(UPDATED) Rasmussen Reports: "36% Think Radiation From Japanese Nuclear Disaster Hurt the U.S."

Jiji Tsushin (3/13/2013) headline reporting on the survey was even more dire: ３６％が「米国に重大な被害」 - 36% think "grave damage in the US".

36%? Grave damage?

Here's Rasmussen page on the survey on the 2nd anniversary of the nuclear accident in Japan (3/11/2013):

36% Think Radiation From Japanese Nuclear Disaster Hurt the U.S.

Monday, March 11, 2013

It’s been two years since an earthquake and tsunami triggered an explosion at Japan’s Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, and more than a third of Americans think radiation from that accident is likely to have done significant harm to the United States. Still, most Americans believe nuclear power plants at home are safe.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 36% of American Adults believe it is at least somewhat likely that radiation from the Fukushima nuclear power plant did significant harm to the United States. However, that includes just nine percent (9%) who think that scenario is Very Likely. Fifty percent (50%) of adults say it’s not likely the radiation did any harm, including 17% who say it’s Not At All Likely. Sixteen percent (16%) are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

The survey of 1,000 Adults nationwide was conducted on March 9-10, 2013 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

The wording of the survey question:

1* It’s been two years since the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. How likely is it that radiation from that plant did significant harm in the United States?

2* How safe are nuclear power plants in the United States – very safe, somewhat safe, not very safe, not at all safe?

3* Should more nuclear power plants be built in the United States?

Coverage of the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident by the major media outside Japan, including the US, pretty much ended by the end of March 2011. I was writing many posts each day starting March 11, 2011, and distinctly remember the foreign coverage dropped off significantly around March 23, 2011. There was nothing more to explode, nothing exciting to see or hear. By the time April rolled around, there was hardly any coverage. That was my unscientific impression, anyway.

If I were to answer the first question, I would answer "not sure". NOA did publish the data on contamination from the rain after the Fukushima I Nuke Plant accident, but the EPA in California didn't bother even measuring radioactive particles in the atmosphere. EPA in northern California relied on "volunteers" to collect air filters at the measuring stations, as it fit their "lifestyle", and the air filters were sent by mail to a laboratory in Alabama. I haven't seen any systematic, official measurement of agricultural produce except in the very early days (EPA stopped emergency monitoring on May 2011).

Tweet

Rasmussen Poll: Ron Paul 41% Obama 42% in 2012 Matchup

a virtual tie.

Election 2012: Barack Obama 42%, Ron Paul 41%
(4/14/2010 Rasmussen Reports)

"Pit maverick Republican Congressman Ron Paul against President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election match-up, and the race is – virtually dead even.

"A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds Obama with 42% support and Paul with 41% of the vote. Eleven percent (11%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided."

The Political Class is a totally different story. According to the poll, 58% of Main Street voters prefer Ron Paul, while 95% of the Political Class prefer Obama.

Not surprisingly, the Republicans seem to have mixed feelings about Ron Paul. The Republican Party establishment have been trying to marginalize and ridicule Ron Paul (and his ever-growing supporters) for a long time.

What's interesting though is this: Significant chunk of Republicans haven't decided what to think of him.

"Twenty-six percent (26%) of GOP voters think Paul shares the values of most Republican voters throughout the nation, but 25% disagree. Forty-nine percent (49%) are not sure.

"Similarly, 27% of Republicans see Paul as a divisive force in the party, while 30% view him as a new direction for the GOP. Forty-two percent (42%) aren’t sure."

The Republican Party leadership must be scared.

A 19-year-old college student whose political role model is Ron Paul has become the new mayor of a Wisconsin town, with a solid support from townfolks fed up with their city council not listening to them and wasting money on projects no one wants.

Maybe, just maybe, a change (a real one) is afoot.

Tweet

Approval Rate New Low for Obama

Rasmussen's Presidential Tracking Poll, which surveys likely voters and which is calculated as difference between "Strongly Approve" and "Strongly Disapprove", is -21 today, tying the all-time low for this president.

Even the more mainstream Gallup's Obama Job Approval shows a clear crossover: 48% Disapprove, 46% Approve.


TA (technical analysis) on Rasmussen's "Strongly Disapprove": it looks like it is about to break to the upside, after several months of basing and forming "a cup". We will see if it forms "a handle" part. The cup with handle is a bullish, continuation formation, and it could happen without a handle. The target would be the depth of the cup, so it would be about 50%.

What could trigger the upside breakout? The health care "reform" bill passed without even a vote on the bill would be a good candidate, among so many others...

Tweet

Sudden Spike of Strong Support for Obama Was Just That: A Spike

on Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, which is calculated by subtracting "Strongly Disapprove" from "Strongly Approve". The number has been negative since July 2009, after the House passed the climate change bill.

Another poll shows the support for Obama at 44%, while 47% disapprove. The approval rate among independent voters is abysmal 27%.

My guess is that Americans don't want to be scolded all the time on just about everything by the Nanny-in-Chief, as this Politico article points out ...

(Obama always sounds to me like an irritated middle school principal, new to the job, who is puzzled why his students aren't behaving the way he thinks they should.)

Tweet

Obama Support Shoots Up On War Prep in Middle East

I could be wrong, but that's what I think.

Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll for today (February 1, 2010) shows quite an anomaly. The gap between "strongly approve" and "strongly disapprove", which was in negative high teens, narrowed over the weekend to a mere -4.

"Strongly disapprove" percentage hasn't changed much, around 40%. It is "strongly approve", which jumped from Friday's 25% to 35%. That's a 40% jump in "strongly approve" category.

Also, there is hardly a change in "total approve" and "total disapprove". The sudden surge in "strongly approve", therefore, must have come from the Obama supporters who already approve of the president's handling of his job - i.e. switching from "approve" to "strongly approve" over the weekend. There had to be a trigger for such an abnormal move.

What changed from Friday to Monday? Have you read any cheerful news that makes you want to enthusiastically support the president?

It cannot be the $3.83 trillion budget of his that was unveiled this morning, with gaping $1.6 trillion deficit for yet another year.

The only significant news that I can think of over the weekend is this:

US raises stakes on Iran by sending in ships and missiles (1/31/2010 Guardian UK), and
China, Iran Spur U.S. to Develop Air-Sea Battle Plan (2/1/2010 Bloomberg)

If this news was a trigger for the sudden surge of strong support for Obama, it could only come from people who highly approve of more aggressive stance and action by the U.S. military around the world, particularly in the Middle East, whether they are Democrats or Republicans or Independents.

It seems neoconservatives (here's one) are alive and well, after all.

To protect "our allies". Which one? Pick your country and cheer.

Tweet

Reid Plans Christmas Eve Vote on Health Care Bill

What a hard-working Congress. After passing $1.1 trillion spending bill on Sunday, the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is planning the vote on the Senate health care bill on Christmas Eve. Makes you proud, doesn't it?

Reid plans Christmas Eve passage of health bill
(12/17/09 MSNBC via Newsvine)

"WASHINGTON - Senate Democratic leaders have laid out an ambitious timetable for passing the health care bill on Christmas Eve. But if they're successful with their strategy, the vote that matters most and sets the stage for final passage would happen on Monday.

"To be successful, the plan assumes Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., will have three key elements before the weekend: the bill's cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office, the legislation completely written and available to the public, and assurance from all 60 members of his caucus that they will vote for the package.

"As of this writing, none of those things has materialized."

If they manage to pass this piece of you know what, what a wonderful Christmas present for the health care lobby! For taxpayers, let's forget Christmas, there's nothing to be cheerful about.

According to Rasmussen Report on December 14, 56% of U.S. voters are now against the health care reform plan being crafted by the Obama administration and congressional Democrats. 40% of the voters are in favor. More importantly, however, 46% now strongly oppose the plan, compared to just 19% who strongly favor the plan. Also, according to Scott Rasmussen, "63% of senior citizens oppose the plan, including 52% who strongly oppose it."

Rasmussen Report also reports that unprecedented 71% of the U.S. voters are angry at the federal government, including 46% who are very angry.

But no matter how much the voters are against the government's health care reform, how angry they are at the government, they don't get to express their displeasure until 2010 election.

Besides, I still remember what happened in September/October 2008: people were dead-set against the $700 billion bank bailout bill (something like 99 to 1 against), but the Democratic Congress passed it anyway (those who opposed were Republicans). And what happened to those Democrats in November election? Nothing. Almost all of them got elected back.

99% of poll respondents at Fox News are against the government raising debt ceiling, Zero Hedge reports. They will raise it anyway, and give themselves a nice raise as an aside.

As long as 1% of population is for it, Congress will pass any and everything. Health care bill, debt ceiling bill, defense bill, what have you.

To add insult to injury, the overburdened taxpayers were lectured by President Obama the other day that unless the health care bill gets passed, the federal government will go bankrupt. (I also remember how he threatened the general public with "catastrophe" unless Congress passed his so-called stimulus bill.)

First, your government is already broke, Mr. President, as you already admitted back in May. Second, in case you don't know yet, an increasing number of Americans (voters, not the political class) will cheer if your government goes broke and stops spending. It would make a very nice Christmas present if you stop spending, for a change.

Tweet

Technical Analysis of Presidential Approval Rating Chart

If I am to apply technical analysis of stocks to Presidential Job Approval number of likely voters as published by Rasmussen Report, here's what I see.

A declining trend line and inability of the index to recapture the trend line:

A steady decline from the January high. Almost a inverse correlation to the stock market move so far, and in sync with the decline of U.S. dollar. In late May, there were a few attempts to regain and surpass this trend line, but they were unsuccessful. But those failures were to be expected, because, as you can see just prior to those attempts, there was a rising wedge formation in the downtrend (bearish). So, sure enough, after failed attempts, the index resumed the downward trend.

After impulsive low (dipping to 45%) sometime in late August-early September, the index has found the range between 48% and 52%. But again, a weak attempt to regain and surpass the downward trend line was unsuccessful (red arrow in the chart), and the index has recently dropped down below 50% and is oscillating in a very tight range. If I could superimpose the bollinger band, the band would be very narrow, indicating a very low volatility.

A break seems imminent. It could be up, it could be down. We have to keep an open mind. If it is up, the first target is the trend line at 52% or so. If that happens, and if it is to be a trend change, the index has to break above it in a convincing manner. If it is down from here and now, it can threaten to break 40%. If it first goes up near the trend line and then goes down, the drop may still be to the low 40s if the previous two downtrends are any indication. Trend is your friend until it isn't, as many swing traders would say.

Potential trigger for the move: passage of House health care "reform" bill. (The decline in June may have been triggered by the passsage of House climate bill.)

Also, if the stock market declines sharply from here (trigger: 3rd Quarter GDP number tomorrow) and U.S. dollar appreciates sharply from here, the job approval index may recapture the trend line and surpass it, marking a definite trend change.


Some of you may get indignant, even offended, to analyze the presidential poll number as if it were a stock. But come to think about it, it's all about sentiment, poll and stock.

Tweet

Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll for 8/24/09

On the bright side, it has improved from yesterday (-14).

Tweet