Obama's approval rating among liberal dems is 85%, but among conservative dems it's only 60%

[Cali_Democrat]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

So it appears the more liberal members of the Democratic Party really approve of the job Obama is doing.

[treestar]

1. Nice to keep it in perspective.

I am surprised at that result.

I've been told I am conservative. (though my winger friends say I'm a communist :rofl

[lonestarnot]

114. I'm fresh out of those.

[polichick]

2. Or more liberal members are more loyal when polled by outsiders.

[Cali_Democrat]

16. The statistical analysis suggests people who dont like Obama...

tend to be more conservative.

[Gravitycollapse]

25. No, it definitely doesn't.

It suggests that Obama has a higher approval rating among liberal Democrats than conservative democrats. It makes no implication that those who dislike Obama tend to be more conservative.

As it seems, it's not just statistical illiteracy that is dangerous. What is really dangerous is the statistically illiterate who assume they actually understand statistics.

[Cali_Democrat]

30. The numbers do suggest that those who disapprove of Obama tend to be more conservative

I know these numbers can be painful for some folks.

It reminds me of the 2012 election polls. The conservatives just hated those damn polls, so they created their own 'unskewed' polls.

Rather amusing.

[Gravitycollapse]

35. What's amusing is your apparent inability to understand how statistics work...

Statistics are generally meant to be narrowly interpreted. They should only be given weight along the vein of the questions asked. The question asked was the approval of the President's job. Which means the statistics give insight into how different groups approve of the President and his job.

You cannot realign data to answer questions that were never asked.

Is there a body of data which suggests those who disapprove of Obama tend to be more conservative? Maybe? But it isn't the data that's in your OP.


If I wanted someone to read a book to me, I wouldn't ask someone who doesn't know how to read.

I certainly don't trust the statistically illiterate to explain implications of a data set.

[Cali_Democrat]

37. The anger is palpable.

Love it.

[Gravitycollapse]

45. Yes, anger is a human emotion often expressed at the incessant daftness of others.

[lonestarnot]

115. Snort. That was not a good use of your time ma'am/sir.

[LordGlenconner]

92. You're telling me

What a crybaby.

[CJCRANE]

75. The poll specifically says "approve" and "disapprove".

In any case if someone doesn't of something that means they disapprove. It's a simple function of language and logic.

The only other option is "don't know/not sure" which is usually about 5%.

[Gravitycollapse]

107. It gives a general disapproval rating. It does not say how many liberal Democrats disapprove.

Just as it doesn't say how many conservative Democrats disapprove.

I've taken both logic and statistics courses and the logicians follow the rules of statistics just like everyone else. If you want to know Obama's disapproval rating for a specific demographic, you cannot extrapolate it from his approval rating. You actually have to poll for his disapproval rating and you need to make sure to divvy it up by demographic.

[lonestarnot]

117. You fell for it again.

[DanTex]

101. Actually, yes it does. It's pretty simple math.

Democrats that disapprove of Obama are more conservative, as a group, than Democrats who approve of Obama. This is because the group that approves consists of 85% of all Liberal Dems, and 60% of all Conservative Dems, whereas the group of people who disapprove consists of 15% of Liberal Dems, and 40% of Conservative Dems.

Which means that, if you sample at random from the pool of disapproving Dems, you are more likely to hit upon a conservative Dem, than if you sample at random from the pool of approving Dems.

[Gravitycollapse]

105. It's simple math as long as you don't know anything about statistics.

You can't say that because 85% of liberal Democrats approve of him, 15% disapprove. Just as you cannot say that because 60% of conservative Democrats approve of him, 40% disapprove.

As I said before, you cannot realign the statistics to answer questions that were never asked. Gallup provides an overall disapproval rating (and you will notice it isn't the inverse of his approval ratings) but does not break it down according to demographics.

If this were a statistics exam and the prompt stated "85% of liberal Democrats approve of President Obama's job" and the question was "What is the percentage that disapproves?" and, with no other information, you respond with "15%," you would be marked wrong.

Now, I don't know about the two of you, but I don't manufacture evidence because it suits my argument.

[DanTex]

111. LOL. And I thought that the anti-Obama idiocy couldn't get any worse.

Aside from the general silliness of dwelling on the distinction between "not approving" and "disapproving", the overall approval rating is 45%, while disapproval is 51%, which means of the general population, only 4% fall into the "neither" category. In other words, almost everyone has on opinion. This isn't some local ballot measure nobody has heard of, it's the president.

So it is completely implausible that somehow the disapproval rating among liberal Dems is actually higher than the disapproval rate for conservative Dems. Well, at least to anyone with the arithmetic skills of a 4th grader.

The funniest part of all is innumerate people like yourself accusing others of not understanding statistics.

[Gravitycollapse]

112. You still don't get it, do you? I hate it when people make up statistics to suit their argument.

That is exactly what the OP did. And the strangest part is that it wouldn't even be particularly difficult to find an actual body of data that supported his or her assertion. Which demonstrates not only a willingness to abuse mathematics but also a general laziness and disdain for research.

[DanTex]

113. Oh, I get it. Unlike you, I am actually capable of addition and subtraction.

The statistics weren't made up, they came from a Gallup poll. I'm sure you'd like to "unskew" them, but like I said, the math here is pretty simple.

[Gravitycollapse]

116. Show me where in that Gallup poll it states 15% of liberal Dems and 40% of conservative Dems...

Disapprove of Obama's job.

I await with bated breath.

[DanTex]

119. This is where you need to use those arithmetic skills.

Given that only 4% of the population neither approves nor disapproves, the idea that, out of the 40% of conservative Dems who don't approve, fully 25% fall into "neither" is completely implausible.

[Gravitycollapse]

121. AAAAAAAH. Okay let me try this one more time...

It is very important when structuring a poll that the questions you ask be specific to whatever it is you are trying to study. In the case of the presidential approval rating, it is structured to gather information on the APPROVAL rating, not the disapproval rating.

If you were to invert the data for the approval rating, it would not give you the same value that would be obtained if the disapproval rating was being polled. The reasons for this are abundant and generally explained in 101 level statistics courses (also political statistics courses). But what is most important to take away from all of this is that you cannot extrapolate from the data an answer to a question that was never asked.

Despite the illusion that a dichotomous poll can simply be inverted to determine the subordinate (the superior being the approval rating and the subordinate being the disapproval rating), you cannot actually do that in statistics.

Now, this will seem pedantic to those who don't actually understand the importance of properly structured poll questions, but there is actually a meaningful difference between someone failing to state they "approve" of Obama's job and stating they "disapprove." If you can't wrap your mind around that, you need to set aside some time to take at least one logic and one statistics course in order to have some sort of tenuous grasp of symbolic logic.

[DanTex]

123. Except that disapproval was polled. And only 4% of the general population 100-(45+51) answered

neither. Which means that the overwhelming majority of people who did not answer "approve" in fact answered "disapprove." Why this is so difficult to comprehend for you is one of the great mysteries of this thread.

[Gravitycollapse]

124. And, as I have already stated, no demographic information was given for the disapproval rating.

Which is why it cannot be used to argue that those who disapprove of Obama tend to be more conservative. Because that isn't actually a statement backed by the statistics presented.

Do you understand?

[DanTex]

125. And given that the "neither" category is miniscule, it is totally implausible that a full 25%

of conservative Dems would fall into this category. In fact, part of the reason that Gallup didn't break down the disapproval by demographics may well be that they assumed nobody would be dumb enough to not realize this.

Around, and around we go.

[Gravitycollapse]

128. No, around and around you go in your little noggin. All flustered because you don't fucking get it.

And are either completely unwilling to get it or incapable of getting it. Either way, you don't get it. And that is a problem because at least one thing fundamental to using statistics is understanding how statistics work.

[DanTex]

129. Umm, no, I completely get it. Given that there are only 4% in the "neither" category...

"lack of approval" is an extremely strong proxy for "disapproval". Fundamental to understanding and using statistics is the ability to do arithmetic, which you obviously lack (or at least you lack the willingness).

Again, since it is completely implausible that 25% of conservative Dems are "neither", then the OP is completely correct in concluding that Dems who disapprove of Obama are more conservative as a group than Dems who approve. I understand why you keep ignoring this fact, but that doesn't make it go away.

[yardwork]

106. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that "those who dislike Obama tend to be more conservative."

What are his approval ratings among conservative Republicans?

Come on.

[Gravitycollapse]

110. And that would be fine if the OP said he or she had anecdotal evidence.

However, that isn't what the OP claimed.

[polichick]

58. My point is that liberal Dems are loyal to the party when polled by outsiders...

They hold politicians' feet to the fire but don't badmouth them to pollsters.

[Sheepshank]

66. I wonder why post #35 (explanation of poll results) isn't being applied to your post?

you are implying and interpreting something that isn't in the results....and likley isn't the reason 80% of liberal dems responded the way they did. How can you say with any assurance that you are making valid assumption to all of the responders?

As a side note, I actually can see where there may be some loyalists that responded exactly as you assumed, but 80%...nah.

OTOH, Given how the super left, purist, vocal "liberals" here on Du take every opportunity to "Hold Obama's feet to the fire", I wonder at the actual and real motivation here, when compared to the poll results from the outside world.

[polichick]

73. Well, depending on how you ask a question, you can get...

any result you want when polling. Try it sometime - it's fun and eye-opening.

imo liberals have been far too loyal to a party that is increasingly the servant of corporations.

[Sheepshank]

82. But I don't see that type of question having been asked in the poll

no evidence that is the case...you just made it up.

[polichick]

83. What type of question?

[yardwork]

108. And we vote Democratic. And we vote in every election and primary. And we encourage others

to vote for the most liberal candidates possible. And we volunteer to GOTV.

So, all in all, we liberal Dems are pretty darn important to winning elections for Democrats.

[Capt. Obvious]

109. Most people know who to blame

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024764673

Or they should.

[treestar]

118. The lying to the pollsters argument is ridiculous

Do you have proof of that?

You have no way of proving that. It would require a survey, a poll, about lying to pollsters.

[JI7]

3. it's always been this way

[RobertEarl]

4. Of course they are

The Liberals are the base of the party.

And they are the Left of the party. We just want more: Health care, Peace, Green Energy, and Bankers in jail.

It is hard to fathom the opposition to our demands. But your post shows where our opposition comes from; cons.

[Fumesucker]

6. As Johnny Ringo's now famous post shows, Reagan Democrats are the base of the party

Only those who voted for the Gipper truly know what it means to be a Democrat.

[RobertEarl]

9. You are cracking me up!!

I used to try and compete with you, in my own way. But too many jury assaults on my style have edumacted me to just quit attacking the opposition.

[Fumesucker]

14. I've lost much of my interest in politics, the only thing keeping me here now is DU is hilarious

It's like Clique and Claque, the Tappet brothers here.

[jazzimov]

5. So DU only represents DU

and has no relation to the outside (real) world.

Gee, who da thunk it?

[VanillaRhapsody]

28. I know right....this must be a paradigm shift for some on DU!

[Whisp]

97. That's been known for a long while now.

But there are a buncho here that think they have the credentials to advise the CiC on every issue known to humankind. Why, he works for Them, like a gardner and he better listen to what they say and take the orders! I paid for him with my taxes, gull dern.

If they call him a piece of shit, why he should just accept that as valid criticism - afterall he did say Abuse Me, please!

[Scuba]

7. Appears to me the liberal Dems have the President's back and the conservatives don't.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4760274

[polichick]

86. Exactly, but libs are the bad guys. Makes me want to have nothing to do...

with the party anymore.

[kenfrequed]

100. Liberal Democrats are a bit more loyal.

It is how conservative Democrats and pseudo-moderates manage to get us to take one for the team or to "be pragmatic." Of course afterwards we usually get kind of screwed over cause "where else are we gonna go?"

President Obama had the support of the more liberal part of the party because Gravel was a bit too unstable and Kucinich was getting hosed over by the press. The conserva-dems went with Hillary until they realized she wasn't going to cut it, then all the Wall streeters and bipartisans and triangulators started throwing their money at then candidate Obama.

Oddly he had to make ridiculous concessions to them by appointing an absurd number of conservadems to his cabinet and to turn the treasury and financial appointments over to Goldman Sachs. Sumner, Geitner, and Rahm continually talked him into compromising his compromises even further before anything made it to the republicans.

The presidents first two years were wasted partially by stupid Blue Dogs giving cover to republican obstructionism and fillibusters. Had the party united with progressives and supported the Great Blue Wave, then it would have been easy to pain thte GOP as obstructionists in the media instead of the Democrats in the mold of Lieberman causing such havoc.


The greatest of ironies is how much liberal democrats get blamed for the loss to Bush in 2000 by conservaitve democrats that weren't terribly loyal to democratic ideals in the first place.

[Scuba]

102. I cannot disagree with anything you wrote here.

[kenfrequed]

103. Well...

Maybe you could agree to disagree with my profuse and distracting typos? They were pretty bad.

Thank you, and I am also an ardent supporter of Warren, whatever she wants to do!

[BeyondGeography]

8. Weird

All the conservatives here love him.

[Sheepshank]

69. even more wierd.....

all those super liberals that compare Obama policy to Bush policy, finding no differences at all, and claim Obama is so NOT liberal, and are vocally disappointed.....I clearly thought they didn't love him.

[BeyondGeography]

70. It's either a sampling error

Or we're spending time with a very select group of people here.

[JI7]

10. that's how i know many of the attacks on him are right wing trolls

[Cali_Democrat]

12. Correct

The Obama bashers are much more likely to be conservative than liberal.

[RobertEarl]

13. RW trolls on DU?

Where? Let me at them. Tell us who they are and MIRT will take them out.

[Logical]

21. LOL, nice try! nt

[Cha]

24. Yeah, I'm sure some rw trolls are sneaking in for now.. but the profiteering

great derpers are giving them a run for their money.. so much so that it was featured on a rw hate site as some kind of example. For what? Taking down the President? Have at it idiots.

[sheshe2]

33. So true Cha! So true.... nt

[Cha]

36. Here's to the

Obama Revolution, she~



Democratic Support Among Young People Reaches a Record High Hello!..

Gallup suggests that the hardening support for Democrats among young people is at least partially based on the fact that the country is more racially and ethnically diverse. Democrats have embraced the changing face of the country, while Republicans have become even whiter.

REport..
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/03/30/democratic-support-young-people-reaches-record-high.html

[sheshe2]

43. The Obama ~

Yes indeed. And I love that picture!

Cha!

[Cha]

46. An integral part of that Revolution, she..

Let's see them whine about that..



More Whine?

‘I have to thank Obamacare for saving my life’

Steve Benen Reports..
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/i-have-thank-obamacare-saving-my

she~

[VanillaRhapsody]

29. Wolves in Sheep's Clothing....

Trojan Horses...

[Bobbie Jo]

65. Interesting

I've seen Obama described as a Trojan Horse on this site more than a few times.

[VanillaRhapsody]

78. Pots calling kettles black...

[uponit7771]

59. +1

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. But he's supposedly so "right-wing" himself

Why do the Blue Dogs not like him more? I thought that he was one of theirs- or so some people say..........

[TheKentuckian]

17. What the hell is he doing that anyone that calls themselves a Democrat that is too liberal for them?

Raise taxes too much?

Not enough use of the military?

Not enough fracking?

To hard on BP?

Hasn't tried hard enough to cut Social Security?

Not enough Republicans in the cabinet?

Too tough on Banksters?

What is it that these folks want and are they just registered Democrats that have been voting TeaPubliKlan for 40 years? If not then what is their definition of liberal?

Hell, same goes for the self identifying liberals, what are their policy ambitions and what is their definition of conservative?

[Art_from_Ark]

27. I think the definition of "liberal" has changed dramatically

since I first became acquainted with it back in the LBJ years.

[Puzzledtraveller]

71. Indeed

In my opinion, many that identify as liberal are actually neoliberal with statist tendencies. All too comfortable with economic and trade policies that benefit the rich with a (D), foreign interventionism with a (D) and a predilection for telling people what size soda they can have.

The (D) implies that all things being equal if there was an (R) enacting the same, their protestations would be constant and vehement.

[TheKentuckian]

120. Plausibly, which means my response to this is "You've stated the labels, now show me the agenda"

[Number23]

15. We'll add this to the list of 49,087,258 ways that stuff that is accepted as DU Gospel

nowhere near resemble reality in the real world.

[sheshe2]

19. So true, at least not where I come from. nt

[Cha]

18. Shhhh, haters don't like

to see that shit.

[sheshe2]

20. Kick!

[tarheelsunc]

22. But they're not "real" liberals, or not "good enough" liberals, or stuff. /sarcasm eom

[Bonobo]

23. That's because those that self-identify...

"liberal democrats" = conservative democrats

"conservative democrats" = republicans

[CJCRANE]

72. Moderate democrats = ?

By your definition there are no liberal Democrats.

In which case most DUers will disappear in a puff of logic.

[polichick]

93. Do you think most DUers are liberal?

I only see a few who really fight for liberal policies.

[CJCRANE]

95. I don't know. It's an anonymous message board

full of random self-appointed people.

I don't get to say who's liberal or not.

However, I've been here for 12 years knocking down and supporting those who knock down Republican talking points and I don't intend to quit.

[Scootaloo]

26. Which explains why conservative dems yowl so long and hard...

About how utterly and completely and unswervingly loyal they are to Barack Obama.

...Right, Cali_Democrat?

The rest of us like the guy, and just wish he were even better.

[Cali_Democrat]

32. "conservative dems yowl so long and hard...

About how utterly and completely and unswervingly loyal they are to Barack Obama."

Link?

[Cha]

38. "The rest of" them.. Just like to

whine a lot. And, every time something good is going on about President Obama they have to get on and take a required dump.

[Scootaloo]

41. Yup, that's us, whiny liberals, always wanting stuff.

Can't never be satisfied with "good enough to pass through Republicans," nope. We ought to be ashamed

[Scootaloo]

40. Link to what?

Would you like a link to posters calling for the mass banning of all "disloyal" voices? Don't skip the reccomended list there.

Maybe take a look at all the posters hyperventilating over the notion that the president sells policy to the citizenry?

yeah, these go to full threads. I'm lazy, read 'em yourself.

Maybe a link to the group with the site's longest ban list due to "disloyalty"? Which also happens to hold the lion's share of DU conservatives (if we understand conservative to mean people more interested in the status quo than progress, rather than the reactionary behavior of Republican "conservatives.&quot

I also have a particular poster in mind who's not posting here in this thread and so shall go unnamed, but constantly harps on about hte subject - her favorite argument is "Elizabeth Warren agrees with the president about X, how dare you be opposed!" And golly-o-mighty, this person's slavering desire to hate-fuck Edward Snowden for "embarrassing the president" is just embarassingly explicit. Just look for lots and lots of blue links

[Cali_Democrat]

42. Those links still don't support your assertion that...

"conservative dems yowl so long and hard...About how utterly and completely and unswervingly loyal they are to Barack Obama."

Sorry.

[Scootaloo]

47. Okay.

True, I'm counting "screeching about how disloyal others are" as part of the same point, since it's always done as a compare-and-contrast, "look how loyal I am to the leader!" sort of shit.

While I'm being honest though, I think you should know that I wasn't seeking your approval or affirmation.

Sorry.

[Cha]

57. Conservative dems are always running away from Pres Obama but don't

let that stop the great derpers from whining the opposite.

[VanillaRhapsody]

31. Well now we know they have officially jumped the shark...

now that the Affordable Care Act is looking like a glowing success....there will be this big switch to "We have always liked President Obama...its just that...."

[sheshe2]

34. "We had to hold his feet to the fire, we did! He asked us to!"

"It's only because we did this that ACA is a success!" ( Many here will now be seen patting themselves on the back).

[Cha]

44. I'll tell ya the ones who won't be patting themselves on the back, she..

the great derpers who have raged/whined/raged/whined at the Eleventh Hour non stop these last few days about Obamacare to squelch its popularity.

Guess what.. they lost.

[sheshe2]

48. They did indeed!

Lost but not forgotten!

Ah, they'll find a new poutrage and spin it like a top!

[Cha]

49. That's what they do..

derp

[VanillaRhapsody]

53. They will swear there was no President Obama bashing...."just a few mildly disgruntled folks

venting a little bit...." "constructive criticism" etc etc etc.

[Cha]

54. they already are saying.. it's between "idolizing" and "confronted".. vile ugly names from

the derp squad are being swept under the run as we speak.. until the next time that is..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024749963#post195

[sheshe2]

55. Don't forget the feet to the fire.

They looooove to say that!

[VanillaRhapsody]

56. Yes and they LOOOOVE to take credit for things nonsensically....

[VanillaRhapsody]

52. Oh they will say how we are not "remembering it right at all"!

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. Damn Skippy they LOST....Big TIME!

[WillyT]

39. I Told You !!!

[Cha]

50. Cheers to us!

[truebrit71]

60. What is the criteria for the phrase "liberal dems"...??

Because on it's face it would appear that those numbers are reversed...

[Cali_Democrat]

61. All political polls are done using self-identification.

It has always been like this. Think back to the 2012 election when GOPers said Dems were over sampled. That really wasn't true, what was happening was that more folks were identifying as Dems, but the GOPers just couldn't believe it so they 'unskewed' the polls.

These kinds of numbers can be painful for some because they don't fit their narrative, but reality is reality.

[truebrit71]

64. I see...100% of Liberal Dems I know don't have approval numbers remotely that high...

...for the President...

[Puzzledtraveller]

74. The same phenomenon that characterizes differences among conservatives

also exist among liberals and I believe those high numbers among respondents that identify as liberal are actually neo-liberal.

[Larry the Cable Dude]

62. No such measurement existed when Bill Clinton was President

We do not know if 85% is average, low, or high for a Democratic President, among liberal democrats.

[Cali_Democrat]

63. That's not the point of the post

The point is that Obama has a higher approval rating from liberal Dems than conservative Dems.

Oh, welcome to DU.

[truebrit71]

67. From "Self identifying" liberal dems...

...

[CJCRANE]

76. So you don't trust the poll (which is a standard poll)

but you trust self-identifying liberal Dems on an anonymous message board..

[truebrit71]

79. No, I trust self-identifying liberal dems in my social/political circle

...besides, Gallup has had problems in the past, no?

[CJCRANE]

85. Fair enough

but on a message board one person's anecdotal evidence is as good as another's.

Gallup has been out by a few percentage points here and there but when you're talking 85% and 60%, then that wouldn't make a substantial difference.

[Sheepshank]

81. And ALSO using self dentifiers

...conserva-dems aren't so hot for Obama....your point still isn't making any logical sense.

there are way many here on Du that self identify as liberal dems and screech that Obama isn't liberal enough....they are doing all sort of holding feet to the fire (in their minds I guess). Yet in the real world...not so much.

I have yet to see a trend of posts from a group of conservative dems that screech against Obama as much as the so called, self labelled, liberal dems.

[Tarheel_Dem]

88. +1

[truebrit71]

99. Possibly because the conserva-dems are more in-line with his policies...

...that aren't really very liberal at all...?

All I know is that it doesn't seem to make sense for people that prefer middle of the road policies (corporate-friendly etc.) such as those pursued by the Obama administration to call themselves liberal, when the liberal issues are more in tune with corporate accountability, pro-environment, anti-drilling/fracking/big oil i.e. things that Obama hasn't really championed at all...

That's the part that doesn't jive...

[Cal33]

68. To me it looks like more liberal Democrats want more badly the Democratic Party to win.

[Tarheel_Dem]

77. I keep telling folks that DU is not representative of anything IRL. Remember, this is the joint....

where Dennis Kucinich routinely won presidential preference polls by a landslide, and couldn't even hold on to his House seat.

[Capt. Obvious]

80. To be fair

that's not a full picture of how Dennis lost his House seat.

[Tarheel_Dem]

84. No matter how he "lost it", the result is the same. We don't do "nuance" here.

[Capt. Obvious]

87. This thread is proof of that

[Rex]

91. .

[Fumesucker]

98. Al Gore won the popular vote nationwide and didn't win in his own home state

[LynneSin]

89. If we can get those Dems out to vote at midterms no way we can lose

Just saying.

[seabeyond]

90. your title is a hoot.... while sittin' on du. nt

[Sheepshank]

94. Rec for the full thread

The snark and disbelief of outraged self identified "liberal dems" on DU that don't like to be linked to other liberal Dems that actually like Obama.

This thread is cracking me up!!!!

[Bobbie Jo]

122. Self-identified, indeed.

My favorite post from a DU'er to BBI: (troll extraordinaire) "I can't decide whether you're a caricature or a cliche'"

[Cha]

126. LOL.. oh the humanity!

[Number23]

131. DU has been HILARIOUS all day today. You can tell the president is doing right by his constituents

by the amount of "Congratulations Big O!!1 I know I've been shitting on you for six years straight but I didn't really mean it!1" and "apologies" from some for being foul mouthed (bad) vulgar (worse) and ignorant as all hell (much, much worse).

Of course NONE of this is a surprise to the president's supporters. The detractors are finally coming to realize they're on the wrong side of history and I think it's better they do this now than later.

[1StrongBlackMan]

104. I haven't read the poll numbers; but ..

that can't be right because REALLY, REAL "liberal Democrats" of DU don't approve of President Obama ... let alone the job he is doing.

[DonCoquixote]

127. translation

Stop chasing the reagan dems/third way fifth column that will always prefer a GOP. The base is ready Obama, it is ready Hillary, and if you stopped running from us to chase the allmighty mushy middle the the media has proclaimed God, you might find we can do great things.

[djean111]

130. And Bernie Sanders!!!!!!!