Poll: One-Third Say Impeach Obama

Jonathan Topaz, Politico, July 25, 2014

One third of Americans think President Barack Obama should be impeached, a new poll says.

According to a CNN/ORC International poll released Friday, 33 percent of Americans think the president should be impeached and removed from office, compared with 65 percent who say they don’t support impeachment. Fifty-seven percent of Republicans say they support impeaching Obama, compared with just 35 percent of independent voters and 13 percent of Democrats.

When asked about when Congress should attempt to impeach a president, 79 percent of Americans said it should be used only if there is evidence of a serious crime–such as treason or bribery. Eighteen percent said impeachment could appropriately be used to registered dissatisfaction with White House policies.

A plurality of Americans–45 percent–believe Obama has gone too far in expanding his presidential powers. Thirty percent said the president has been about right in terms of presidential powers, while 22 percent he has not gone far enough.

The numbers generally fall in line with CNN results from the past two presidencies–30 percent of Americans support impeachment for former President George W. Bush in 2006 and 29 percent support impeachment for former President Bill Clinton in 1998.

{snip}

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • MekongDelta69

    One third of Americans think President Barack Obama should be impeached

    If we lived in the America when I grew up, he wouldn’t have made it to head shoe shine boy in front of Grand Central Station, much less anything more than that.

    • propagandaoftruth

      A plurality of Americans–45 percent–believe Obama has gone too far in expanding his presidential powers.
      —————————————

      There it is. Why not? IF a REAL case could be made…

      Do it! Impeachment could be seen as a sort of critical job review, and with all the executive ordernatin’ he been up to…

      Might be something there. Anything within reason to make that mulatto’s life harder and save our Folk sounds peachy keen to me.

      • MekongDelta69

        “…45 percent–believe Obama has gone too far in expanding his presidential powers. Thirty percent said the president has been about right in terms of presidential powers, while 22 percent [they left off the word, ‘believe’] he has not gone far enough.”

        In a normal America (which doesn’t exist anymore), those sentences would read:
        “…95 percent–believe Obama has gone too far in expanding his presidential powers. Four percent said the president has been about right in terms of presidential powers, while one percent were diagnosed as being clinically insane.”

        • Puggg

          In a “normal America” Obama wouldn’t even be thought of as America or even in America. A “normal America,” you say “Obama” and “normal Americans” would think “some African” or “they misspelled that big city in Nebraska.”

      • NoMosqueHere

        Impeachment is really just an indictment by the House of Representatives. The Senate determines removal from office. So impeach him, and let the senate sort it out.

        I would propose at least two impeachment counts: aiding and abetting multiple, felonious breaking of US immigration law; and conspiracy to break US immigration law.

    • Commissar Kirov

      That’s an insult to shoeshine boys. In the world I grew up in he’d have been rejected by the bums in the Bowery as unclean and unAmerican.

  • Truthseeker

    Treason? There’s no doubt our “leaders” have been committing that crime for decades. The concept hardly exists in today’s universalist, anti-nationalist world.

    • me

      Globalism. Corporate and government oligarchs. They really do believe that they’ll take it with them when they go….

  • TruthBeTold

    When Obama was first elected, I said I believed it was a good thing that a black man became President while Whites were still the majority. Had this happened when Whites were a minority it would have been the end as in Zimbabwe and South Africa.

    I don’t know how Obama won the second election; Romney was an ineffectual light weight who was easily marginalized by the left, voter fraud, black voter surge, and others but he won.

    While Obama seemed to have come out of nowhere, are there any other blacks who could appeal to White voters? Has his performance in office planted the seed about the consequences of ‘black rule’?

    MAYBE Whites will wake-up and catch-on and draw the right conclusion before giving another black man a chance to be President.

    • NoMosqueHere

      The democrats need to disprove the following maxim: Once you go Black, you never go Back.

      Don’t be surprised if they don’t go back. Maybe the black muslim Congressman Keith Ellison will run — he will appeal mightily to the sick whites and crazy jews for sure.

      • Commissar Kirov

        Isn’t this the motto of Haiti? Or is it Detroit?

  • james AZ

    CLEAN UP the AMERICA NOW !!! first thing to do is IMPEACH DICTATOR OBAMA NOW!

  • dd121

    The other 2/3 just aren’t paying attention.

    • Glen

      The 43% of Republicans who do NOT support impeachment are too afraid to make the attempt.

      • dd121

        Their team is in last place. The only place to go is up. What’s to lose?

  • 4321realist

    Failure to enforce immigration laws especially in these times of terrorist attacks is in itself enough for impeachment let alone the myriad of other serious infractions he’s guilty of.

    Yet we have establishment Republicans hissing the idea, which indicates the spinelessness which has rendered the party almost at a dysfunctional level. They also sat back and allowed the Dems to seat people on the Supreme Court who are white-hating racists and kooks of the highest order. And not opposing Holder as AG?

    Such wusses.

    There is NO WAY the Democrats would sit still if George Bush did the same things Obama is doing now.

  • JohnEngelman

    During the impeachment hearings for President Clinton the President’s approval rating went up. Republican Congressmen who went after the President came back with missing body parts.

    • WR_the_realist

      That’s because the impeachment was about Clinton lying about getting a blow job, a laughably tawdry affair but not something that imperiled the nation. Obama is definitely going beyond his constitutional authority when he issues executive orders exempting whole classes of illegal immigrants from deportation. He also exceeded his constitutional authority when he jumped into the Libyan civil war without any approval by congress (never mind an actual declaration of war by congress, which we haven’t had since World War II). I notice that all the war protesters went home as soon as war monger George W. Bush left office and war monger Obama was sworn into office. That proved to me that leftists really don’t care about war, but they’ll use it as a club against conservatives because even Americans who aren’t leftists don’t necessarily like war.

      • JohnEngelman

        President Obama has responded incompetently to the Great Recession. His incompetence has consisted of losing to Congressional Republicans on issues where he has public opinion on his side, like on raising taxes on the rich.

        On immigration the president faces the dilemma of leading a party that is divided on the issue. The GOP is also divided between a nativist base and a business community that wants cheap labor. The business community has dominated the GOP since it was founded in 1854.

        The most radical innovation the President has been responsible for has been a health plan that is nearly the same as the one Mitt Romney introduced in Massachusetts, and which is popular there.

        Barack Obama’s military adventures have been less damaging to the United States than those of George W. Bush.

        None of these are impeachable offenses.

        • WR_the_realist

          Refusing to enforce the law is an impeachable offense. Jumping into a war without congressional authorization is also an impeachable offense. Obamacare is arguably unconstitutional but congress created that law, Obama merely signed it, so that is not an impeachable offense. The fact that Massachusetts has a very similar law does not mean that the federal law is constitutional. States are allowed to do things that the federal government isn’t. That is the principal of enumerated powers applied to congress that the founders certainly intended and most Americans have forgotten. The constitution lists what congress can do, with the intention that congress can’t do anything else. (Iif congress can do anything, why bother list some of those things?) OTOH, the constitution lists what states *can’t* do, and states can do pretty much anything else. (Of course, that doesn’t mean they should.)

          If you say that George Bush should have been impeached for lying about Iraq, well, you’ll get no argument from me. But at least Bush did get congress to pass a bill letting Bush go to war if he wanted. This wasn’t a proper declaration of war, which congress is too spineless to issue nowadays. Congressmen prefer to pass the buck to the president so if the war turns out well they can say they authorized it and if they war turns out badly they can say it was the president’s fault for getting into it. Obama didn’t even bother to seek this sort of wishy washy authorization when he went into Libya. He merely said that NATO authorized it, as if NATO gets to decide when we have a war.

          • Wholly Unconvinced

            An excellent point by point trouncing of Engelmans typical drivel, Thank you sir!

      • Spikeygrrl

        Contrary to popular opinion among the uneducated, Clinton’s impeachment was not about sex. It was about suborning witnesses, hiding/destroying evidence, and obstruction of justice.

        • JohnEngelman

          Clinton’s impeachment was payback for Watergate. Many white men hated Bill Clinton because they were angry about America’s defeat in Vietnam, and the fact that many who demonstrated against the War were prospering in life.

          • WR_the_realist

            A nice theory but, no, that wasn’t what the charges of impeachment were about.

          • JohnEngelman

            The charges for impeachment were excuses, not reasons.

    • NoMosqueHere

      Yeah, but they still had their balls.

  • Who Me?

    One third of Americans think President Barack Obama should be impeached.

    Well, of course; impeached, convicted and removed from office–and about 6 years late.
    BUT WHAT IF HE WON’T GO????
    What if he decides he likes living in the White House, that being Dictator-In-Chief suits him just fine, and since it’s just a formality anyway, he will just go ahead and declare himself King-for-Life of the United States.
    Has our country ever faced such a move? No.
    Do we have any REAL laws in place to put a stop to something like this? No, because the founders of our country never dreamed that the entire top 3 branches of government could have a majority of madmen (and women) that would condone this without the consent of the people.
    And that only 1/3rd of the people would even notice or care………….

  • Obama reminds me of many of the blacks who have played American presidents in Hollywood films. Apparently all that propaganda over many years laid the groundwork for someone like him to magically float to power. Of course these fictional black presidents always turn out to be selfless preservers of the American nation, but I guess that part only kicks in as they are addressing the nation when we are about to be hit by an asteroid.

  • WR_the_realist

    Only one third? Just how bad do you have to be to get impeached nowadays? All Nixon did was have his henchmen electronically eavesdrop on the Democratic Party. Now both parties do that to the entire nation. For refusing to enforce immigration law, Obama should be impeached. For jumping into a war in Libya without congressional authorization Obama should be impeached. There are many other policy positions where I disagree with Obama, but a president can’t be impeached just because you disagree with his policies. A president can and should be impeached for grossly exceeding his constitutional authority, and Obama fits the charges.

    Of course leftists would disagree with me because they recognize no constitutional limits whatsoever on what congress and the president can do.

  • WR_the_realist

    Americas are dumb. Terribly dumb. They are also taught in the public schools that big government is good and that the job of the federal government is to solve all your problems.

  • Spikeygrrl

    Yes, sad to say: they really are that dumb. Which is why 33% is an amazingly GOOD thing!

    The proper comparison is not to prior administrations, but rather to only a month or two ago, before news of the Barry Soetoro-incited Mexican Invasion broke.

    • 2War Abn Vet

      It should be noted that only about 33% of the population supported the original American Revolution.

      • Spikeygrrl

        Exactly. Especially considering that for every patriot who has no hesitation to speak his beliefs out loud, there’s another citizen with the same beliefs who never speaks those beliefs at all because he’s scared sick of losing his job/family/friendships/standing in the community.

        If all this starts to sound eerily familiar, remember Nixon’s Silent Majority. They never went away; they’re simply even more inhibited than ever by the jackbooted thugs of militant “Progressivism” and Political Correctness.

  • Paleoconn

    I would have liked Bushlet to get impeached. Clinton should not have, as loathsome and sleazy a character as he may be.

    • AndrewInterrupted

      You see a president’s sleaziest work during the last month of his 8 years. Carter and Clinton were especially brutal on their way out. I thought Bush was responsible for the last banking debacle. Turns out, Clinton signed the legislation that allowed for derivatives, etc. That had a devastating impact on America going into the 21st century. Clinton was also the one who signed NAFTA. That probably has a lot to do with our greaserito problem now. After NAFTA the southern border turned into Swiss cheese.

      • IstvanIN

        Why do so many people think overpopulation ala New Delhi is so great?

        • AndrewInterrupted

          It lowers the White percentage.

          • IstvanIN

            Sad thing is many, many White support this madness.

          • AndrewInterrupted

            Many more are just in the dark as to how bad it really is. As a field service person in the high technology area, I have a unique vantage point. The average White person can’t tell if that southeast Asian woman driving by in an $80,000 Lexus RX400 is the wife of an MD or just another refugee scammer working at a bench, collecting a fat puppy-mill check.

      • Paleoconn

        I know very little about Carter’s record, thanks for the info. That said, he wasn’t a lame duck two-term president like Bushlet, Free Willie, and Obama. Surprising that he would upset the applecart so with another election on the horizon. But then, he probably knew he was toast so he said to heck with it. As far as Clinton re NAFTA, I agree. However, it was Conservatism Inc’s Saint Ronnie who signed the first amnesty in ’86 legalizing 3 million greaseritos (I like your term).

        • AndrewInterrupted

          Reagan’s affiliation with California and Hollyweird muddied his judgment there. Having said that, Reagan was double-crossed. The amnesty was half of a two part deal. The other half closing the border. The Libtards betrayed him and the American people. That’s why any person qualifying as an American citizen should be saying: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me”.

  • Just got back visting Southern Florida, where every second car is still sporting an “Obama” bumber sticker and people still wear Obama pins on their lapels. I don’t see any chance of this getting off the ground.