A new Gallup poll shows just how racially divided the country has become over the President. The poll shows a whopping 91% of Blacks supporting Barack Obama as compared to only 36% of Whites.
President Obama’s overall approval rating has stayed below 50% and some polls have him in the 30s. This poll shows him at 45%.
Democrats still like Obama by 79% and liberals are just slightly lower at 75%. The poll would suggest that liberals are not altering their views of the President despite his adoption of many Bush era policies, as discussed earlier.
Gallup shows failing popularity in every other demographic group beyond African-Americans:
57%. Hispanics: 55%. Moderates: 54%. Unmarrieds: 53%. Easterners: 52%. Women: 47%. Midwesterners and Westerners: 45%.
Beyond Whites in general, the worst groups are married citizens at 39% and seniors at 38%.
While the Administration has been trying to appeal to conservatives in various areas, it does not seem to be having an impact. Obama has a 23% popularity among conservatives. For Republicans, it is down to 12%.
Source: LA Times
Bdaman,
Follow the money – who is paying to support Prop 23?
p.s. I love what Arnold has had to say about this issue… he is a Republican I could support for president if the ‘natural born citizen’ clause of the Constitution was amended.
Here’s another article Ms. Elaine
Coldest summer in decades in Southern California – “Summer played hooky on us. We leaped from spring to fall,” said Bill Patzert, a climatologist for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Canada Flintridge. It’s one of the coolest summers in decades.
LAX tied the coldest average temperature for August on record, going back to 1944, said Jamie Meier, a meteorologist for the National Weather Service in Oxnard. The Santa Barbara airport also broke a record for coolest August, she said.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/09/las-summer-ends-with-a-chill-it-was-the-cold est-in-decades.html
Back at ya Doc
Calif. initiative a test for national climate law
By: CATHY BUSSEWITZ
Associated Press
10/05/10 7:20 PM EDT
SACRAMENTO, CALIF. — If the supporters of Proposition 23 prevail in the Nov. 2 election, California’s landmark global warming law would be suspended indefinitely.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/breaking/calif-initiative-a-test-for-national-climate-law-104367163.html#ixzz11hIPrJYa
This one’s for Bdaman (in the spirit of his drive-by linking…):
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39550874/ns/world_news-europe/
Dr. Polar Bear,
A couple of quotes for you…
Taken from: http://oehha.ca.gov/air/toxic_contaminants/html/Inorganic%20Arsenic.htm
If 0.00004% of Californians die early due to airborne arsenic, what do you think that the number is for, say, heavily industrialized regions of China?
Dr. Polar Bear,
And how much, say, dioxin is naturally in the environment? Additionally, while arsenic does occur in nature, inorganic arsenic is a far more significant health risk than the organic variety – do you think that the arsenic in industrial effluvia is likely to be organic or inorganic?
Dr. Polar Bear,
“arsenic occurs naturally in the water as well as being “put” there.”
*****
And that means no one should be worried about having arsenic in their drinking water? Is that your point?
Salt occurs naturally in sea water. Still, it doesn’t mean drinking salt water is good for one.
When the sun rises in the south and sets in the north will global warming be complete?
arsenic occurs naturally in the water as well as being “put” there.
Dr. Polar Bear,
Elaine is right – there is a quantifiable cost to arsenic in the drinking water that is paid for in terms of the health of the people who drink it (rather than by the people who profited by putting it there). Your implication that there are ‘good’ (or non-damaging) types of pollution is disingenuous at best – especially when the costs (in terms of public health, property values, and environmental viability) are so rarely borne by the polluters. Industrial sources of CO2 (as opposed to natural ones) tend to include other things as well – CO2 emissions might not be the best metric of pollution, but it is far better than no metric at all. By your own logic, large doses of CO2 are a poison and while we cannot make the world perfectly safe, we should make the decisions about the tradeoffs with our eyes open and make sure that the people reaping the benefits are the ones bearing the costs. Or do you think that it is just fine for companies to get rich by poisoning people?
Doc Polar Bear says poison is the dose as well as the type. Alcohol is a poison but people drink it all the time and nicotine is a cousin of strychnine but people smoke.
To many nervous nellies spoil it for the rest of us. As Dan Daly said “come on you sons of bitches do you want to live forever?” You cannot make the world perfectly safe.
Dr. Polar Bear,
Some types of pollution aren’t bad? So arsenic can be a cure for “the clap.” Then, if one has “the clap,” maybe one should take a “little bit” of arsenic. That doesn’t mean arsenic in drinking water isn’t harmful or that it’s beneficial to people who drink it.
Slartibarfast:
islands of plastic is one thing which does have a harmful effect because it gets in the food chain. We should probably try and clean it up. But saying that one type of pollution is bad so all others are is not intellectually honest either. Or to say that a naturally occurring compound is pollution is not intellectual honesty.
Poison is about the dose as well as the type. A little tiny bit of ricin will kill you but a little bit of arsenic can cure the clap.
Elaine M.:
No I am not Bdamans alter ego. He doesnt need one.
Oops, that should be:
“Or do you think that islands of plastic the size of the state of Texas were floating in the Pacific during the last ice age?”
D’oh!
Bdaman,
To me climate change and CO2 emissions are just a part of the larger issue of pollution and mankind’s impact on the environment. And we do know that mankind has a significant and negative impact on the environment(or do you think that islands of plastic the size of the state of Texas during the last ice age?). As there are good reasons to worry about pollution besides climate change, it seems wisest to attempt to reduce pollution while keeping a close eye on the climate to determine what, if any, impact we are having and what, if anything, can be done to fix it. You’ve never answered my assertion that pollution control is still worth the cost even if climate change is not man made. Now that’s not intellectual dishonest, but it is intellectual cowardice. I mean that in the nicest possible way, but the simple fact is that unless you can answer my assertion then the policies against climate change need to be done anyway and your entire argument is irrelevant.
Bdaman,
I’m one–maybe two–steps ahead of you. I already prepared dinner and folded the laundry.
🙂
Ms.Elaine I always enjoy your sense of humor.
O.K. I’ve got to get dinner ready and fold a load of laundry.
Talk to you soon.
Bdaman,
“If you take a child from a young age and tell him everyday he’s stupid and he will never amount to anything what do you think that child will think when he comes of age?”
That he should vote Republican???
😉
See the links above I gave to wikipedia and Dr. Roy Spencer
I tried to post the link to NASA three time but it wont let me.