Obama job approval amongst *****LIBERAL****** democrats - 87%

[uponit7771]

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

I like him, he's far from doing everything I want him to do WHEN I want him to do it but some way he's been making it to my plus side more than not...


Obama 2012!!!

Regards

[leveymg]

1. Gallup never called me.

This approval rating reflects Gallup's satisfaction level with Obama more than anything else.

[SDuderstadt]

8. Our household actually is...

a Gallup household.

[LoZoccolo]

15. They don't need to because of statistical sampling. n/t

[tsuki]

207. If you get called three times a month in an overnight poll of 100

in a country of 330 million, how statistical is that sampling?

Once a few polling companies measured statistical probability, now a lot of polling companies manage results to increase profitability.

[uponit7771]

16. What does this matter? Thx in advance

[robinlynne]

27. They didnt call anyone I know either.

[Codeine]

82. Not calling you completely throws off every poll ever conducted.

Known in statistical circles as the Leveymg Corollary.

[ProfessorGAC]

84. You're Not Serious, Are You?

That comment is just ridiculous.
GAC

[uponit7771]

90. No, these people ARE serious...read the post below...they're disassembling as we type

[polmaven]

114. Well, if they never called

you, how accurate could it possibly be? It's obviously a fraud!

[treestar]

180. Never called me either

But that's not required for polling to be accurate.

[tsuki]

206. I got a call from the Toe-Sucker's PAC yesterday. Wanted my

feedback on which Republicon candidate had to better chance of beating Obama. None, I said. Wait, I haven't asked you the questions. Yes you have. You have a poor field and none of them have a chance. Besides, the Toe-Sucker has serious moral and ethical challenges. I don't want to be associated.

[old mark]

2. K&R- Well, so much for that primary thing....nt

[bluestateguy]

3. The other 13% are at DU

nt

[seabeyond]

4. lol. seems like it. nt

[uponit7771]

7. lol!!! no doubt

[butterfly77]

36. And some of them are really..

TROLLS!!!

[4dsc]

135. count me in.

[hifiguy]

242. This Social Democrat, too.

[Pisces]

5. excellent news. They didn't call me either but I would have had full support of him.

[demosincebirth]

42. Ditto on that.

[JoePhilly]

232. +1

[dkofos]

6. Doubt he would get those numbers here.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jtown1123]

205. I doubt these numbers because if his approval rating is that high

he wouldn't be pandering to the GOP on economic issues. Doesn't make sense.

[vaberella]

250. I think you might be wrong.

Dems are a low number. Those who consider themselves Dems are a low number. The numbers that help Presidents win are with the Independents. So these numbers can actually be true.

[Canuckistanian]

9. A mile wide and an inch deep, if you ask me

I think most are gritting their teeth while giving that approval.

[uponit7771]

13. over 80% might as well be 100% in a well sampled poll, his highest approval is amongst LIBERALS

[Scuba]

17. Agreed. If Gallop called me, I'd tell them I approve....

...while those here on DU know better.


In Madison over the past week I spoke with several dozen people on this topic. None are happy with the President's performance.

[uponit7771]

20. The more progressive democrats approve of Obama more than the less progressive democrats

[Poboy]

134. This is the correct answer. Of course we will 'circle the wagons'.

[treestar]

181. Doubt 87% of liberals would do that

Lie to the pollster.

[sabrina 1]

39. That, and the people who call themselves 'liberals' now

are pretty funny. Have you noticed how many right-leaning DLC types call themselves 'liberals' these days?

I would bet that the majority of that 80+% are DLCers.

[greiner3]

151. Actually;

I don't know of any right-leaning DLC types who call themselves liberals. If anything they are more apt to align themselves with the populist conservative upwelling of late. But if you have any links I would like to peruse them.

[sabrina 1]

159. You've got to be kidding.

It's the new thing to do, to identify as 'liberal' if you are a DLCer. Can't provide links here as it would be a violation of the rules.

Not just here though. Kos, eg, calls himself a liberal when he speaks publicly but I can't think of anyone less liberal, it's almost funny to see someone who when he started out, made a point of telling people that he was against abortion, despised the 'women's studies set' driving many women off his site as a matter of fact among other things. He was discovered to have been anti-gays in the military when he was on active duty bemoaning the fact that someone gay might see him in his underwear. He is a former Republican who loved Reagan along with many others on his site, passing themselves off as Liberals now. His only real claim to being 'left' was his opposition to the War in Iraq.

He is a public figure which is why I mention him, but on his site you will find many others just like him, many who are anything but liberal, Republicans who didn't like the Christian fundy influence on their party and ended up trying to change the Dem. Party to suit their conservative beliefs. Most of them hate real liberals, and are not shy about saying so.

It's understandable actually. They have to go overboard to explain what they are doing in the Dem. Party when challenged, so they insist that they are liberals to compensate.

Most of them are loyal Obama supporters and believe he can do no wrong. Kos himself does criticize the president sometimes. But the 'liberals' over there now, will furiously defend every right-leaning decision Obama makes, such as lifting the ban on Offshore Drilling eg and accuse 'the professional left' of 'just wanting a pony' or some such garbage from their bag of DLC talking points.

Since kos was the MSM's choice of spokesperson for the 'liberal blogosphere' (although how THAT happened is a mystery as he certainly doesn't speak for most real liberals even on his own site) and since he supports Obama, I guess you could say that 'liberals support Obama overwhelmingly'. But on his own site, many thousands of real liberals have either been banned or left, and of those that are there now, at least half do NOT support this president on many issues. The word has been confiscated.

[hlthe2b]

11. I support him and will continue to...

though he has frequently disappointed me. Better than any likely alternative--by miles.

[Angry Dragon]

12. What is a liberal democrat??

[uponit7771]

14. Someone MORE progessive than a conservative democrat

[readmoreoften]

32. Who is as far right as the Republicans, but without the hysteria.

[readmoreoften]

30. Someone far to the right of an Eisenhower Republican.

[swilton]

249. My question too!

[mmonk]

18. I don't know why. He isn't a liberal.

[uponit7771]

21. I like the Obama promise meter, it defines more of what he's done to me than a lot of things

[caseymoz]

156. Have you compared it to anyone else?

It's only good if you know the average grade. Also if you know the particulars of the bills he's getting passed.

[phleshdef]

24. His overall record, when weighed as a whole, is very, very liberal.

You probably prefer to cherry pick a handful of high profile compromises and treat that as his record instead of objectively weighing the whole thing.

[readmoreoften]

29. You prefer to ignore the horrible policies he promotes to support him

in watered down half-compromises. I've never read of a single impressive thing that Obama has accomplished. Everything good is like half-toxic water that looks good on paper but doesn't function in the real world. Everything bad is a pure right-wing nightmare.

[uponit7771]

62. The poster used the word OVERALL....for a reason

[bobbolink]

74. Well, if you seriously think about it, it is "very, very liberal" to cut low-income housing,

continue the tax cut for the rich, play ball with the RW on cutting Head Start, more cuts to Food Stamps, Heating assistance, etc.

Then there is backing the bad treatment of Manning, resuming Abu Ghraib, I mean Gitmo... and on and on and on.

Yes, all of that adds up to SOCIALIST!!!

[phleshdef]

217. He doubled food stamps and the proposed cuts would still keep them well above the level they were...

...before he took office. You can't look at one cut and say "Obama cut food stamps" because thats not accurate way to make such an assessment. I don't have the exact numbers on hand, but for example sake, lets say food stamp funding was like 30 billion, he comes in and makes it 60 billion, then at some point, he cuts it back to 45-50 billion. 45-50 billion is still dramatically higher than 30 billion. You can't pass judgement on a President's record by one cut.

The same goes for heating assistance. Heating assistance was raised in the first place BY Obama as part of the stimulus bill. The stimulus bill had a 2 year expiration date. So now, with the new budget, he proposed funding that matched pre-stimulus levels. One can argue that it needs to be reintroduced at stimulus levels, thats fine. But you are going after him for "cutting" it but, had he never raised it in the first place, then you couldn't call it a cut.

His record as a whole is still very liberal. I know that irks you because you want so badly to call him a conservative. Historians will shit all over that opinion. I'm afraid thats something you will have to live with.

[bobbolink]

220. OH CrAP! The amount people are getting in food stamps has DROPPED.

It was in all the papers.

Just because you want to paint Obama as a "liberal", which he is NOT and never was, don't play with the facts... especially the facts that affect poor people.

This is what is so hurtful, and why you are losing votes... BECAUSE you simply don't care about the reality of poverty, and what it is doing to peoples' lives. You would rather paint him as some hero, and ignore the fact that people will SUFFER with less heat, etc.

When he doesn't get the votes YOU want, look in the mirror.

And don't come back with more insensitive crap about poor people.. we have HAD IT!

[phleshdef]

222. Foamy mouthed ranting that obviously ignored everything I said.

[bobbolink]

240. I'm sure Obama appreciates you denigrating potential voters.

Well done. :puke:

[phleshdef]

248. If you base your vote off what some anonymous stranger says on an Internet forum...

...then you probably shouldn't be voting.

[LanternWaste]

244. I imagine we concentrate more...

I imagine we concentrate more on the negatives of a politician we do not approve of, and concentrate more on the positive of those we do approve of.

[caseymoz]

69. I'm a 13 percenter then.

And I think the other 87 percent have severely taken their eyes off the ball. We're losing the rest of what's important under him.

Look for net neutrality to fall next while the military sets up false social networking to spread propaganda. I bet he doesn't lift a finger to stop either one. I bet in two years the Internet as we've come to know and love it will cease to exist. It will become nothing but a propaganda tool for the right via the military-industrial complex.

[dionysus]

71. there's a reason alex jones has listeners.

[caseymoz]

78. I don't know what that has to do with anything I said.

Maybe you attached it to the wrong message?

Or is it by that kind of nonsequitur that you reach the conclusion that Obama is good?

[xphile]

215. Neither I would guess is that 87%.

The bar has been pushed rather far to the right these days.

[LoZoccolo]

19. K&R! GOBAMA! n/t

[uponit7771]

22. WOW, is it out of line to label the people who unrec this news bashers?

[Scurrilous]

23. K & R

:thumbsup:

[Imagevision]

25. Compared to Bush? anyones... "likeable"

[Pirate Smile]

54. LOL. Now you guys are even going to argue that his personality is not "likable"? Good luck with

that although I find it amazing that you've gone so anti-Obama that you even want to claim he isn't really "likable".

I keep waiting for the constant Obama-bashers to start posting Birther crap - or Birther "curious" crap.

[Cleita]

26. Gallup poll? n/t

[readmoreoften]

28. Just shows how far right the term "liberal" has gone. Now liberals support torture,

the decimation of public education, putting social security on the table, defunded the National Labor Relations Board, and endless war for profit and geostrategic control. These people are only "liberal" in comparison to the fascists on the right. There are two choices in America right now: a far-right agenda or an extreme far right agenda.

Eisenhower Republicans are far more progressive than today's "Obama low-information liberals".

The power of propaganda is strong.

[EFerrari]

31. LOL! No kidding.

:)

[readmoreoften]

35. It's really disgusting. They've destroyed even the meaning of the word "liberal"

[sabrina 1]

46. DLCers have claimed the word 'liberal' now.

They did that in order to be able to infiltrate the party succcessfully. I noticed on many of the boards I frequent that DLCers use the word 'liberal' a lot unlike real liberals who don't feel the need to advertise it, with avatars and handles announcing to the world 'I AM a Liberal'.

Funny, but regardless, Obama has lost the most important democraphic which is left-leaning Independents who were mostly responsible for his victory in 2008.

[socialist_n_TN]

64. Yeah ain't it the truth. I've never been happy to be called.......

"liberal" anyway and what passes for "liberal" nowdays, I call a right wing non Bircher.

As it gets righter and righter, I'm more and more PROUD to call myself a socialist.

The fascists will shoot you.
The conservatives will cheer them on.
The moderates will watch your execution on TV.
The liberals will cry over your grave.

That was from the 60s/70s. Except nowdays, it would be the ones who call themselves "liberal" that will cheer the fascists on.

[bvar22]

149. Nailed It!

There is also the shame factor.
Whenever I answer ANY Public Poll, I give Obama the highest marks possible,
but I hope I don't have to vote for him again.
Gallup may show overwhelming support among Democrats, but I suspect that "support" is very shallow.
You will NEVER see the support Obama had at his inauguration.
Too bad he threw away that huge Popular Mandate for CHANGE. :cry:

PLEASE give me a "Democrat" to vote for.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone



Rhetoric, broken promises, and excuses mean NOTHING now.
"By their WORKS you will know them,"
and by their WORKS they will be held accountable.

[meow mix]

33. haha liberal right...

like i beleive that

[Sky Masterson]

34. How can we lower those numbers?

:hide:

[in_cog_ni_to]

37. LOL...no freaking way are his numbers that high.

I don't know one person who voted for him who will vote for him again. NOT ONE. Now that he's completely ignored the Union/blue collar working man in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, etc...he's toast in 2012. His problem is, he thinks he can go out on the campaign trail and turn on his charm, flash his pretty smile, give a few "Change We Can Believe in" speeches and all will be forgiven. NOT. People now see the rhetoric for what it was....complete bullshit.

Hopefully, he'll have a REAL Progressive challenger in the Primary. That's who will win the nomination.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[dionysus]

47. yes, 87% of liberal dems polled are paid by the obama admin.

:eyes:

[Pirate Smile]

56. LOL. Check your echochamber. It may be too small.

[ProfessorGAC]

85. A Thimble Is An Aircraft Hangar In Comparison

Good comment.
GAC

[dionysus]

49. in illinois, you don't know ONE obama voter that will vote for him again, eh?

:rofl:

[in_cog_ni_to]

145. NO, I do not.

He's not adored in my neighborhood. My sister and B-I-L in VA. voted for him, won't do it again. My niece who lives in D.C. won't vote for him again. My S-I-L in Ohio won't vote for him again. My friends in Illinois are now kicking themselves in the ass for voting for him. They won't make the same mistake twice. My mom..no go. My 2 brothers...no way are they voting for him again. My neighbors, forget it. Laugh all you want. BO has been a HORRIBLE Liberal President and you know it.

[uponit7771]

59. lol!! Achums razor comes to mind, the people YOU know are in the 13% bracket of liberal democrats

[socialist_n_TN]

65. Not to be picky, but I believe that's OCCAM'S razor.....

:)

[JTFrog]

186. Step outside of DU once in a while.

:shrug:

[Jackpine Radical]

38. In a national survey, I'd register my support for Obama.

Even though I have grave reservations about his policies.

My reasons have to do with not giving comfort to the enemy. A lot depends on the questions & choices offered. A negative poll response can sometimes be construed as a preference for the right, not the left, especially since the Reptilians and their media puppets have spent so much time portraying O as a liberal.

[CakeGrrl]

41. Always interesting to contrast the real world against cyberspace. n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

43. I'm sure many folks in the 87% said that to protect Obama...

...even though they disagree with him on many issues. They don't want to criticize him in front of a pollster because it might help Republicans.

[uponit7771]

63. it's obvious some people are disasembling

[Cali_Democrat]

67. Yep. n/t

[treestar]

183. Oh BS

I suppose next you'll tout the Bradley Effect?

Why do that? A poll response is not public.

[Change Happens]

44. God bless MY President and his family! Support him 100%...

[Scurrilous]

57. ...

:thumbsup:

[frazzled]

45. Also, the more educated, the higher the approval

I'll put that in my pipe and smoke it.

Postgraduate degree 55%
College graduate 50%
College nongraduate 45%

[sabrina 1]

50. You mean the ones who benefited more from

tax cuts for the wealthy. That makes sense. I know a few of them personally, 'liberal' yes, but fully supportive of their Bush era tax breaks.

That would definitely explain the numbers.

[JoePhilly]

234. You think the only people who have post graduate degrees come

from wealthy families???

Not the ones I know. In fact, that is a key difference I find when I meet others with post graduate degrees. Most of those who came from money, tend to be Republican. Most of those who grew up poor or middle class, are Dems.

And past that ... I know plenty of teachers with Master's degrees. They didn't grow up wealthy, and being a teacher shure hasn't made them wealthy. And again, most of those I know, are dems.

[sabrina 1]

241. No, and I didn't say that. I know many people with post grad

degrees also who didn't come from wealthy families.

Not everyone with a post grad degree is a millionaire, but nearly every millionaire has a post grad degree.

[Agony]

66. ivory tower means just that... your feet are not on the ground.

it would be different if they came down off of their tower every so often...

and some of them do... 45% apparently

Cheers,
Agony

[dionysus]

70. i'm pretty much just making ends meet and i support obama.

:shrug:

[Agony]

139. I apologize upfront for my cynicism but it is based on interaction with my friends in academia

I was not referring to economic status in my post except to the extent that some in academia make out pretty well (or maybe it is that "life is good enough"?) My post was more about my disappointment with the level of understanding, outside of their respective fields, of political realities. Very intelligent caring people, but I think with a shallowness that scares me inside an environment of higher education.

Eternal vigilance... fail. for such intelligent people...

it is not like I will never vote for Obama again... but I am not going to be quiet about my serious disappointment.

Your mileage may vary.

All the best,
Agony

[ProfessorGAC]

88. Perhaps From Learning To Think Critically?

Just asking.
GAC

[readmoreoften]

177. No faculty I know support him. However, many faculty don't keep up with current events

because they're too busy reading journal articles on obscure topics.

[readmoreoften]

178. Because education = intelligence level and political savvy.

More Republicans have college degrees than not. So how do you explain that? Want to insult Democrats who couldn't afford to finish college a little more?

[ScreamingMeemie]

246. College degrees don't equal common sense, in a lot of cases.

[malaise]

48. So DU has been invaded by

sock puppets? :evilgrin:

[undeterred]

51. That must be upside down or backwards. I swear its 13%.

And everyone I know is a liberal Democrat.

[BzaDem]

77. Shouldn't you use this as an opportunity to correct your false assumption?

[undeterred]

105. Yes indeedy

I will go out and tell all the liberal Dems I know to get over their anger and start enthusiastically supporting President Obama.

[Ramulux]

52. I'm pretty sure those people

dont understand what the word liberal means. I literally cant understand how anybody could look at Obama's record and say that its liberal, it boggles my mind.

[uponit7771]

60. Yeap, those people are ignorant and you're not....sigh, there are others in the 13% bracket too

[dionysus]

53. i'm going to make a prediction. when obama wins handily in 2012, ppl will run around screaming it's

because of DIEBOLD

[Raksha]

86. Well, maybe it will be because of Diebold!

What's to stop 'em? They can rig elections any way they want.

[JackDragna]

55. If a "liberal" approves of his job so far..

..extending wars, letting those who led the financial meltdown off the hook, abandoning unions, continuing torture, then my God, they're just not bloody well paying attention.

[2Design]

58. must have polled his staff and not us

[uponit7771]

61. ...us meaning DU'rs? Come on people, DU is NOT a real take on Obama's base

[dionysus]

68. you can explain this all day, but a lot won't get it.

[caseymoz]

73. Does that imply that his staff is? nt

[TheKentuckian]

101. Liked it when I was preaching to every soul I crossed, pounding the phones, and my ca$h was rolling

in.

Of course "liberal" has been redefined to being to the left of the Birchers so it matters little.

[caseymoz]

72. I'm a 13 percenter, then . . .

And I think the other 87 percent have severely taken their eyes off the ball. We're losing the rest of what's important under him.

Look for net neutrality to fall next while the military sets up false social networking to spread propaganda. I bet he doesn't lift a finger to stop either one. I bet in two years the Internet as we've come to know and love it will cease to exist. It will become nothing but a propaganda tool for the right via the military-industrial complex, and Obama would have facilitated all of it.

Do you see him lobbying hard to save NPR and PBS, BTW?

I'd also like to know how Gallup finds or defines liberal democrats.

[uponit7771]

87. Or the other 87% see Obama having the rules in congress changed on him during his term only and most

...people who don't like him because of his policies and a lot who don't like him for the color of his skin fighting him each and every step.

[caseymoz]

104. That wasn't true in 2009-10

And tell me, when he had that overwhelming advantage, what did he do to make sure they kept it?

And that doesn't at all explain or excuse his record on wiretapping, on human rights, and on extensive executive power, his crackdown on whistleblowers and his allowing net neutrality to flounder. etc. etc. He's kept his name off all of this, but in fact, he's the one responsible for all of it. He doesn't even have Bush's poor excuse, he's no idiot.

Plus, I would say, Harvard law school doesn't graduate very many liberals. The Chicago School of Law is a hotbed of conservatism, but hired him. His background is not very liberal. During the election he voted to release telecommunications companies from responsibility for wiretapping people. Problems with a Republican majority didn't determine that vote.

And even if what you say is anything near the truth, he could at least give a show of fighting back.

[uponit7771]

111. First off, OBama did NOT have an overwhelming advantage that is a winger talking point. Obama began

...with 59 senators which is no longer a controlling share of senators to pass legislation. FDR had 83% dems and LBJ had 67% in congress Obama had no where NEAR that number.

Two, I'm disappointed on the human rights end of the admin and I pray it's not his whitewater seeing it doesn't need to be but I think he's improved those stances even if an inch from the last admin. More needs to be done and I'm still in the disappointed end of the spectrum for those areas but I feel I can work with Obama to fix them.

[caseymoz]

125. Question: did he or did he not have both houses of Congress?

He had both houses of Congress. He had a bigger advantage than Repubs do now, yet, I guarantee you, Republicans will get more of their legislation passed now than Democrats were able to. That's a conjecture, but watch, I bet it proves true.

He made two Supreme Court nominations. One was as left as the outgoing one, the other one he made sure to nominate someone slightly to the right of who was in there, whose record was deliberately obscure.

He hasn't improved human rights an inch, get this through your head, he has made it worse. Inform yourself about this before you decide to vote for him again. He has carried through with every remaining case under Bush, using arguments as bad or worse than Bush's prosecutors. He has argued that a case can be dismissed if the executive branch says it involves secret information. When before, it only meant that the case could go on without that evidence being entered. He has cracked down, and I mean, cracked down on whistleblowers. His treatment of Manning is nothing less than a prosecutable offense, and his excuse about it was nothing less than disgusting. His dance on Guantanamo wasn't convincing given the rest of his record.

Your worried its going to be his Whitewater, no, because these are policies Republicans agree with. I'm worried about how to get this guy out in 2012. I don't care if he goes down in scandal now. He should be in prison.

[uponit7771]

136. NO! He did NOT have both houses to begin with. Simple majority means NOTHING if the filibuster is...

...abused.

Saying you have the keys to your car and no gas to start it means nothing...

Again, kkkons CHANGED senate rules...those are the facts

[caseymoz]

144. Means nothing? Watch, repubs will get more things through

Than the dems did with both houses. Even when Obama has the veto!

If they would have called Republicans to filibuster anything, to actually get up and speak and justify closing down the Senate, let Americans see Repubs closing down Congress on every single issue, and try to justify it, they could have won. But no, it was all a filibuster on paper. They wouldn't bring things to the floor due to the threat of a filibuster. Remember when Democrats filibustered just recently? Really filibustered. How long did it last? How successful was it?

And if that sounds like a gamble, they could have just changed the rules of the Senate and got rid of the filibuster. Senate rules, BTW, are done with a mere majority, if they were truly serious about anything. Filibuster isn't in the Constitution. It's a disgrace in our political system. Especially as Repubs held up so many of Obama's appointments. They had a right to do it when it was being that abused. What they call the "nuclear option" do away with the filibuster is what I call the smart and right thing to do.

[polmaven]

137. Exactly what

"overwhelming" advantage was that????? He has NOT had anything like an overwhelming advantage!

[caseymoz]

155. Both houses of Congress is not overwhelming?

An very strong showing, if not exactly a landslide, in the 2008 election, with an energized base? And potential, but squandered coattails in the next three elections?

And don't tell me the filibuster blocked him. I already dealt with that above, but to recap it anyway: They could have confronted it. They could have changed the rules on the filibuster with a mere majority vote! They could have gotten rid of it completely. Short of that, they could have forced the Republicans to actually filibuster every single issue they were threatening it. It was not a filibuster, it was a threat of a filibuster that was never challenged. Let citizens see Republicans closing down the Senate on every issue and every nomination and having to justify it on the floor. Since in an actual filibuster, they have to keep speaking, if they want to filibuster everything, let them exhaust themselves. Let them speak until they're either dead or have lost elections. Don't back down on every threat of a filibuster that appears on paper.

Obama gave away single-payer before there was any threat of filibuster, BTW. Before it was even on the horizon.

And BTW, there was an actual dissident Democrat filibuster in the Senate against Obama's compromise with Repubs on the taxes just in January. How long did it last? Did it close the Senate forever? No. The bill went through. That's right. Obama was able to put a bill through for Repubs over a filibuster by liberals in his own party, but he wasn't able to do it against Repubs on anything.

You are being bamboozled. For any progressive, Obama is the equivalent of a double-agent.

[polmaven]

192. No!

Having both Houses does not constitute an overwhelming majority. And as far as changing the rules of the Senate to change or eliminate the filibuster, it isn't as easy as all that. First, it can only be done with a simple majority at the beginning of each new Senate session. It was tried this January, and did not succeed even then.

Even if it could have been done in the middle of the session, the fact remains it wasn't, and that it existed throughout the 2 years in discussion. How does the possibility of eliminating it change the fact that it stopped so much legislation? That just doesn't make sense.

I am not being "bamboozled" by anyone. I am being realistic. There is a difference. I'm sure you won't agree, because anyone who disagrees with you is obviously too stupid to know better, but I have been around long enough to have earned my own informed opinion.

[caseymoz]

211. Strom Thurmond filibustered the civil rights bill in 1957

The whole south was solidly behind him. It passed. They've made it easier to stop a bill with the threat of a filibuster since. It's called an unwritten rule.

The fact that they could have changed it at the beginning of the session means nothing when you consider that if Obama's agenda was actually so bold, that would have been part of the drive from the very beginning. He and the Democrats had to know exactly what Republicans would do to stop a bold, liberal agenda. They had to see the Republican propaganda machine gearing up for an anti-Obama propaganda blitz.

No, I think you're too stupid because I think you're bamboozled. Intelligent people get bamboozled a lot. (That is the ones below super-genius.) Look at Bernie Madoff. A lot of intelligent people there, but when it's happening, it's like a spell. A lot of people put a lot of hope in Obama. People don't let go of that easily or at all, because disillusion and facing loss is a painful thing.

Besides, you're committed to getting him elected. It's called faith, the process of "believing in" something. To cease believing in it feels like betrayal of the cause. The barriers are emotional, not intellectual, and everybody has those emotions.

[VoteProgressive]

75. Which proves that most dems watch IDOL and not the news just like the GOP.

[uponit7771]

79. LOL!!! You guys are starting sound like the people who believe the weapons went to Syria!!!

[VoteProgressive]

89. And you sounds like the GOP supporters who never thought Bush was wrong either.

[uponit7771]

92. Obama has been wrong on multiple points, again his positives FAR outweight the negatives or things..

...that he hasn't gotten to yet.

[VoteProgressive]

98. I understand your point. But remember that the Bush supporters said the same thing.......

I'll 100% vote for Obama. But I am not happy with him and admit I had way too high of expectations. But those expectations were implemented by Obama. I fell for it I admit.

[uponit7771]

102. Obama promise meter is over 85%, given that FACT how do you STILL feel he hasn't come through on...

...what he said he'd do?

85% aint bad imho

[VoteProgressive]

106. I expected a better fight for the public option. At least an ATTEMPT......

I expected at least ONE war to be 100% over by now. All troops gone. All money stopped being spent.

I expected the patriot act to be scaled back.

I expected no one to be held with no charges and no trial

I expected bankers and bush to be put on trial

I expected tax cuts for the rich to be over!

I NEVER wanted a guy who seemed scared/cooperative with the GOP

I know he has done some stuff. but not close to what I worked my ass off for.

Last time he got $2600 (my first donation to a candidate), me walking the streets and making phone calls and my vote. This time he gets the vote only.

[uponit7771]

115. I did NOT any ANY WAY expect what you expected AFTER KKKons changed senate rules, come on people..

...Obama is NOT a dictator and hes been dealt people who would rather complain than to get him more progressive senators.

Come on

[VoteProgressive]

123. I wanted him to KICK SOME ASS. Call them out when needed. NONE OF THAT!

[uponit7771]

126. I wanted him to bust Mich Michonnel in the mouth for real, I think he could get away with and give..

...bastard a fat lip then dare someone to touch him but I know that would not have furthered any of his agenda.

[VoteProgressive]

130. OK, no need to discuss further. If you are correct his donations will exceed...

the 2008 election. If not then they will not. We will see.

[uponit7771]

132. true

[readmoreoften]

166. That promise meter doesn't account for the way those "promises" are deployed.

Universal forced purchasing of insurance is not universal health care. Most of that stuff is hyperbole and spin.

[BzaDem]

80. Perhaps the problem is with your perception, rather than everyone else's?

[uponit7771]

83. They're killing me, rather than believe very probable facts they're disassembling as I type

[VoteProgressive]

91. Or perhaps you are a blind supporter. Which is OK. Bush had many also.

[uponit7771]

95. Bush didn't have 9+ percent UE rate and an 87% approval amongst conservatives. You guys are tryin

...your best but looking at the facts its very probable the Obama bashing that shows up on DU isn't resonating in main street liberal.

[VoteProgressive]

100. Anyone who thinks Obama has done a good/great job had low expectations. I will vote for him but....

no money or time.

He disappointed me a lot.

[uponit7771]

103. I had higher expectations BEFORE I saw KKKon senators change senate rules and abuse the filibuster..

...and Harry Reid take a bribe and not change senate rules.

After I saw that I set my expectations according to the way our government works.

[VoteProgressive]

108. He never said "YES WE CAN, if the GOP cooperates"......

I thought he was a FIGHTER and not a "we just got to get along".

[uponit7771]

116. Your kidding right? What's he supposed to do bust each republican senator in the mouth?

Come on people...

[VoteProgressive]

124. Wow.....what he did was say Boehner was a great guy. Give me a break.....

this is not the guy I saw campaigning.

[uponit7771]

129. K, to your point theatre is where I give the Obama admin a D-. They've had SOOOOO many oppurtunities

...to step on the necks of the poisonous culture of the GOP and haven't taken it.

I'm going to give them 3 more years though and we'll see how he does with their worker hating policies, I'm just not going to give up on the guy now cause it aint come soon enough

[VoteProgressive]

148. That is fair. And I admit, after I see the GOP candidate I might change my mind! :-)

[Motown_Johnny]

197. His approval with Dems is 79%, the 81% number is self described Liberals

just for clarity

[Raksha]

76. I don't believe it. n/t

[uponit7771]

81. 85-90% approval is hard to believe also, but facts are facts

[Raksha]

93. I'm not so sure it's a fact. But what if it is?

Is that supposed to mean something to me? I don't jump on anybody's bandwagon, and as an early-vintage Baby Boomer I KNOW what "liberal" means. And Obama ain't it, not by a long way.

[uponit7771]

97. No one said it was supposed to be anything to you, I was posting GOOD news.

[caseymoz]

94. And just in, Obama administration is not resisting repubs cutting the NLRB

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x666029

So, is this guy anything but a Republican paperweight? Bush didn't do anything like this, even when he had the House and Senate.

That goes right to the heart of liberal values. If you're for this guy, shame on you. I'm thinking that at least much of this 87% reported as liberals either aren't by some Gallup manipulation, or they're deluded.

It reminds me of when my uncle complained, back in the '90s, that we lived in a world where Bolsheviks think they're Anarchists.

[in_cog_ni_to]

147. Gee, noticed your post was completely ignored. I wonder why?

:eyes: They hate facing the fact the man is a HORRIBLE president.

[readmoreoften]

169. He is a horrible president and I don't buy these numbers. They just don't reflect anything I see.

Or anything anyone I know sees. This website is an open, public forum. I think it's silly that to think that somehow the majority of people here different from the rest of the party. No one is vetted.

For example, I don't know of any rank-and-file union support for Obama. Teachers despise Obama. How on earth can it be 87%?

[readmoreoften]

168. Republican paperweight. Excellent way to put it. I'm stealing it.

[Modern_Matthew]

96. Didn't realize that many of us were delusional. nt

[uponit7771]

99. LOL!!! OMG!!! Another one, Obama has 85-90% approval amongst LIBERAL dems and people unrec this and

...hate it with a passion to the point of calling the 87% "delusional"

OMG

[caseymoz]

113. You just convinced me to unrec it to.

In violation of my own principles.

Because 87% of 20 percent of whatever percent even answered Gallup and whatever percentage Gallup defined liberal are delusional. By my estimate, that could be any place from 1-5 percent. In other words, it's plausible. Gallup is not known for being impartial, either.

And even if you're not delusional, Obama is still not liberal. His record tells you that. Not in the old sense. He's to the right Ronald Reagan, which is still liberal today. Me, maybe I should stop deluding myself and just say I'm a socialist. Testing says I'm as left as Josef Stalin, but libertarian rather than authoritarian.

[uponit7771]

118. omg!!!...I going to save this one if it's ok with you

[caseymoz]

133. Part of your troll porn collection, I'm guessing.

Instead of trolling, you might have figured out a way to come up with some argument for Obama. Something so overwhelming that those informed about it can forgive him for torturing or locking people away for their lifetimes. Who can forgive him for the Wikileaks/Bradley Manning disgrace.

I know that's not as funny and you can't feel the superiority of being in the majority of the minority if you do, but it just might be more important than any good side you find to Obama.

[in_cog_ni_to]

150. You just need to accept the fact that not everyone that voted for, worked for, donated to

BO is happy with what he's done. Kissing Repuke ass is NOT what he was put in office to do.

[DeSwiss]

107. ....

[gkhouston]

109. Looks like we're replacing nuclear power with the Infinite Improbabilty Drive. n/t

[truebrit71]

110. Total bollocks,..besides wasn't gallup next to useless last cycle?

I don't recall exactly, but I think that they were about as accurate as a Frank Luntz control group vote..

There is no way on god's green that he is anywhere near that high with LIBERAL Democrats...mod dems, sure, but the "professional left" not a fucking snowball's chance it's that high..

[uponit7771]

119. no, gallup was useful and has stable sampling rates. You guys aren't facing facts; Obama is liberal

...and has done a good job with liberal issues.

Obama promise meter shows such

[truebrit71]

127. Doesn't matter how many times you say he's a liberal it stil won't make it so..

Okay with torture, tax-gifts to the wealthy, no war crime prosections, HCR that is a gift to the insurance industry, wall street bailout, cutting LIHEAP, thinks that TSA groping is a great one-liner rather than a violation of civil liberties, still wire-tapping...the list goes on and on and on...

Paul Wellstone/Bernie Sanders/Dennis Kucinich/Anthony Weiner/Alan Grayson/Russ Feingold = Liberal

Barack Obame = Not So Much

[uponit7771]

131. Me nor you can argue much with the Obama promise meter, we can act like it doesn't exist but facts..

...are facts.

He's mostly done what he'd say he'd do and that's a good thing for liberals.

[bvar22]

152. And then there is THIS:

Video is forever.

Campaign Obama vs President Obama
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah

[jtown1123]

204. My bullshit meter disagrees

[whatchamacallit]

112. Cool, then he won't need my help. (nt)

[uponit7771]

120. If this is what it takes you prolly wasn't goin got give it to him n e way

[Le Taz Hot]

203. . . .

:wtf: is a 'prolly'?

[Cursive]

221. ...

WTF is a grammar Nazi?

[Le Taz Hot]

247. This has nothing to do with grammar

and everything to do with making up your own words. "Prolly" isn't a word. Here, allow me to help you. The correct form is probably. Now, memorize this as there will be a test next Friday.

[jp11]

117. Good, with information like this he can feel better about moving further to the right.

Also the OP's numbers are for Liberal Democrats only, there are options for Conservative Democrat, moderate democrat, liberal, conservative etc. Liberal democrat doesn't cover all of the people who'd call themselves democrats or liberals not to mention people who might cut off ties with the democratic party and identify as independent.

Having said that it doesn't matter as he has overwhelming support of democrats no matter your persuasion and liberals at 75%.

[ReggieVeggie]

121. his approval among whites is 39%?

seems incompatible with other stats

[uponit7771]

122. Actually, that's all he needs to be reelected now if blacks and hispanics show up in same numbers

...as 2008.

I read an article on how conservatives have shot themselves in the foot with the racial change in America. Dem presidents only need 40% of white votes and 90% of likely hispanic and black votes to be elected now.

[ReggieVeggie]

128. 87% of liberal democrats and only 39% of whites

something doesn't add up

[Marr]

141. Excellent point.

That doesn't seem to make sense.

[readmoreoften]

170. +1

[Marr]

138. Argumentum ad populum

Let's assume that poll is accurate. That doesn't say a thing about the correctness of Obama's policies, or the long term effect they'll have on the country and the Democratic Party. It doesn't validate your position on anything besides Obama's chances of being reelected.

[uponit7771]

140. It counters the "Obama base" meme and corners consummate bashers

[Marr]

142. So your point is that DU isn't a reflection of the Democratic Party's base?

I consider myself an Obama critic and I'd acknowledge that freely. However, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the small demographic that DU does (in my opinion) reflect. They're activists, volunteers... people who are worth more than a single vote.

[uponit7771]

161. DU is DU 85-90% approval rating in real world while FUDrs on DU constantly bash Obama...

...I don't have to think long on this one.

[Marr]

227. What is a "FUDr"? n/t

[Erose999]

236. FUD = Fed Up Democrat. At least I think thats what it means.

[readmoreoften]

171. "consummate bashers". What did you look up "consummate" in a thesaurus?

:crazy:

[Motown_Johnny]

143. BUT HE MUST BE PRIMARIED BY SOMEONE MORE LIBERAL!!!!!

:sarcasm:





sorry, couldn't help myself

[seabeyond]

146. this is good news, right? we are all happy on du our dem is doing well in the polls

right? seeing that we are on democratic
underground

[uponit7771]

162. No, they hate...this thread got up to 17 recs MAX!!!

[sylvi]

153. Face-saving responses

for themselves and Obama. People don't like to admit they've been sold a bill of goods, and they sure as hell don't want to allow the RWers any schadenfreude.

[Scurrilous]

154. Kick

:kick:

[Cerridwen]

157. It was 86% during the week of Nov 1-8, 2010. That worked out well. n/t

[That Guy 888]

158. It means nothing without the questions...

Not a slam on the President, just a slam on polling in general.

Did you ever hear about the poll that showed limpbaugh listeners as "well informed"? If you looked at the questions, they involved things like name recognition, i.e. "Who is the current US Attorney General". While they correctly identified then Attorney General Janet Reno, you can just imagine the "information" the dittidiots believed. That poll was used to justify the opinion that his listeners were some of the best informed, most rational people in the country.

For ANY poll I want to see the questions.

[uponit7771]

164. Dude, come on...THESE gallup polls are static and have been for years. It's not like they're asking

...a different question per president.

[avaistheone1]

160. I know of no liberal Democrats who support Obama at this point.

I think Gallup has got some funky numbers.

[uponit7771]

163. Again Accoms razor comes to mind, the people you know most likely are part of the 13%. Facts suck...

...sometimes but we must face reality; Obama isn't as bad as DU makes him out to be.

[ReggieVeggie]

173. Occam

[readmoreoften]

175. It's Occam's razor, thanks.

I'll go with campaigning with Jeb Bush, busting teachers unions and privatizing education, the Shirley Sherrod debacle, siding with the Republicans on the NLRB, supporting torture, maintaining Gitmo, bombing more Pakistanis than Bush, upping the troops in Afghanistan, acting like our occupying force in Iraq is some sort of non-military force, passing off forced health insurance as "universal health care", saying social security is "on the table", cutting housing and LIHEAP, never standing up for anything, keeping the Bush tax cuts that are killing the working class, having cabinet members who say liberals' ideas are "retarded".

Oh wait. Maybe they are if they're going to continue to back this guy.

[uponit7771]

195. I don't expect perfection

[girl gone mad]

218. At this point, I'd say you don't even expect competence.

At least you'll never be disappointed.

[uponit7771]

223. Fact not in disupute: Obama promise meter at over 80%, I like facts

[treestar]

184. People you know are not a good statistical example

Which is why Gallup does not use that as a standard.

[deacon]

165. Well, the GOP are slitting their own throats daily. Politically speaking, he can just coast.However,

he inherited a multi-headed crisis and political coasting,pandering and posturing doesn't solve deep problems. We need leadership wire to wire.

[Rex]

167. No no! Seriously! We all hate him! Just read what people say We say!

Of course their macrocosm is DU and they believe in that they control the keys to what is a balance in the force and they ways of the Wookie!

What you just said!!! +1

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

172. Low information voters. Remember when 70% supported Iraq War because they believed Bush's lies?

[ReggieVeggie]

174. and 91% approved of him after 9/11

[readmoreoften]

176. Let's not forget our newly-converted "liberals" who were two-time Bush voters

who've pushed the party to the right and "love Obama the liberal" even though they have no clue what that means.

A lot of folks here voted for Bush a few times and definitely supported him after 9-11.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

189. Even the Twit, Elisabeth Hasselbeck has said on air that the President has made wise decisions

and that the Republicans should save their campaign money until 2016. These comments were said on The View. Hasselbeck is a GOP tool.

[JTFrog]

190. You mean like Cenk and Ed?

:shrug:

[JTFrog]

191. "A lot of folks here voted for Bush a few times and definitely supported him after 9-11."

What the fuck are you talking about?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

188. Exactly.

[Skidmore]

179. He has my support even though I e-mail him periodically

to voice my disagreements with events. He has a job I don't envy and perseveres in spite of getting hits on all sides.

[eridani]

182. As if any liberal Dem would publicly diss Democrats however much they criticize their policies

No other choice, given the total conservative slant of the corporate media.

[seabeyond]

193. As if any liberal Dem would publicly diss Democrats ..., lol. you might want to peruse

this thread

[eridani]

245. I'm talking about interacting with the general public, not talking among ourselves n/t

[quaker bill]

185. Let's sum up

Since they don't agree with me:

They are (pick one or more as needed)

"not really liberal"
"not paying attention"
"not very smart"
"don't care as much as I do"

and/or

"Gallup polls suck"
"they asked the wrong folks"
"got the numbers wrong"
"asked the wrong questions"
"polls are irrelevant"

combine as necessary.

[JTFrog]

187. Winner winner chicken dinner! n/t

[uponit7771]

194. post of the thread!! Notice this thread is mostly unrec'd

[seabeyond]

196. excellent post and yes, you are right. had to take another look to see at 0

lol, amazing.

[Motown_Johnny]

199. this just proves that DU is dominated by the > 1 in 5 Liberals who

are not going to be happy with anything that can actually be passed in this political environment. (Maybe some trolls help but I am not going there)

[Major Hogwash]

210. History will record that Obama did everything that he could despite the efforts of those against him

Republicans, Tea party fanatics, blue dawgs, libertarians, anarchists, and that one pissed off guy from Arizona -- John McCain!!!

LoL

[Erose999]

198. How many liberals call themselves "Democrats" anymore? I know I don't... anymore. Its just a label

that doesn't mean anything anymore.

[uponit7771]

229. lol!!! what ever way you wanna desipher this

[NeedleCast]

200. This Poll Doesn't Say What I Want It To!!!

Therefore, I will deny it's reality and substitue my own!

Take that, high Obama approval rating!

[uponit7771]

226. Yeap, exactly....notice this thread has zero recs on it.

[Le Taz Hot]

201. LIeberman describes himself as a Liberal.

So does Bayh and Lincoln and the Nelsons, . . . The problem, of course, is in the definition. That's where these poll numbers have always been and will always be deeply, deeply flawed.

[Generic Other]

202. Well then if I stay home on election day it won't matter

because that's my intention.

[uponit7771]

228. If Obama was perfect would you stay home?

[Generic Other]

238. He just doesn't need my vote

That's the message I get.

[Bobbie Jo]

230. Bookmarked.

For those who claim, "nobody EVER says this here."

[Generic Other]

239. He has 87% of the liberal vote locked up why does mine matter?

What would I be voting for? His record as a "liberal"? I will vote for those whose actions match their promises.

[uponit7771]

243. Yeap, same here...there are more upthread and this thing has been rec'd down to zero

[Zorra]

208. Seems the term "liberal" has moved as far to the right as the Democratic Party has.

Eisenhower would be considered a flaming radical liberal by today's corporate created standards.

[uponit7771]

224. Yeap, the 13%'rs are the ones who are liberal everyone else are just "redefined"

[Major Hogwash]

209. Make that 88%, I'm backing Obama again.

So, let them eat cheese with their whine.

[Scurrilous]

212. BTTT

:kick:

[Donald Ian Rankin]

213. Liberal democrats or democrats who self-identify as liberal? N.T.

[Zorra]

214. "Corporate-friendly liberals" is the new term.

[Erose999]

233. I just call them Oprah-watchers. Oprah is a big fan of Obama, Rahmbo, Arne Duncan and the rest of

the corporatists. My mom is always telling me about who Oprah had on and what they were talking about. Usually its some kind of "Waiting for superman" corporatist spiel.

[girl gone mad]

219. The latter, I'm sure.

And in a sample size of 3500, how many do you think self-identify as liberal democrats? Ten?

[Erose999]

235. I stopped identifying as a Democrat specifically because of Obama and the DLC. So that sample would

not have included me or many others I know who have also stopped calling themselves "Democrats".

I guarantee you he's lost more people from the left-wing of the party than he will pick up from the center and the Right. Theres a reason most on the Right will never like him and its not something he can "change" or capitulate to.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

237. Is your guarantee based on guesswork or on polling? N.T.

[L0oniX]

216. Someone's got a poll up their ass.

[blindpig]

225. Whadda ya expect from liberals? n/t

[JoePhilly]

231. That other 13% must be his "base" ...

:rofl:

[vaberella]

251. I'm of the rare species on DU that supports our President. n/t