White House

Fist Bumps Around the White House? Obama’s Reaction to Trump’s Decision Not to Run

Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
May 17, 2011, 10:53 a.m.

Treas. Frank Caprio (D) on 10/7 “cri­ti­cized” ex-GOP Sen. Lin­coln Chafee (I) over “Chafee’s ac­know­ledg­ment that his old Sen­ate” camp cmte owed about $18.4K “in back taxes and fees due to a mis­un­der­stand­ing of tax reg­u­la­tions by his” camp treas­ur­ers.

Want More On This Race? Check out the Hot­line Dash­board for a com­pre­hens­ive run­down of this race, in­clud­ing stor­ies, polls, ads, FEC num­bers, and more!

Caprio “said the tax prob­lem called in­to ques­tion Chafee’s lead­er­ship and the people he would bring with him to the State­house if elec­ted.”

Chafee deputy mgr Mike Train­or, 10/8 said “that Chafee doesn’t want to raise taxes, but the real­ity is the state is fa­cing” a $300M to $400M “de­fi­cit ‘that de­mands thought­ful and im­me­di­ate at­ten­tion.’”

Train­or: “He’s had the cour­age to step up to the plate, un­like any of his com­pet­it­ors, and say, in ad­di­tion to cut­ting ex­penses and re­du­cing costs, we need new rev­en­ue” (AP, 10/9).

Caprio: “He is ask­ing Rhode Is­landers to trust him, telling him that he wants them to pay more in taxes, when he owes back taxes. It raises a lot of ques­tions on what kind of lead­er he would be” (Edgar, Provid­ence Journ­al, 10/9).

The res­ults of the NBC News/Wall Street Journ­al poll re­leased on Monday con­firm pre­vi­ous sur­vey data that show the Re­pub­lic­an Party has suffered brand dam­age over the past few months. The GOP’s self-ab­sorp­tion and ob­ses­sion with pleas­ing its con­ser­vat­ive base in pres­id­en­tial can­did­ates’ rhet­or­ic and in policy ini­ti­at­ives at the con­gres­sion­al, gubernat­ori­al, and state le­gis­lat­ive levels have taken a toll. While tea party folks like to boast that they provided the GOP with its ma­jor­ity in 2010, I didn’t no­tice many of them vot­ing to put Nancy Pelosi in as House speak­er in 2006 or to elect Barack Obama pres­id­ent in 2008. In the Bible, the Lord giv­eth and the Lord taketh away. In polit­ics, it is pretty much in­de­pend­ents who giv­eth and taketh away.

In one telling find­ing, NBC News/WSJ poll­sters Peter Hart (a Demo­crat) and Bill McIn­turff (a Re­pub­lic­an) asked, “Which polit­ic­al party do you think cur­rently does a bet­ter job of ap­peal­ing to people who are not among its hard-core sup­port­ers — the Demo­crat­ic Party or the Re­pub­lic­an Party?” A whop­ping 55 per­cent said Demo­crats ap­peal more to those out­side their base. This is com­pared with only 26 per­cent who said that was true of the Re­pub­lic­an Party. The sur­vey also showed a con­tin­ued high­er trend of neg­at­ive rat­ings for the GOP that star­ted a few months ago. It is fur­ther evid­ence that noth­ing kills suc­cess like ex­cess.

The sur­vey, con­duc­ted Feb. 29-March 3 among 800 adults na­tion­wide, found that 33 per­cent of Amer­ic­ans thought the coun­try was headed in the right dir­ec­tion, while 58 per­cent said it was off on the wrong track. While this is a bad set of num­bers, the right dir­ec­tion ran in the 17-to-19 per­cent range in Au­gust, Oc­to­ber, and Novem­ber. The wrong track was in the 73-74 per­cent range. The right dir­ec­tion began turn­ing up in Decem­ber to 22 per­cent, and it rose to 30 per­cent in Janu­ary, be­fore the most re­cent 33 per­cent. The wrong track dropped to 69 per­cent and 61 per­cent in Decem­ber and Janu­ary, re­spect­ively, be­fore the cur­rent 58 per­cent.

Pres­id­ent Obama’s job-ap­prov­al rat­ing, which had been at 44 per­cent in three con­sec­ut­ive NBC News/WSJ polls in Au­gust, Oc­to­ber, and Novem­ber, edged up to 46 per­cent in Decem­ber. It was 48 per­cent in Janu­ary. Now it is up to 50 per­cent in the new sur­vey. The dis­ap­prov­al rates dropped from 51 per­cent for three months to 48 per­cent, then to 46 per­cent, and now to 45 per­cent. The Gal­lup Or­gan­iz­a­tion’s na­tion­al track­ing sur­vey con­duc­ted March 1-3 put Obama’s job-ap­prov­al rat­ing at 48 per­cent, with 45 per­cent dis­ap­prov­al, al­though those num­bers re­versed in the March 2-4 track.  

For all of the pub­lic at­ten­tion paid to the gen­er­al-elec­tion tri­al-heat fig­ures, once you get well with­in a year be­fore an elec­tion, the job-ap­prov­al rat­ing is a far bet­ter pre­dict­or of how an in­cum­bent pres­id­ent is go­ing to fare. The 48-50 per­cent ap­prov­al range is the min­im­um that an in­cum­bent wants to see to have a reas­on­able ex­pect­a­tion of win­ning reelec­tion. In 2004, Pres­id­ent George W. Bush had a 48 per­cent ap­prov­al rat­ing in his fi­nal, preelec­tion Gal­lup poll. He squeaked by Sen. John Kerry with a 51 per­cent to 48 per­cent vic­tory.

An im­prov­ing eco­nom­ic pic­ture and self-in­flic­ted Re­pub­lic­an wounds have com­bined to boost Demo­crat­ic for­tunes right now. Quan­ti­fy­ing how much things have changed, the Wall Street eco­nom­ic con­sult­ing firm ISI Group re­cords how many pos­it­ive and neg­at­ive eco­nom­ic de­vel­op­ments oc­cur each week. The firm found that in the peri­od from the week of May 23, 2011, through the week of Oct. 3, 2011, there was more neg­at­ive than pos­it­ive eco­nom­ic news in 16 out of 20 weeks. Since the week of Oct. 10, 2011, however, we now have had 22 weeks in a row of more pos­it­ive news.

To be sure, this eco­nomy is enorm­ously fra­gile, with dan­ger­ous land­mines — in­clud­ing rising oil prices and a re­ces­sion in Europe — ahead. But all you can judge is the here and now, which is a lot bet­ter than just four months ago. The ef­fect of bet­ter eco­nom­ic news on Pres­id­ent Obama’s num­bers, along with the brand dam­age Re­pub­lic­ans have been in­flict­ing on them­selves and likely nom­in­ee Mitt Rom­ney, have prob­ably boos­ted Demo­crat­ic hopes ar­ti­fi­cially high and de­pressed the value of the GOP stock.

Based more on “mi­cro” race-by-race de­vel­op­ments, The Cook Polit­ic­al Re­port has ad­jus­ted its cur­rent fore­cast from a net gain of between three and six seats for Re­pub­lic­ans in the Sen­ate to a likely gain of between three and five. It could drop to a two-to-five range, de­pend­ing upon who ends up run­ning for the newly open Re­pub­lic­an Sen­ate seat be­ing va­cated by Maine’s Olympia Snowe. In the House, we’ve ad­jus­ted our fore­cast from some­where between a wash and a net Demo­crat­ic gain of 10 seats to, now, a Demo­crat­ic gain of between five and 15 seats. That still would leave Demo­crats short of the 25 seats they need to win a ma­jor­ity.

It’s worth re­mind­ing folks that there is an ebb and flow to polit­ics. We may just be at a pro-Demo­crat­ic ebb at this point. Eight months, though, is a long time to go.

What We're Following See More »
WON’T INTERFERE IN STRUCTURING NSC OFFICE
White House to Give McMaster Carte Blanche
15 hours ago
THE LATEST
NAIVE, RISK TAKER
Russia Compiling Dossier on Trump’s Mind
17 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Retired Russian diplomats and members of Vladimir Putin's staff are compiling a dossier "on Donald Trump's psychological makeup" for the Russian leader. "Among its preliminary conclusions is that the new American leader is a risk-taker who can be naïve, according to a senior Kremlin adviser."

Source:
PLANS TO CURB ITS POWER
Pruitt Confirmed As EPA Head
4 days ago
BREAKING
WOULD HAVE REPLACED FLYNN
Harward Turns Down NSC Job
5 days ago
THE LATEST

"Ret. Vice Adm. Bob Harward turned down President Donald Trump's offer to be national security adviser Thursday, depriving the administration of a top candidate for a critical foreign policy post days after Trump fired Michael Flynn." Among the potential reasons: his family, his lack of assurances that he could build his own team, and that "the White House seems so chaotic."

Source:
REVERSES OBAMA RULE
House Votes to Let States Block Planned Parenthood Funds
5 days ago
THE LATEST

"The House passed a resolution Thursday re-opening the door for states to block Planned Parenthood from receiving some federal funds. The measure, which passed 230-188, would reverse a last-minute rule from the Obama administration that said conservative states can't block the women's health and abortion provider from receiving family planning dollars under the Title X program."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login