Atkinson Advisor » White House

Approval ratings — Truman to Obama

admin — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 14:10:52 +0000

Year end is a time for reflection. Last year, we witnessed the historic election of Barak Obama. This year, we have watched his administration tackle a number of large issues. Next year, we are all hoping to see positive signs of recovery.

Where does Obama’s approval rating rank compared to other presidents? Fortunately, we can find out for ourselves.

Thanks to Gallup and USA Today, the presidential approval trackers lets anyone compare approval ratings for every president since Harry Truman either by date or by number of days in office. For example, you can see that Gerald Ford had an approval rating of 42 percent during Dec. 6-9, 1974, or you can compare Obama with Bush 43, Bush 41, and Richard Nixon on Day 100 in office. It’s a dead heat with everyone between 55-65 percent approval.

Interestingly, the Gallup charts show only Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton have left office with significantly higher ratings than when they entered.

USA Today’s presidential approval tracker

Time searches in YouTube clips

admin — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:41:51 +0000

Next time you want to direct people to an exact spot in a YouTube video, try adding the timestamp in the link. To jump to 1:32 in the clip,
add #t=1m32s to the end of the URL.

For example, during the July 28 House press briefing, reporters questioned Press Secretary Robert Gibbs about the meeting among President
Obama, Harvard professor Henry Gates, and police officer James Crowley.

This link takes you to the start of the YouTube clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDtOKodLdhE&feature=PlayList&p=42029F03573BDA18&index=0

By adding #t=17m42s to the end, you direct users to a humorous exchange between Gibbs and reporters that starts at 17:42 of the clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDtOKodLdhE&feature=PlayList&p=42029F03573BDA18&index=0#t=17m42s

Controversy and perspective

admin — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 02:25:38 +0000

President Obama pledged to release pictures of torture and abuse of prisoners in overseas military prisons. He then reversed that decision and angered many supporters in the process.

The administration’s reputation will take a hit. Those in power obviously made a calculated choice that the confidence President Obama has generated since his inauguration can withstand the downside of not keeping such an emotionally charged promise.

Philip Gourevitch, who is co-authoring a book about Abu Ghraib, has an interesting perspective on the president’s decision, which he supports. He claims to have viewed many of the photos not yet published. And he says he has no plans for publishing any of them in his book. His explanation:

“Crime-scene photographs, for all their power to reveal, can also serve as a distraction, even a deterrent, from precise understanding of the events they depict. Photographs cannot show us a chain of command, or Washington decision making. Photographs cannot tell stories. They can only provide evidence of stories, and evidence is mute; it demands investigation and interpretation.”

If we know anything about Washington, D.C., the photos will eventually come to light. They always do. Let’s hope they also have the perspective that Gourevitch advocates.

Gourevitch’s entire op-ed from the New York Times.

Cool in the moment

admin — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 01:10:34 +0000

In the endless prelude to Super Bowl XLIII, NBC’s Matt Lauer interviewed President Barack Obama live from the White House. The interview was clearly expected in its content – no breaking news or new information.

A welcome surprise was the president in a button-down shirt without a tie or a jacket in a national network interview. It was a rare combination of unexpected and completely on point.

Being cool has always been part of Obama’s appeal. He gave the impression that after the interview he was going to sit down and enjoy watching the Super Bowl like millions of Americans.

Give him and his handlers credit for matching the image with the moment – or maybe just being his cool self.

Did we forget to mention that?

admin — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 01:57:48 +0000

Nearly 70 million people tuned into the vice presidential debate last Thursday. It and the three presidential debates are among the most powerful political events because they are the only times both campaigns are represented on the same stage (White House meetings about the economy excluded).

Gwen Ifill, reputed PBS newscaster, moderated the Biden-Palin tete-a-tete. Just prior to the debate, we found out that Ifill is currently writing a book called Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama (see the book’s YouTube video), which will be released on Inauguration Day.

Ifill moderated a fair and impartial debate by all accounts. That doesn’t forgive her lack of transparency. The Commission on Presidential Debates did not comment about Ifill’s lapse when contacted by the Associated Press.

Maybe that’s because the commission has its own transparency issues. The commission has refused to make available the contract between both campaigns about the debates’ details. A spokesperson went so far as to claim that a contract does not exist. Yeah, right.

Non profit organization Open Debates called the commission’s bluff and released a copy of the 2004 contract between the Kerry and Bush campaigns. Among its 32 pages, the contract describes in detail the coin flip to determine who receives the first question and many other minute details.

A memo to both campaigns: Transparency is the new currency. Unlike our taxes, please spend it with abandon.

It’s trust, stupid

admin — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 03:03:27 +0000

Hillary Rodham Clinton once enjoyed a commanding lead in the polls and was the presumptive presidential nominee for the Democratic Party.

Last week, The Washington Post and ABC News released a poll showing why her fortunes have changed. Only 39 percent of Americans now view her as honest and trustworthy as compared to 62 percent for both Barak Obama and John McCain. Clinton’s numbers are down from 52 percent less than a year ago.

The news gets worse. Among Democrats, her numbers fell from 81 percent to 63 percent in that same time period.

Most campaign strategists tie the precipitous fall to her comments about landing amid sniper fire in Bosnia during her time as First Lady. Her campaign made it worse by handling the situation poorly when reporters uncovered footage of the official welcoming ceremony that was anything but hostile.

Politicians don’t generally rank high on the trust scale. At the same time, presidential candidates are held to a higher standard.

The ability to lead effectively is based on trust. Trust us; it will be a significant issue in this year’s election.