Remember yesterday’s Washington Post poll that was full of bad news for Barack Obama?

[kpete]

Overblown Overreach

David Brooks, predictable enough, says Democrats are overreaching and destined to reap the whirlwind. Frankly, I have some doubts about this. Remember yesterday’s Washington Post poll that was full of bad news for Barack Obama? The one about how the public is losing faith in him and his agenda? Well, here was their question about who the public trusts on some key issues:



more:
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/07/overblown-overreach.php

[scheming daemons]

1. The "OMG! His poll numbers are tanking!" MSM story is a big case of F.U.D. spreading

....and it's not working... at least so far.


The people still trust this President... at the same level they have all along.

[MADem]

3. What's FUD?

Fucked up disinformation?

Foolishly unvarnished dogshit?

Failed undermining distortions?

[FatDave]

6. Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (nt)

[MADem]

9. I kinda liked fucked up disinformation! nt

[FatDave]

10. It is catchy and fitting.

I don't know if it originated with them, but Linux advocates used to complain about microsoft spreading FUD back in the late 90's.

[LWolf]

2. The poll would have been more accurate, imo,

if it included a "neither" response.

[redqueen]

4. Oh for God's sake. (nt)

[LWolf]

7. No, for people's sake, and for accuracy's sake. nt

[redqueen]

8. If the respondent trusts no one, how does their opinion matter?

If we had a different electoral system, it might matter. In the one we have, those people have removed themselves from the process entirely.

[LWolf]

11. If you assume that "the respondent"

is a lonely individual in a sea of millions, it might not, although every one's pov SHOULD matter, imo.

I wouldn't make that assumption, though. That everyone but I will automatically trust one or the other.

That discounts the large number of people who vote for "lesser evils," who vote to defeat the "enemy," rather than FOR someone they "trust." It discounts the smaller, but still numbering enough to be a significant group, of people who vote 3rd party, or who are independents, because they don't "trust" either of the super-parties.

Just because people VOTE for a candidate, doesn't mean they trust that politician, or that they should.

[TexasObserver]

5. Recommend. Any time the right is pulling out polls from their pollster lackeys ...

It's so transparent. One of the corporate toadie pollsters suddenly runs a poll that appears to show the president waning, and they focus on that one little piece of information. It's fabricating news, and they do it all the time.

The closer we get to health care being passed, the more we will see the president attacked and undermined.