Poll: Trump Transition Approval Plummets

Washington (CNN)President Barack Obama will leave office Friday with his highest approval rating since 2009, his presidency largely viewed as a success, and a majority saying they will miss him when he is gone.

A new CNN/ORC poll finds Obama's approval rating stands at 60%, his best mark since June of his first year in office. Compared with other outgoing presidents, Obama lands near the top of the list, outranked only by Bill Clinton's 66% in January 2001 and Ronald Reagan's 64% in January 1989. About two-thirds (65%) say Obama's presidency was a success, including about half (49%) who say that was due to Obama's personal strengths rather than circumstances outside his control.

Amid those glowing reviews, one-quarter of Americans (25%) say Obama is one of the nation's greatest presidents, far outpacing the share who felt that way about other recent presidents as their terms ended (11% described Reagan that way, 10% Clinton, and 5% or fewer said so about either President Bush). Still, nearly as many (23%) call Obama a poor president, more than said so about Reagan, Clinton or the first president Bush, but well below the 46% who said George W. Bush was a poor president as he prepared to leave the White House.

That assessment of Obama's presidency, as well as his approval ratings, are marked by sharp partisan divides. While 54% of Democrats consider Obama one of the greatest presidents, 54% of Republicans call him a poor president. Though he has earned near universal approval among Democrats (95% approve), just 18% of Republicans say they approve of how he handled the presidency. That gap explains the difference between Obama's approval rating and those of the two former presidents who left office with higher marks.

Both Reagan and Clinton held approval ratings above 9-in-10 among their own partisans, yet their approval ratings among those in the opposing party outpaced Obama's, with 39% of Republicans saying they approved of Clinton at the end of his term and 38% of Democrats approving of Reagan as he prepared to leave office.

Looking back at the critical issues of the Obama years, Americans give the President positive ratings for handling several issues that were central to his first run for office: the economy, foreign affairs and race relations among them.

Ben Reilly wrote:Meanwhile, Obama is enjoying his highest approval rating since 2009, and the majority of Americans say they'll miss him:

Washington (CNN)President Barack Obama will leave office Friday with his highest approval rating since 2009, his presidency largely viewed as a success, and a majority saying they will miss him when he is gone.

A new CNN/ORC poll finds Obama's approval rating stands at 60%, his best mark since June of his first year in office. Compared with other outgoing presidents, Obama lands near the top of the list, outranked only by Bill Clinton's 66% in January 2001 and Ronald Reagan's 64% in January 1989. About two-thirds (65%) say Obama's presidency was a success, including about half (49%) who say that was due to Obama's personal strengths rather than circumstances outside his control.

Amid those glowing reviews, one-quarter of Americans (25%) say Obama is one of the nation's greatest presidents, far outpacing the share who felt that way about other recent presidents as their terms ended (11% described Reagan that way, 10% Clinton, and 5% or fewer said so about either President Bush). Still, nearly as many (23%) call Obama a poor president, more than said so about Reagan, Clinton or the first president Bush, but well below the 46% who said George W. Bush was a poor president as he prepared to leave the White House.

That assessment of Obama's presidency, as well as his approval ratings, are marked by sharp partisan divides. While 54% of Democrats consider Obama one of the greatest presidents, 54% of Republicans call him a poor president. Though he has earned near universal approval among Democrats (95% approve), just 18% of Republicans say they approve of how he handled the presidency. That gap explains the difference between Obama's approval rating and those of the two former presidents who left office with higher marks.

Both Reagan and Clinton held approval ratings above 9-in-10 among their own partisans, yet their approval ratings among those in the opposing party outpaced Obama's, with 39% of Republicans saying they approved of Clinton at the end of his term and 38% of Democrats approving of Reagan as he prepared to leave office.

Looking back at the critical issues of the Obama years, Americans give the President positive ratings for handling several issues that were central to his first run for office: the economy, foreign affairs and race relations among them.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/18/politics/obama-approval-rating-cnn-orc-poll/

Eilzel wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Meanwhile, Obama is enjoying his highest approval rating since 2009, and the majority of Americans say they'll miss him:



http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/18/politics/obama-approval-rating-cnn-orc-poll/

I think a mix of the media and racism are responsible for the massive disparity in views of Obama. For some, and I don't care is the word is thrown around a lot these days, some racist idiots could NEVER get over the fact Obama was a black President with a foreign sounding name. For them, everything he did would be terrible and to hell with giving him a chance.

But more importantly, the media in the US has become so polarising that there seems to be (from an outsiders pov, the Americans I work with are wholly Democratic liberals), that the country has been pushed further and further apart based on where they get their information. Medicaid is either the single greatest achievement of Obama, bringing healthcare to MILLIONS of poorer people OR Obamacare is a disgusting infringement on a person's right to choose and a display of ego-maniacal big government interference. There doesn't seem to be any middle ground there either.

With such split narratives it's little wonder there is such a difference in views- where one man can be seen as one of the greatest or worst of all time.

Thorin wrote:1) Copout reply and we have been over this before. where you came unstuck applying the Brexit attitude

2) He has been worse than Bush foreign policy wise and that is saying something

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:1) Copout reply and we have been over this before. where you came unstuck applying the Brexit attitude

2) He has been worse than Bush foreign policy wise and that is saying something

Unresponsive and irresponsible.  Proper analysis requires more than just throwing up a few value adjectives, without any calibration or factual grounding.  

Why was the Bush foreign policy better than Obama's, when Bush's program opened up a new wound worldwide in the Christian/Muslim split, led to the longest war in American history, cost $17-trillion, championed rape, torture, kidnapping, murder and renewed concentrations camps, and caused the world to enter into the second Great Depression?  Who could top that?

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Unresponsive and irresponsible.  Proper analysis requires more than just throwing up a few value adjectives, without any calibration or factual grounding.  

Why was the Bush foreign policy better than Obama's, when Bush's program opened up a new wound worldwide in the Christian/Muslim split, led to the longest war in American history, cost $17-trillion, championed rape, torture, kidnapping, murder and renewed concentrations camps, and caused the world to enter into the second Great Depression?  Who could top that?

Well if you care to read back I already did

So you place the value of money over human lives

That says it all to me

As I have said time and time again, most people, including me. think he is one of the best domestically Presidents ever and yet just about the worst foreign policy wise. I mean a president who does not refer to Islamic terrorism, as Islamic is just about as naive and wrong as it gets. His poor decision to believe Iran is going to not build any nukes, its as bad as Clinton with North Korea, the same failing. His inaction with Syria, has led to hundreds of thousands of dead and his anti Israel stance, has pushed back the peace process for years. So yes lets applaud his domestic polices, but foreign policy wise he has pandered to Islamic extremism. Wrongly thinking that if the US panders to the likes PA, Iran etc, that Muslims will see the US in a better light. Its naive beyond belief when there is a constant rhetoric of hate against the US within the Muslim world. Where also many Muslims hate him for killing Bin Laden, especially the Palestinians.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Well if you care to read back I already did

So you place the value of money over human lives

That says it all to me

As I have said time and time again, most people, including me. think he is one of the best domestically Presidents ever and yet just about the worst foreign policy wise. I mean a president who does not refer to Islamic terrorism, as Islamic is just about as naive and wrong as it gets. His poor decision to believe Iran is going to not build any nukes, its as bad as Clinton with North Korea, the same failing. His inaction with Syria, has led to hundreds of thousands of dead and his anti Israel stance, has pushed back the peace process for years. So yes lets applaud his domestic polices, but foreign policy wise he has pandered to Islamic extremism. Wrongly thinking that if the US panders to the likes PA, Iran etc, that Muslims will see the US in a better light. Its naive beyond belief when there is a constant rhetoric of hate against the US within the Muslim world. Where also many Muslims hate him for killing Bin Laden, especially the Palestinians.

Didge, I want to stop us from killing any more babies.  You want to launch yet another war replete with killing more babies.  How is that in any way involving money?  

If anyone is playing with money, it's you who want to engage in another costly war, potentially bankrupting the world just like last time.

Bring it down to earth.  If we go on another Muslim-killing rampage with ISIS, we'll just be playing wack-a-mole.  There's another movement waiting to pop up just around the corner.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  

--Albert Einstein.

veya_victaous wrote:Thorin Just because you are racist doesn't mean Obama has to be
Iran has just as much right to Nu8kes as Israel

AND it not our job to save the world,      
people like You are WHY the west is hated in large parts of the world, you can't leave good enough alone and You are so Busy telling Everyone else What is best for them you forget you parliament is Full of Peados

veya_victaous wrote:And IF they can make them of their own accord then...

So you think We should INVADE yet another nation because they Might do something.
They Might become a threat so lets Kill them now?
that is your position is it?

And you wonder why I mock your poorly thought through crusades

veya_victaous wrote:So what then
you have this one isolated nation nuking it's neighbors

OWNING nukes is not the problem or the mark or morality,
It is Using them !!!
And like you said WE DO KNOW ONE GROUP more than willing to use them with very little provocation.
Clearly they are the Real threat to World peace.
Who ever pushes the Button first is in the Wrong.