Warning Signs on Obama's Left (Previously Unreleased Poll Results)

[tishaLA]

I’ve obtained some previously unreleased data from this week’s Washington Post poll that probes in some detail whether Obama is at risk of losing support on his left — a claim that has been widely made by pundits in the wake of his compromises with the GOP on tax cuts and spending cuts.

The upshot: Some of the numbers suggest potential cause for worry, though others suggest that the left may be sticking with him in the numbers he needs, despite some signs of softening support. Here are some of the key findings, sent my way by the Post’s polling team:

* Among liberal Democrats, Obama’s strong favorability rating has dropped 10 points, from 79 percent in April to 69 percent now.

* Among liberal Dems, the percentage of those who view Obama as ”too conservative” has jumped seven points, from eight percent last September to 15 percent now.

* The percentage of liberal Dems who say they will “definitely” not vote for Obama has gone up eight points, from one percent in December, to nine percent now. (The flipside here is that the percentage who will definitely vote for him has gone up seven points, to 72 percent.)

* The percentage of liberal Dems who say Obama is “doing too much to compromise” with the GOP on “important issues” has gone up five points, from 20 percent in December to 25 percent in March (though that’s within the margin of error). http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/warning-signs-on-obamas-left/2011/03/03/AF5SmTQE_blog.html">Washington Post

the better news is at the link, but if I post more I'll go over what's reasonably allowed on DU. Please check those out, too, because they are better numbers.

[FrenchieCat]

1. I'm starting to possibly want to see Obama to lose, like many here at DU......

Just for emotional reasons. I just want to witness their world
come to a screetching halt as they have to start to battle everything
they don't want but WILL get.... including those things we progressed on
but that were taken for granted for the past 2.4 years.

Why not? Seems like these days, voting or not voting,
supporting or not supporting a candidate is based on personal emotions,
and not really based on any reasonable measure of progress and the chance
or the lack of a chance to ever attain more of it.

Should be interesting....and I will at least have a chance to enjoy
this President for his next 1.6 years....with a Republican house that
he so richly earned and deserved, cause it helps us progress on our issue objectives,
by sitting around and not doing anything more than complaining about our disappointment...
....well not really, but hey....doesn't seem like that many here really care about the
results of anything as long as people look tough, sound convicted, and act like a "leader"
and stuff.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

12. a Common occurence here at DU. Hope you aren't shocked.....

[tekisui]

36. Do you really want Obama to lose?

If so, you may be on the wrong site. If not, you may want to adopt a different tactic and tone.

[AtomicKitten]

8. Well, that certainly would be an excellent example of cognitive dissonance.

If they are successful, I do hope their initial smug satisfaction keeps them warm at night while the GOP gets another shot at dismantling America.

[tekisui]

11. The only ones I see saying they hope Obama loses claim to be

Obama supporters who feel that those who dare to critic are not worthy of his Presidency.

I want Obama to be a better President and a stronger leader. I don't want him to lose to a repuke.

[bigwillq]

13. Good post.

:thumbsup:

[FrenchieCat]

17. Well, we know that you are waiting for a primary opponent,

because even if the playing field isn't fair,
and the GOP works hard to get rid of DEM's Union money support,
while encouraging Corporte money support for the GOP,
and is being helped by a biased ass media, you made it clear
that ALL candidate should face a primary, no matter what,
and no matter the results.

[bigwillq]

25. Well, I'm not going to sit around on a message board

and complain about the rules. I'm going to be proactive and do what I can do, despite of the rules, to help elect progressive candidates. If I feel the incumbents in my state and city and nation are not progressive enough for my tastes, then you bet they should face a primary challenge. May the best man or woman win. LONG LIVE DEMOCRACY. :woohoo:

Happy Earth Day! :hi:

[FrenchieCat]

16. You must be not reading a lot of OPs......

Because no matter whether it is actually specifically said or not,
there are those who do nothing BUT criticize this President
like all day every day about everything....even when he does
something positive is "that's just campaign Obama" or
"I'm tired of talk, and want to see action" (Like Kucinich and Greenwald and the
rest of 'em are something more than just talk) .....

They do this constant criticizing because they specifically hope he loses,
because what is important to them, is their own little myopic personal satisfaction,
..... I'm not saying you--
but there are more here of those than you and I might want to believe.

At some point, they poison the rest of us with their constant beat of their
"He ain't never gonna be good enough" drumbeat.....and even Obama supporter
start to care less. So with the RW on one side throwing rocks, and Progressives
on the other side, throwing pebbles, it all just looks like folks can't stand Obama
to those who may not be following close, but get the drift.

Then same folks will blame Obama for losing.....
when they had a big hand in it the entire time.....
and the sad part is, it won't be Obama that suffers much....
cause many of us don't neccesarily believe that he was really going
to get a fair hearing to begin with, and a second term ain't neccessarily in
the cards for the First Black President. It would be nice, but I'm starting to
believe that this country is too busy hating and whining to get its shit together
and do anything more than make demands while sitting on the sideline issuing threats,
aka bunch of talk with the only promise that comes with it is not voting, or working or
donating....like that's going to punish anyone other than those who those advocating such
action claim to care so deeply about.

[tekisui]

34. So what if some only criticize. The fact that you think

that means that they want him to lose says more about you than anything. Many of those who speak freely when they think critically and don't like what is happening were strong Obama supporters and campaigners in 2008. That you are so unwilling to accept that there are people who honestly supported him and are honestly disappointed now shows you are in some form of denial.

[KoKo]

57. So far the report doesn't say that any Democrats "Want" him to Lose...You are making this up..

just to trash the report, imho. To shut the discussion down.

[CakeGrrl]

27. Oh please. There are plenty here who flat-out don't want him back in 2012.

Don't lay it off on blind support of the President.

Whether they'll make good on their promises to sit it out or vote 3rd party when push comes to shove and the reality is President Obama vs. the Republican challenger? Who knows?

[tekisui]

35. I would love a primary challenge.

I am not going to donate or make calls or canvass like I did in 2008. But, I am still going to vote for him over a repuke. To suggest that others would prefer a gopper over Obama (which some may, but they are a tiny minority on DU) is to avoid the issue.

[KoKo]

58. You are making this into some kind of "Game" with Winners and Losers and

some Media Person Hyping the Contest.

Serious Dems are not into that Media Game. SHAME ON YOU for making it down to that level.

We are fighting for what "we thought" was America and our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and a long History of folks fighting for their rights through out our History. For you to tar DU'ers with some kind of "Paint Brush" as "For or Against Obama" shows a sense of innosence about Politics that might make you want to wait a bit before you mouth off.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

59. I don't want him to lose but

On the whole he is doing a GREAT job but there are a couple of things he needs to watch. One is the $$$$ guzzling wars and the other is letting the big corps off paying their taxes. Ordinary people are worried that they are being targeted for cuts. There is a lot of grumbling.

[Avant Guardian]

38. Strange reaction to facts

Gloom and doom

[DCBob]

46. I know what you mean Frenchie..

It "might" be worthwhile just to see these clueless idiots come to the realization what they had in Obama wasn't so bad afterall. But I say "might" because actually I dont think suffering under another GOP regime is really worth it.

[Avant Guardian]

48. So, Democrats who critique the presidents policies/actions are, 'clueless idiots?'

Blind faith does really strange things to a persons power of perception

[DCBob]

49. Not those that "critique".. just those that mindlessly and endlessly bash him..

BTW, that's "President" with a capital "P". I assume you did that on purpose as some sort of "clueless" insult.

[Avant Guardian]

51. Manufacture outrage much?

[Autumn]

66. Yes. if we are wanting the president to do

what we voted for him to do, we want a republican to win and we are "clueless idiots". Kind of a stupid belief if you ask me.:silly:

[KoKo]

No "Gloom and Doom"...it's just a poll asking questions. You just don't like the answers..

so you are whining.. Let's step back and look at WHY DEMOCRATS should VOTE for Obama Next time...based on what we see NOW! Let's agree that this can all change on a dime in the next year and so this is just a poll showing that Obama needs to "adjust his course" if he wants to win back some faction of his Democratic Voters.

That's what polls are for and how Dem and Repug Campaign Operatives make their money "adjusting their Candidate" to the changing climate and mood of voters in the Country.

Why make this a "good or bad thing" when Obama's Campaign is watching this to see how they "adjust" what they say and do? :shrug: It's NORMAL in Election TIME to do this.

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

70. I will really enjoy laughing in their faces in November 2012. It will be so satisfying.

[ClassWarrior]

71. Yes, he's better than Rape-Publicans. So that means we should settle for weak Dem policies?

Why on earth do you resist wanting to make him a better President and a better candidate? Hmmm?...

NGU.

[whatchamacallit]

73. If there was ever a person whose support is purely emotional

it's you. :hi:

[creon]

78. Disagree

I do not want Obama to lose; either for emotional reasons or logical reasons.
Certainly not for emotional reasons, as I am not the prisoner of my passions.
Being the prisoner of your passions leads a person to folly.

Be careful of what you wish for - you may get it.

Not for logical reasons either: Obama is one of the very few persons in the political class has any sense.
Name one politicain in Washington who is more sensible, balanced, even tempered, measured and prudent than Obama.

Obama is the sort of man this country needs: logical, even tempered, prudent.

He may not be the sort of person many in this country want.

Wanting and needing are two different things.

[inna]

2. and the other 75% what, think he's not compromising enough and want more bipartisanship? funny stuff

[namahage]

4. No, there's a "just about right" option.

But I can see how that possibility may not occur to some.

[inna]

10. uh, the point is that *only* 25% of Dems (acc. to this poll) think he's compromising too much.

eta: which leads to consclusion that 75% of Dems are in denial, if you need further elaboration.

[TheWraith]

15. Or actually, that 25% of Democrats don't know what they're talking about. nt

[robcon]

3. The key to Obama's re-election will, as usual, be independents.

Dems will vote for Obama, as usual, within a narrow range.
Repugs will vote for whomever they nominate, as usual, within a narrow range.

The winner of the election will be the one who attracts independents. The Repugs have NO ONE who has any appeal outside of their party.

Obama has no risk whatsoever from the left, unless there is a bloody Democratic primary, or a third-party candidate. Those are the only circumstances in which the Repug might have a chance.

[Exilednight]

20. That depends on if the Green Party puts up a candidate and draws more of the

base away. If you lose a fairly good size of the base (the 25% that are unhappy with him), he will need a much larger portion of the independent vote to win re-election.

Gore didn't lose because of the independent vote, he lost because he lost votes from the base.

I would of thought that after the 2000 election that Democratic party would of learned a lesson about disenfranchising the base.

[dflprincess]

37. Gore lost because the election was rigged.

He did win the popular vote - but thanks to the electoral college all the Bushes had to do was fix the counts in Florida.

[Exilednight]

39. The vote should of never had been that close. Gore lost because of

Clinton's treatment towards the base. Liberals and progressives believed that a Gore presidency would of been a third term of Clinton triangulation.

[JoePhilly]

75. Bullshit.

Gore lost mainly because he pushed Clinton aside. Clinton's approval was very high at the end of his second term.

Gore tried to duck any connection to Clinton and the sex scandal. And a bunch of dopes voted for Nadar. And the GOP had its voter suppression out in force.

If Gore embraced Clinton and his economic policy, he wins easy. He did not. And that made the election close. Add in the Nader non sense, and some GOP suppression in Florida, and Gore loses.

[Howler]

5. Obama only beat McCain by 7% last

presidential election.

[truedelphi]

7. The real warning sign for serious candidates of either party:

Only 34% of all American voters consider themselves to be Democratic voters.

Only 24% of all Americans consider themselves to be Republican.

Add those two numbers together, and you get over 40% of all American voters desperately seeking/hoping and willing to work for someone other than a mainstream candidate of either party.

[Peacetrain]

9. That great unwashed middle everyone wants nothing to do with.. is

who will decide how we go forward..

[GeorgeGist]

32. Me thinks you're looking in the rearview mirror ...

the country is actually going backwards.

[Drunken Irishman]

24. It's been like that for decades...

[KoKo]

61. That's certainly an interesting point to consider if your stats from the poll

add up the way you say. It says that both parties need to have caution because there's a HUGE unknown about this coming election.

[NorthCarolina]

14. Despite weak, and weakening, support we still wouldn't want to primary him

with an actual progressive Dem candidate....right?

[FrenchieCat]

18. No. I think you should!

Isn't it your dream.

I say, enough on the sideline! Make your dreams come true.
I'm sure you can get enough "progressive" folks together to make it so.....

Just do it.

Like I said, I'm starting to hope that Obama loses the fucking GE....
cause if nothing else, he'll always be the First Black President,
so he certainly won't suffer. The country on the other hand just might,
moreso than anyone would now think possible.

I remember when Bush stole it, and there were many who said....
oh well, it's only 4 years, and he can't be that bad.

[Puglover]

45. I have to agree witth Tekesui up thread.

If you are honestly starting to hope Obama loses the GE then possibly you should take a break from this board for abit. I have been disappointed in Obama at times. And at other times he has surprized me with his "chess game" and I have been happily surprized. I have seen vile things said about him on this board and ya know Frenchie. It sorta goes with the territory of being the Prez. I know Obama knows this. He talks about it and grins and you can see the he lets it roll off his back. That is one thing I very much admire about the guy. He is strong and resilient. I will happily vote for him in the next election and if he is primaried(he won't be) by someone I preferred I would easily vote for them. That's politics isn't it?

[KoKo]

62. I haven't seen any DU'ers who are still not Tombstoned for speaking out..Advocating Obama Lose...

Those of us are still here have always advocated for a STRONGER..More ROBUST Democratic Party (and, while we hoped Obama could do more given we gave him with hard work a Dem House and Senate) we have waited to see what the President, himself, would do to initiate Legislation and Policy on his own like Bush II did to ram through stuff on American People with disregard to Congress.

Some of us feel he hasn't taken a "Leadership Role" but has left too much to Lackeys on Wall Street, in Congress on the Repug Side and to the Special War Interest Lobby.

So, there is deep concern by lifelong Dems who have been around decades as to how Obama will be perceived going forward with the Dem voters who vote all elections...not just Presidential but local on the Off Year Elections. The Backbone of Dem Party is BIG DONORS and VOTERS WHO VOTE EVERY ELECTION...National and Off Year.

Those are the Dems that the Polls are trying to get direction from at this point.

[namahage]

19. 1980 called.

They want their rationalization for letting Reagan win back.

[stevenleser]

22. There are plenty of Democrats running in the primary. There always are.

None of them have any chance, but there are always Democrats you have never heard of who file to run. Some of them, I am sure, are Progressives. If you go to vote in your primary or caucus, chances are several names will be available to you.

Lee Mercer is running, for instance.

[bigwillq]

26. Exactly.

There will be options. Not that I expect any serious challenge to Obama (because there won't be). But folks who want to go a different route should have that option (and they will). That's why I don't understand why so many here are against a primary challenge. There's not going to be a serious challenge to Obama on the DEM side. Some frings DEM, yes. But nothing serious.
I, for one, though, feel every incumbent should face a primary challenge no matter how weak that challenger may be.
There is nothing wrong with primary challenges. We should always have an option (s). I feel it's good for democracy. Some feel it's bad for the party. I don't.
Carter-Kennedy a possible exception but Carter was a weak incumbent to begin with. I feel it's different for Obama this time. Obama still has a ton of support from the party.

[Exilednight]

40. "Obama still has a ton of support from the party. "

He has the party's support, but do the people support the party. Right now, polling is favorable to Obama, but what happens when Republicans begin to fall and a moderate sounding Republican begins to emerge.

The poll shows that Obama has already lost 25% of liberal/progressives. Democrats make up roughly 30% of all voters. That means 25% of self described liberal/progressives make up roughly 7% of all voters. Obama beat McCain by only 7% of the vote.

[DCBob]

44. Nader could cause some trouble if he decides to give it another go.

However, I have not heard if he is even considering it again.

[FrenchieCat]

21. I'm sure that Glenn Greenwald is in Brazil sitting in his hammock

overjoyed about this. So is the media, and they will play us some more.....
till the gig is up and we're out! We'll see who'll be laughing then.

[Tarheel_Dem]

23. Well Congrats to the PL, it's working.

YAY! DUMP OBAMA! :bounce:

[bvar22]

28. The scary thing about this is that....

...The Obama Administration has created an even deeper vacuum on the Anti-WAR/Pro-Labor Left
than the "Centrist" Clinton Administration created in 2000.

[Dkc05]

29. Polls don't mean crap! He is a lock for a 2nd term

Obama knows how to get it done. Raise billions and bury the pubbies.

[Ramulux]

30. You dont need polls to tell you this

Besides my neo-liberal aunt who is in love with Obama, I don't know any democrats who approve of Obama. But then again I dont know many conservative democrats.

[karynnj]

31. One thing the poll can't measure is whether the "nos" were to signal disapointment or anger

In saying that, I think of 2007, when I was angriest at both Clintons and, in retrospect, was very unhappy with things Bill did before both the 2000 and 2004 elections. (Seriously, having a confessional televised interview less than a week before Gore's convention speaking of how he was healing his marriage was not cool - nor was putting out his autobiography in late June 2003 and making the rounds - answering the first question of every journalist - with "because I can" - not only taking the air time and the spotlight from Kerry, who needed to define himself, but bringing up Monica was not cool either.) Then in my opinion, Hillary stabbed Kerry in the back - buying into the Republican lie that Kerry disparaged the troops with her "inappropriate line - ignoring that war hero Kerry defended Bill Clinton's patriotism in 1992 when he badly needed that.

Now, having intentionally dredged up the primaries, here is my point. There was a time where when asked by a college daughter, who strongly supported Obama and didn't like Clinton, if I would promise not to vote for Clinton if she won the nomination. I realized I could never do that - and the reason was that Bush had just vetoed a bill that ANY Democrat would have signed into law. There is a difference in the two parties. For all who think Obama has not been the change he promised, the truth is that President Romney, or worse President Palin, Gingrich, Pawlenty or Trump would be far far worse.

Also consider, that Bush at a similar time, might have had many of the Buchanan Republicans disapproving - but there was no way in Hell that any of them would not "hold their nose" and vote for him to avoid one of the most liberal nominees in decades. Given the field, liberals will be in the position the Buchanan Republicans were.

[tishaLA]

33. I never got the sense that republicons disapproved of Bush

maybe I'm wrong, but it was always my sense that, despite him not delivering on a number of social issues they wanted--anti-marriage equality amendment to the Constitution, etc.--their critiques were much more muted. Now, it may be that I feel the Obama criticisms are very loud and widespread because I'm on DU, where 2/3 of the posters seem to disagree with him while the rank and file of the party seem to embrace him still, and that if I had been on FR or another nutso RW site prior to 2004 I might have witnessed the same thing. Who knows? It seems to me, though, that much more than the progressives here, republicons twisted themselves into pretzels to remain supportive of the chimp...until, I guess, the last year or so he was in office.

[karynnj]

53. The people I refered to as the "Pat Buchanan " Republicans

were the fiscal conservatives who were also completely against the war - another name would have Ron Paul, but many label him as a Libertarian, rather than Republican, though he is a Republican.

I didn't spend enough time (or any time) on FR in 2003/2004 and I am not sure what part(s) of the right wing they attracted.

[KoKo]

64. I think it's not the job of those of us Dems to "twist ourselves into Pretzels"

to defend policies we find in direct opposition to the person we elected to LEAD the Democratic Party as President. One whose speeches defy the ideology by which he seems to be governing.

Like those on the Right who kept after their dream of denying gays, women and minorities any rights...and who wanted to turn back the clock to the late l9th Century...we Democrats who remember what the New Deal meant to America and our families...we must KEEP PUSHING OUR DEMOCRATS to KEEP TRUE to their CAMPAIGN PROMISES! We've been promised and promised and compromised so much. Our job is to keep our Dems Clean...the Right's Job is to get Corporations and Religious Interests to hold true to Grover Norquist, PNAC and every Right Wing Nut Job's Corporate Scheme to bring America back to before the Civil War in America.

That's where it is today...as many of us Older and many Younger Americans see what is going on today. IMHO..

[DCBob]

41. Most of the "angry left" will come to their senses when they see the candidate the GOPers put up.

Independents are the ones he has the most to worry about.

[vroomvroom]

42. Sad that our Democracy is now a Hoax -- Voting has become: 'Who is Less Bad'

I remember a time when voting actually mattered.
Now it is just a choice between death (gop), or a protracted version of the same thing (democrats).

[DCBob]

43. Last I checked Democrats were against "death"...

protracted or otherwise.

[Avant Guardian]

47. Then why the shift to the right?

...at a time when right-wing-ism is in full collapse?

[DCBob]

50. I think he see's as pragmitism not a shift to the right, given the nature of the mess we are in..

which I agree with.

[Avant Guardian]

52. There is nothing pragmatic about shifting TOWARDS the problem

...rather than away from it.

[Exilednight]

54. pragmatism is just another word for triangulation in this White House. n/t

[KoKo]

63. But, our Democratic President just sent the First Killer Drones into Libya!

And, it killed women and children.

:shrug: How can you justify this Drone and the many to come ordered by our President? Four Wars: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and now Libya? How can this be justified if Democrats are "against Death?"

[great white snark]

55. Sad that you don't speak for yourself re: "lesser of two evils" meme.

It does matter.

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

69. actually, it's "who is better?".

Obama's continued success is our reward for putting up with this kind of pessimistic attack.

[Blaukraut]

56. Ok, I'm somewhat disappointed in President Obama, BUT

I know he had 'help' in terms of coming up short of my expectations in the form of the Senate Dems and House Dems. I did not want Bush to have the power to single-handedly change policy, so I can't be a hypocrite and hope for Obama to do so.

Yes, he could have done more, but he could also have done a hell of a lot less and a hell of a lot worse. I for one will not contribute to the negativity about the President because I'd rather not depress the vote in '12. If the vote is depressed enough, and Republicans gain more seats and maybe even the presidency, we are going to wish we had Obama to complain about again.

[tishaLA]

60. Senate Dems, yes. House? No.

The House was there for him and, were it not for the Senate, we could have gotten the most progressive legislation in decades. As it stood, the Nelsons, Lieberman, et al combined to water everything down in the most sickening ways.

[Imagevision]

65. Washington Post? geeez do you believe everything you read, remember who owns the M$M...

[kjackson227]

67. So, do liberals/progressives still want to continue with...

the progress that some liberals/progressives perceive as too slow and/or weak, or do we want to see the progression made so far come to a screeching halt, and possibly regress or worse under a Repugnant dictatorship? If we think unions, SS, Medicare, and public education are in trouble now, just wait and see what happens if we allow the Reich-wing/batsh*t crazy Republican candidate win under the influence of the tea baggers. Do we really have any idea how crazy this country will get, and do we REALLY want to go there???

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

68. The Fringe is a tiny percentage of the Left Wing. You guys completely overestimate yourselves.

Obama will be reelected.

And you'll piss and moan for another 4 years.

[kjackson227]

72. +1

[tishaLA]

74. I'm not a "you guys"

I posted the OP but I disagree with those on the left who are unsupportive of the President. I have had my disagreements and disappointments like everybody else, but I'm as firmly in his corner as I was three years ago. Posting information isn't the same thing as agreeing with it, you know.

[Mimosa]

76. I wish the President I worked to elect were 'in my corner'

President Obama has been a huge disappointment to me. His Libya bombings have pushed me into complete disaffection.

If Bush did it, I'd be puking too.

Obama has compromised WAY TOO MUCH and may compromise even more with Republicans.

[tishaLA]

77. I agree with you WRT the Libya drones

And I may agree with you about any number of other disappointments, but I reach a different conclusion than you. With many of the issues I'm disappointed in, the largest share of the blame is with the Senate and its stupidity, not with the President. But when the Resident is wrong, as he is with drones, I criticize him.

[uponit7771]

80. +1000000

[grahamhgreen]

79. Maybe that's why he's acting like he's listening to us?