad consensus?” Craig may have come to that conclusion because both candidates, Obama and McCain, promised to close Guantanamo. Setting a date before you have had time to fully study the issue isn’t embracing consensus. It is showmanship, like an opening statement in the courtroom. Foreign policy should not be directed by lawyers.

The President chose to believe Craig’s ideas were better than the national security and foreign policy experts who cautioned against arbitrary timelines. The President seems to prefer initiatives that are fresh, bold, and wrong.

The American people expect our President to be smart about things, evaluate policies, and make rational changes. Our current President talks … he talks a lot … and apologizes. He apologizes a lot, always ready to demean and blame the US for any of the world’s ills. It is time he and his team realized they are no longer on the campaign trail, and were elected to govern.

Removing Craig as the point person on the closing of Guantanamo is a start. Getting serious about the rest of the duties of governing a nation, and not just making inspiring speeches, is the rest of the job. President Obama needs to show the nation that he is more than a one-trick pony, and can do more than apologize and demean America. It is time for Mr. Obama to become President Obama.

Politics Gitmo, Greg Craig, Guantanamo, obama