Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

For the first time since he took over in the White House, Americans don't see eye to eye with President Barack Obama on the important issues, according to a new national poll. But the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey does indicate that a majority approve of how Obama's handling his duties as president.

According to the poll, which was released Tuesday, 48 percent of people questioned say that they agree with Obama on the issues that matter most to them, with 51 percent saying no. That's a switch from April, when 57 percent said they agreed with the president on important issues, with 41 percent disagreeing.

AZGrizFan wrote:

For the first time since he took over in the White House, Americans don't see eye to eye with President Barack Obama on the important issues, according to a new national poll. But the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey does indicate that a majority approve of how Obama's handling his duties as president.

According to the poll, which was released Tuesday, 48 percent of people questioned say that they agree with Obama on the issues that matter most to them, with 51 percent saying no. That's a switch from April, when 57 percent said they agreed with the president on important issues, with 41 percent disagreeing.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... on-issues/


Looks like America is wising up....

dbackjon wrote:In a related question, when Obama is pitted against likely Republican candidates, 65% said they would vote for Obama, 70% if it was Sarah Palin.

D1B wrote:

dbackjon wrote:In a related question, when Obama is pitted against likely Republican candidates, 65% said they would vote for Obama, 70% if it was Sarah Palin.

Sarah Palin = the gift that keeps on giving

D1B wrote:

dbackjon wrote:In a related question, when Obama is pitted against likely Republican candidates, 65% said they would vote for Obama, 70% if it was Sarah Palin.

Sarah Palin = the gift that keeps on giving

dbackjon wrote:In a related question, when Obama is pitted against likely Republican candidates, 65% said they would vote for Obama, 70% if it was Sarah Palin.

AZGrizFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:In a related question, when Obama is pitted against likely Republican candidates, 65% said they would vote for Obama, 70% if it was Sarah Palin.

Well then I guess we'll have to find a different candidate, right? Pull somebody out of our ASS like the donks did with Obama...somebody with no record to dissect, no voting experience to criticize, no actual work experience to examine....seemed to work pretty good for you guys.

AZGrizFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:In a related question, when Obama is pitted against likely Republican candidates, 65% said they would vote for Obama, 70% if it was Sarah Palin.

Well then I guess we'll have to find a different candidate, right? Pull somebody out of our ASS like the donks did with Obama...somebody with no record to dissect, no voting experience to criticize, no actual work experience to examine....seemed to work pretty good for you guys.

dbackjon wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Well then I guess we'll have to find a different candidate, right? Pull somebody out of our ASS like the donks did with Obama...somebody with no record to dissect, no voting experience to criticize, no actual work experience to examine....seemed to work pretty good for you guys.

Republicans would never be that bright.

AZGrizFan wrote: Boy, howdy. You have SAID a mouthful, Jon. If that one sentence doesn't explain the difference between Donks and Conks I don't know what does. The fact that you would think that was a "bright" move is truly beyond any form of logic.

AZGrizFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Republicans would never be that bright.

Boy, howdy. You have SAID a mouthful, Jon. If that one sentence doesn't explain the difference between Donks and Conks I don't know what does. The fact that you would think that was a "bright" move is truly beyond any form of logic.

Cleets Part 2 wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote: Boy, howdy. You have SAID a mouthful, Jon. If that one sentence doesn't explain the difference between Donks and Conks I don't know what does. The fact that you would think that was a "bright" move is truly beyond any form of logic.

Can you even see with all the bullsh!t covering your face....

We just went through 8 years of BUSH... is that an example of your Republican brilliance
seriously AZ - both parties are ridiculous - try to see that - for once

dbackjon wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Boy, howdy. You have SAID a mouthful, Jon. If that one sentence doesn't explain the difference between Donks and Conks I don't know what does. The fact that you would think that was a "bright" move is truly beyond any form of logic.

Actually, we are both wrong - that is what the Conks did in 2000.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Cleets Part 2 wrote:

Can you even see with all the bullsh!t covering your face....

We just went through 8 years of BUSH... is that an example of your Republican brilliance
seriously AZ - both parties are ridiculous - try to see that - for once

YOU keep bringing up Bush, not me. Get over it.

Cleets Part 2 wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
YOU keep bringing up Bush, not me. Get over it.

Then please give me an example of Republican brilliance...?

AZGrizFan wrote:

Cleets Part 2 wrote:
Then please give me an example of Republican brilliance...?

This thread is about Obama's poll #'s. Try to stay on topic.

Thank You.

Appaholic wrote:Obama's numbers will not improve (may maintain, but not improve) until the employment numbers improve....it's that simple...regardless of past events, it's been almost a year since the election & the economy is his now, not W's....

Cleets Part 2 wrote:

Appaholic wrote:Obama's numbers will not improve (may maintain, but not improve) until the employment numbers improve....it's that simple...regardless of past events, it's been almost a year since the election & the economy is his now, not W's....

There isn't a Republican ALIVE that will give Obama any credit when this economy turns around...

NOT ONE..!!!

I completely disagree with you - he will only be held responsible for failures - all the successes will be credited elsewhere I can assure you - regardless of what you might think about "who owns the economy"

Appaholic wrote: Oh, it's a given that Obama's numbers will never be affected positively by Republicans, only Independents...surely you didn't think I was that naive....

Cleets Part 2 wrote:

Appaholic wrote:Obama's numbers will not improve (may maintain, but not improve) until the employment numbers improve....it's that simple...regardless of past events, it's been almost a year since the election & the economy is his now, not W's....

There isn't a Republican ALIVE that will give Obama any credit when this economy turns around...

NOT ONE..!!!

I completely disagree with you - he will only be held responsible for failures - all the successes will be credited elsewhere I can assure you - regardless of what you might think about "who owns the economy"