POLLING IMPLICATIONS - AT 5:47 P.M. ET:  Even The New York Time is starting to acknowledge that President Obama has become poll-deficient, a political malady for which there is no definitive cure.  In a fair-minded piece, Adam Nagourney considers the implications of the president's declining numbers:

History suggests that Mr. Obama’s approval rating could be one of the key factors in determining how his fellow Democrats fare in the mid-term election. It is an urgent concern for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which has distributed a slide-show presentation to supporters that charts the correlation between a president’s rating and his party’s performance in mid-term congressional elections. For the past 50 years, almost without exception, the party has lost seats whenever its president’s average approval rating in September and October before the election dropped below 50 percent.

Republicans, at least as of today, are envisioning trying to tie Mr. Obama to Democrats in marginal districts who would prefer not to be too closely associated with him and his policies, the way Democrats used Mr. Bush against Republican candidates — a development that would have seemed farfetched six months ago.

Nagourney points out that the president's numbers are, ironically, more a problem for his party than for him.  The Democratic Party faces a critical mid-term election next year.  Mr. Obama has three years to repair his damaged standing.  Both Presidents Reagan and Clinton saw low presidential poll numbers drag down their parties early in their terms.  But both men cruised to easy victories when they ran for reelection.

So, Republican optimism for next year is reasonable.  To assume that the tide will continue to run favorable through 2012, based on today's numbers, is a stretch.

However, if the GOP can actually field a strong candidate in 2012 - unlike Walter Mondale, who lost to Reagan in 1984, or Bob Dole, who lost to Clinton in 1996 - we could be smiling for quite a time.

November 23, 2009