Poll: Better to be compared to Bill Clinton than Obama

By |
Paul Bedard,Washington Secrets,Bill Clinton,Polls,George W. Bush,Ronald Reagan

Another day, another bad poll for President Barack Obama.

After a week in which his disapproval rating hit an all-time high and adults graded him the biggest presidential failure in over 100 years, Rasmussen Reports tells us that it's bad for a politician to be compared to Obama. Just as bad, in fact, as being compared to former President George W. Bush.

The poll of 1,000 likely voters found that 47 percent “consider it a negative to describe a candidate as being like Barack Obama,” said Rasmussen. For Bush it’s 48 percent. Just 29 percent said it’s good for a political candidate to be compared to Obama.

Better to be compared to former President Bill Clinton, or, especially, former President Ronald Reagan. For most, Reagan is the best president of the last 30 years to compare a politician to, explaining why so many Republicans reference the Gipper in speeches and political ads.

Some 52 percent said it’s positive to be compared to Reagan, more than twice the 25 percent who call it a negative description.

Clinton also ranks much higher than Obama. Forty-one percent, said Rasmussen, consider it a positive to compare a candidate to Clinton, while 31 percent say it’s a negative.

But, said Rasmussen, it’s better for candidates to be compared to anything other than a politician. Just 7 percent told the pollster that being called a politician is a positive description for a candidate; 53 percent called it a negative.

Paul Bedard, The Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com.