I'm I the only Person Surprised at Pres. Obama's Gallup Numbers?

[louis c]

Full disclosure: I love President Obama. The only fault I see in him is that he's too humble.

Having said that, I do understand my friends at DU having criticism for his handling on surveillance and the NSA. After all, I was a late 60's-early 70's radical myself.

I figured my President would take a hit from his base, without picking up any support from his haters.

However, here's today's Gallup Numbers



GALLUP DAILY Link: http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx


Aug 21-23, 2013 – Updates daily at 1 p.m. ET; reflects one-day change


Obama Approval

49%

+1


Obama Disapproval

43%

-1

[Tien1985]

1. I'm glad.

I have actively avoided posting much on the NSA/leak news. I am for transparency so far as to be considered extreme. I know it and I don't see a point in arguing over it--but I don't see the point in putting this on the president's shoulders alone. There is plenty of blame to go around.

When I voted for him, I knew there were things he'd do that I'd disagree with and I reserve the right to say when I think he's wrong. But he is still doing roughly what I expected him to do.

If polled I would say I approved of how he's doing.

[grasswire]

2. polling last week showed that he has lost 15 points among younger people.

That could be devastating for Democrats.

[Fire Walk With Me]

3. Obama Pushes for Warrantless Access to Phone Data... Again

https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/08/20-3

Amid ongoing controversy over NSA warrantless spying programs, another legal battle exposes the Obama administration's willingness to steamroll civil liberties in the name of "security."

Last week, the Obama administration urged the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a precedent-setting ruling that the 4th amendment—which prohibits unreasonable and warrantless searches and seizures—somehow allows for warrantless searches of personal cell phones, the Washington Post reports.

The case in question dates back to 2007, when a man from Massachusetts was arrested for allegedly selling crack cocaine. Police seized his cell phone and, without a warrant, searched its contents to access information that allowed them to locate the defendant's home. Evidence found at the defendant's home was then used in court, and he was convicted of a felony.

[DontTreadOnMe]

4. I am not surprised at all at his Poll numbers.

The hair on fire paranoids about Big Brother are a SMALL percentage of the electorate.

I am a lot farther to the left of Obama, but I still support 95% of his policies.

We have a very loud group here on DU that think Obama is a war criminal, and Manning is a hero. I consider that group as the Taliban on the Left.

[pnwmom]

12. And many of them have opposed Obama since the primaries

and never stopped.

[Whisp]

45. That's right. Consistent undermining. On Everything.

yap yap yap,
Obama is worse than Bush
Why hasn't Obama fixed the fucking world by now

yip yap yap

just sickening.

[Th1onein]

51. So you support drone attacks on American citizens?

Surprise, surprise.

[treestar]

69. You left out

American citizens living in Yemen, actively plotting terror attacks against other Americans.

Americans who don't identify with the country at all, and were just born there by coincidence.

Americans who entered the US on student visas rather than an Americans, because they did not consider themselves Americans.

[Th1onein]

95. That is not the issue, and you know it.

We are Americans; we hold ourselves to a higher standard. Hell, half the time, that's the excuse for waging war. And, yet, we cannot extend to others, even other Americans, the right to have a trial before we take their lives.

It's wrong, it's wrong, it's wrong, any way you paint it; it's wrong.

[cui bono]

56. It's not paranoia if it's really happening.

So glad people are concerned about the loss of our 4th amendment. Where would we be if no one ever stood up for the constitution? Sadly, there are people on here who enthusiastically welcome and defend authoritarian actions by our govt. They seem to also be happy that our first amendment is in jeopardy as well.

Unfortunately, it doesn't take much to be "a lot farther to the left of Obama" since he is about center/right. He is no where near left.

We also have a loud group of blind Obama followers who cannot stand to hear any criticism of him and will defend him even when his actions are not at all those that used to be Democratic Party principles. Some would consider those the Teabaggers on the... I don't know, certainly not on the left. Perhaps that's the problem.

And since I can't respond to his/her unfairly and rudely hidden post, I support FWWM's post. There is absolutely no reason that post should be hidden.
Juror #5 you should apologize and be very, very ashamed of yourself for your "explanation".

[roguevalley]

62. telling old man bush the country is 'kinder and gentler' because of him and having the DOJ

work to pardon Dumbya and his admin lost me. That stuff didn't depend on anyone else. He has done it himself. That is enough for me. If that feels extreme to you, take out obama in the support some give and put in Nixon. Then see if you still feel the same way.

I suppose I'll get alerted for my opinion but I am old and remember better times. Too many people are young enough that you don't remember dems with backbones and lefty politics and fighting for them even if you lost because the values and principles they contained matter. Hell, I can remember pugs doing the same. Some of you only remember back to the Reagan days. I feel sorry for people who only have that much of our country's story to draw from.

Thus, I give you one of the few perks of being old.

[railsback]

76. A.K.A. The Tea Party

Both revel in conspiracies without facts.

[orpupilofnature57]

77. It doesn't sound like you consider much " a lot farther left " 95% ?

We have some Democratic thinking people here who tell the Truth, no matter what Lies are Exposed or Who tells them.

[Thinkingabout]

5. Out of the 43% there is about 26% who thought W walked on water and would never give Obama any

Credit, another group of Dixiecrats who would never accept him because he is black. There are the anti-surveillance group and for Obama to have a 49% approval is more than great. Taking these numbers and going into the 2014 election the winning votes will have to be the grassroots campaign and GOTV run even in the face of voter suppression to pull big wins everywhere. Obama needs and deserves a Congress to get his agenda accomplished. Come on, Democrats, we can do this.

[davidn3600]

6. I aint voting for a democrat that supports the surveillance state

If there is a race where the Democrat supports the NSA...im voting for the 3rd party or not voting for that race at all.

Im not voting for a government that wants to spy on me. Im sorry, but that's how I feel and that isn't changing.

Support the surveillance state...no vote from me.

Im not voting for Big Brother.

[Thinkingabout]

7. Even if a candidate says they are not for surveillance and they take an oath to uphold the

Constitution, they are lying on one side or the other. They can't do both. You may have to forfeit your vote.

[davidn3600]

10. Since what the NSA is doing is unconstitutional....opposing it would be following their oath

[Thinkingabout]

11. I am speaking about the Constitution of the USA, warrants are being issued through FISA court

So the warrant portion is being upheld. What are you talking about being illegal?

[davidn3600]

13. Have you not been following the news? The NSA admits abuse

Recent revelations by the Washington Post have confirmed that NSA abuse of Americans' privacy through unconstitutional warrantless surveillance is far more prevalent than agency requests for information on terrorists. And it has also put to lie President Obama's claims that there has been no abuse of Americans' privacy by the NSA.

“The NSA audit obtained by The Post,” the Washington, D.C. daily newspaper revealed August 15, “dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications.” Each of those 2,776 incidents may contain up to several thousand privacy violations of Americans, meaning that millions of Americans' privacy rights may have been violated by the NSA with searches unauthorized by any judicial body. The Post reported of one of the 2,776 incidents that “the most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders.”

That last incident alone amounts to more than 10 times the quantity of all the phone records the NSA claims to have legitimately searched throughout 2012 in order to find information about alleged terrorists or their confederates. NSA Director General Keith B. Alexander claimed in June 18 testimony before the House Select Intelligence Committee of requests under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act that “in this case, for 2012, less than 300 selectors were looked at, and they had an impact in helping us prevent potential terrorist attacks.”

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/16337-nsa-revelations-prove-abuse-is-the-rule-not-the-exception

The NSA is a rogue agency with no oversight. And what they are doing is violating the constitution. It is illegal for the NSA to conduct domestic spying operations on American citizens on American soil. That is against regulations. Period.

But you keep those blinders on and keep ignoring the corruption! USA! USA! USA!!!

[Thinkingabout]

18. Have you ever had a typo? Hell yes, then who are you abusing, talk about blinders.

Yes there are rogue operators and one has outted himself and you are talking about 2776 in an audit out of how many?

[davidn3600]

27. If you trust this government...good for you. But I don't....

And I don't believe that most Americans trust this government anymore either. Obama, Clapper, and Alexander have NOT been forthcoming concerning what the NSA is doing. There is not enough oversight. The possibility for abuse far outweighs any benefits of this system.

You've got multiple whistleblowers that have said this agency is violating the law. You got the President that has lied in the face of the American people and an odd obsession in prosecuting these whistleblowers. And you expect the government to have any credibility?

If you trust it, fine. That's your opinion. But I don't. And I won't trust it until the system is scrapped or significant oversight is put in place.

[uponit7771]

29. That's the thing, wingers think the government is THE problem...I don't udnerstand

...this reflexive wingerish hate of the US gov

[sabrina 1]

40. So during the Bush era we were all 'wingers' because we didn't trust that Government?

This is what I don't trust. I don't trust Republicans in Government. So I supported Democrats to get rid of Republicans so we could start undoing the harm done by Republicans.

But we still have Republicans in Government.

Why is Clapper, a Republican, part of this administion?

Are there no Democrats who are qualified to be in that position?

Why are there so many Republicans in this Democratic Adminstration?

Maybe that's the problem. Maybe that's why we can't get rid of these Bush policies. When you have a Republican as Director of Intelligence and Republican as Head of the FBI and a Republican as SOD and how many more are there?

How about when we 'vote Democratic' and win, we get a Democratic Cabinet??

There's no point voting Democratic when you end up with Republicans in charge of the Wars and Security and the FBI is there?

What this is saying to the country is that Democrats are 'weak on Security' because they have no Democrats qualified to take over the FBI or the Dir of Intelligence etc.

I guess you have no problem with Republicans in power. Sorry, but I can't think of anything of worse for this country.

Do you know why all these Republicans have been appointed to these powerful positions when they LOST?

[uponit7771]

89. I didn't trust the Bush admin, the Bush admin was a part of the US government not the whole...still

...don't understand why so many on the left agree with Ronald RayGun

[sabrina 1]

92. Well, he President admires Reagan as he said, I don' get it either.

And we have so many Republicans in the Cabinet it's not surprising that Bush's policies would still be in place. All those 'agencies' the CIA, FBI, NSA, TSA, DHS, etc are filled with Republicans. I thought we would be seeing a complete clean up of the Government five years ago, instead we got more of them.

And that is why I don't trust the government. Because I don't trust Republicans.

[Thinkingabout]

32. Let's see, I should trust the "whistleblowers", like Snowden, nope that will never happen,

I don't trust thieves, you can continue to trust those but don't depend on most Americans to trust a thief. Snowden has lied in the face of Americans and GG has lost his integrity, nope I don't believe their story you could put a 787 through and not even get close to the wings. BTW, mark me down for trusting our government more than the rag mags read in the checkout lines.

[davidn3600]

35. It's not just Snowden

Russ Tice, Thomas Drake, William Binney...

I guess they are all lying and like being harassed by the FBI just for the fun of it, right?

NSA - dystopian Stasi on Steroids that just wants "to know everything" about anybody, anytime, anywhere--regardless of any & all constraints
-Thomas Drake

[cui bono]

58. Watch War on Whistleblowers by Robert Greenwald.

You really need to see what happens to whistleblowers. I don't know what you have against GG and why you keep saying shit about him. Back it up with reasons why you say what you say about him. You can't just malign him simply because you don't like what he's saying.

Please, watch that doc. You can get a DVD of it for free from Brave New World's site. Please. Watch it. It's not the best made doc, but it gets the info across.

[Thinkingabout]

68. GG writes about illegal spying and the information collected was from illegal spying and theft.

He has not been totally truthful in his writings, and the total underlying reason for his bitter assaults against the US, UK and others has a reason other than what has been revealed, like the book he plans to write, won't get any funds from me on purchase of his books. How so many have fallen prey to his stories is beyond me but that is a path all must walk by themselves. In the case of Snowden, he could have been a whistleblower had he followed the correct protocol, he chose not to for whatever reason. Since he stole and revealed information to a foreign media source it makes him guilty of espionage, theft and other charges they may decide to use in the future. So he is not a whistleblower, he blew that call. You may choose to continue to fall for whatever story you want, it is thin, and I don't believe their stories. Do you think Snowden was aware of what would happen to whistleblowers?

[cui bono]

71. Okay, I get it. You constantly defend the authoritarian side of this,

not caring at all about what Snowden's revelations truly reveal or are about. Not caring about the constitution and not caring about the erosion of our democracy.

Astounding.

What "story" do you think I'm falling for? The facts are contrary to what you keep arguing.

Now please, go watch War on Whistleblowers. If you really take it in you'll see why people can't use "proper channels" when being a whistleblower. Surely you've read about how the Obama admin treats whistleblowers. Being a whistleblower is not defined by going through "proper channels". Snowden is a whistleblower whether you want to admit it or not. Attempting to demoniz him by denying it doesn't change what is happening at the NSA. You are admitting that yourself when all you can do is slander him rather than defend the NSA's actions.

[treestar]

73. It's authoritarian to have laws?

And expect them to be followed?

[cui bono]

80. When they are unconstitutional, yes.

When they are secretive, yes.

When they can't be challenged in court by anyone because of their secrecy, yes.

[treestar]

94. Who decides that?

We as a people gave the government some secrecy, to be used on our behalf.

No one is hurt by these laws to even notice. If evidence is used against them, only then do they have a gripe. (and standing).

When that happens, the court will consider it.

It is not "authoritarian" to expect American laws to be followed or even defended until they are deemed unconstitutional by the courts, not by any random individual who decides the law does not apply to them.

[Thinkingabout]

75. I abide by the Constitution, we all should, defend the authoritarian side or dislike the libertarian

agenda, yep I will take the Constitution and authoritarian if it allows me to have life, liberty and a pursuit of happiness. The libertarian has not shown me any agenda on operating except to say they are against it.

You can't slander someone if the information he has been writing is a lie to begin with, he puts his name on it, he does interviews so if there is any slander it is by GG. I don't have to like everyone.

[cui bono]

81. Then why are you defending actions that are negating our constitutional rights? n/t

[Thinkingabout]

88. What constitutional right has been negated?

[cui bono]

90. The Fourth Amendment. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

91. Which Fourth Amendment, the one for the USA? Did you read all of it or did you just read a part

You just read a part of it when you thought you had the answer you wanted? Try reading every word.

[creeksneakers2]

44. An audit can't prove

there is no oversight. Saying it does is absurd. Its like something Yogi Berra would say.

An audit IS oversight.

[DontTreadOnMe]

14. He is NOT thinking... he can't understand the concept.

It's an anti-government mindset, just like the Teabaggers.

I just move on... so little time to enjoy life. Let the paranoids grow old... being paranoid.

[Thinkingabout]

24. Yes you are correct, I can not help the paranoid, it is hopeless. One thing about it, if he finds a

Candidate who is as hell bent on anti-surveillance I seriously doubt they would be elected. I will remain happy with my votes for Obama.

[cui bono]

60. Support our POTUS no matter what he does

is blind loyalty, just like the Teabaggers.

Criticizing a govt when it goes wrong is patriotic. That's not at all an anti-govt mindset. I don't see people on here saying get rid of medicare, SS or against universal healthcare or anti-taxes.

Where are you seeing this anti-government mindset of which you speak?

[Thinkingabout]

72. Blind loyalty as you are experiencing with GG, Snowden, etc, you may not like our laws but there are

reasons why most are laws. You can remain in the anti-government so you need to forget about our roads, they were built and maintained by government, the police department, forget about calling them, government provides this also. Want to enjoy our transportation systems, government regulates them also, like having controlled traffic rules, this is provided by government, want to fly, air controllers are hired by the government, want to see the bad guys go to prison, government provides this also. Want to know about the weather, information also provided by government. Keep playing your anti-government but try to like 6 months without any products or services provided by the government and then tell me your opinion.

[cui bono]

79. Really? Show me where I am blindly loyal to Snowden and GG.

You don't have enough data to show that.

Also, show me where I am anti-government. That is a talking point and you know it. If you refute that then prove to me that I am anti-government.

Being critical of SOME areas of the government, particularly certain departments, is hardly akin to being anti-government. But again, you know that and are simply throwing out a disingenuous argument to deflect and defend. What are you defending exactly?

[Thinkingabout]

86. You are concerned with what you have been told happens to your version of

"whistleblower" endures and you have considered Snowden to be one. You are accusing me of slander of GG and GG is the one who slants the truth and degraded his integrity, I don't have to slander him, he provides the evidence. You apparently believe I can listen to a DVD and I would change my thinking to go with your version. You want the right to protest surveillance and then misrepresent the Constitution. You accuse others of blind loyalty to authorities and try to cover felonies committed by calling them whistleblowers. If you are blinded by Snowden and GG and any others for their cause don't expect me to follow, you will have to get someone else to jump off the bridge with you. You want proof, re-read your post, there are clues.

[cui bono]

87. I don't see the proof... and you skipped the anti-government part.

Agreeing with one action of someone's and with someone's reporting on one thing is not blind devotion. Please provide the necessary amount of data if you want to prove a point.

I thought I was anti-government as well? Where is the proof? You made the assertion, back it up.

Please proceed, Thinkingabout.

[davidn3600]

84. This is a democratic country...

...if the people don't like a law, they have a right to protest. They have a right to demand answers from their elected officials. And they have a right to demand that laws be changed. And the people have a right to tell politicians that they won't vote for them anymore.

You seem to have the mindset that "the law is the law" and we have to learn to live with it. Well, sorry but that's not happening. We have a right to protest and free speech under the first amendment of the constitution. You may not like our dissent, but YOU will have to learn to live with it.

No one here is talking about getting rid of social security or medicare. No one here is talking about getting rid of public education or food stamps. We are talking about scrapping or radically reforming a domestic spy agency that is violating our constitutional rights. There is no reason, no reason at all, a progressive would favor such an authoritarian tool as this program.

[PowerToThePeople]

20. .

[mick063]

16. Spread the word brother

Vote the issues.

A common argument I read here:

"Why do Republicans consistently vote against their own best interest?"

I agree with that argument except one caveat:

Do not vote against your own self interest regardless of who they are.

[Thinkingabout]

26. Exactly, I hear about the single issue often, mostly from the anti-abortion group and the

Candidate could care less about those who vote except for the vote.

[otohara]

36. Corporations Know More About Us Than The Govt.

I knew the Boston police would find the persons responsible quickly because of cameras.

A pedestrian who strolls through Boston’s Financial District, an area of about 40 city blocks, can be seen by at least 233 PRIVATE and PUBLIC cameras.

Democrats can't do a damn thing about private businesses who use cameras, but a Democrat put a stop to a plan by malls to track customers in malls.

Vote Democratic - think of North Carolina.

[gulliver]

43. We need your voice to stay loud and clear on this.

We need people who believe in Big Brother to shout it from the rooftops. What would really help is if you would say you are voting Republican, though. Stink them up with your support. Don't stink up a meaningless third party.

[Liberal_in_LA]

61. i would vote for obama again and hope we could change his mind

[treestar]

70. FCOL, this does not affect you that much

The whole NSA thing is a dream up of imaginary victimhood.

[coldmountain]

82. Meanwhile a child will starve, a poor person won't get healthcare, a school will fail, a bridge will

RepubliCONS will laugh at you as they spy on you anyhow.

[davidn3600]

85. Those kids are starving under a progressive president too...

...Obama is spending billions building a domestic spy facility in Utah. Now he's banging the war drums for Syria.

But I guess I'm supposed to blindly support this nonsense all because, "the Republicans would be worse."

[coldmountain]

96. So you're saying there is no difference between Obama and Romney?

[jimlup]

8. Thanks that's interesting.... politically

Politically this should influence the 2014's in a positive way. That election will in many respects set his presidential legacy.

It seems that the republistupids are planning to play the "we hate Obama" card hard in '14 and it won't fly that well. Obama is actually a popular president and the repulistupids are incapable of perceiving this.

So the more they play the Obama is horrible card the better we do in '14 imo..

[liberal_at_heart]

9. Don't care what his numbers are. Defunding and Race to the Top have decimated our schools.

Chicago closed 50 schools last year. Philadelphia is taking out a loan to open its public schools this fall. My own state WA has been found guilty by its own State Supreme Court of not fulfilling its state constitutional obligations of funding k-12 education. Instead of addressing rising college costs by proposing to increase funding at the state and federal level, Obama suggests a rating system. Useless. His numbers are way down with me and so are the numbers of any other democrat who refuses to restore funding to education.

[DontTreadOnMe]

15. Yeah, you are correct. It's all the Dems fault. You should vote Republican.

Because we all know the Republicans will fix all our education problems.

If we could export STUPID, America could balance our trade deficit in less than a month.

[liberal_at_heart]

17. insult me all you want. It won't change my vote. You're going on ignore.

[mick063]

19. You are so persuasive

You do justice for your cause.

I expect many will change their "stupid" minds now.

[DontTreadOnMe]

21. You can't fix stupid

And I don't have the time to try either.

[Union Scribe]

50. I like all your complaints about your lack of time

to fix all us stupid liberals, yet here you are telling us in post after post about how little time you have to talk to us. I'd hate to see how much you post when you've got time.

[PowerToThePeople]

25. Seriously

There are so many nasty attacks on progressives recently. On every issue. I do not personally believe they (the ones doing it) are Democrats. Not real Democrats at least.

"Don't Tread on Me" is a phrase i hear used more by Libertarians than any other political group. Hmmmm....

[DontTreadOnMe]

28. I get this at least once a month

My username "Don't Tread On Me" goes back MANY YEARS before the Teabaggers came around.

I actually would like to change my username... how do you do it? You have to ask for some special admin to change it...?

Then again. I find it ironic when someone accuses me of something based on a username...

[PowerToThePeople]

30. I am not sure.

Go to "Ask The Administrators" forum. People usually choose user names for a reason. You likely chose yours for a reason. The meaning of the phrase has not changed since the Libertarians started using it. They started using the phrase because it stated their beliefs accurately.

[DontTreadOnMe]

49. I am never in agreement with Libertarians, and used this name since 2003

So been here a decade... it wasn't until Sarah Palin hit the scene and people who didn't agree with something I posted started calling me a Teabagger.

I m more of a cross between Frank Zappa and George Carlin. I like to call it out like it really is.

Tax the churches, tax the ammo, and jail the bankers.

[juajen]

52. Sounds good to to me, Tread.

Change your name to Charlie Brown.

[DontTreadOnMe]

53. I was thinking changing it to Chelsea

And then go on an alerting spree

[HangOnKids]

63. Weee you are on a roll

Love the alerting comment, you have had some of that have you not?

[Whisp]

46. I don't think Admin would change your username for you, but

you can register under another one and not use this one anymore. That's perfectly legal.

You will lose your post count tho and have to start all over.

[winter is coming]

33. Beatings will continue until morale improves. n/t

[Fire Walk With Me]

23. Stop projecting. n/t

[Boom Sound 416]

31. I'm surprised that unemployement has gone back to 8.8%

[Thinkingabout]

34. Are you talking about the national unemployment rate, for July 2013 it was 7.2.

[Boom Sound 416]

37. I'm talking about Gallup's front page

[spanone]

38. nope, he's miles better than any fucking rethuglican and folks know it....

[Thinkingabout]

39. Let's add on Obama's worst day he is better.

[sendero]

41. Am I the only person who would be surprised...

... that anyone places any credibility whatsoever in any poll conducted by Gallup?

[jberryhill]

42. Only surprising if you spend all day on DU

Here, the Snowden-Manning ticket is leading the race for 2016.

Elsewhere, virtually nobody knows who they are.

[Fumesucker]

67. Agreed, the Honey Boo Boo set probably doesn't know anything about Snowden or Manning

Personally I'm in favor of citizens being more aware of the issues of the day rather than less but I realize that not everyone agrees with me on that.

[Douglas Carpenter]

47. I don't want to take down President Obama-I just want to cripple the surveillance industrial complex

[grantcart]

48. Not in the least. I communicate with lots of Democrats who know nothing of DU.

Do that and you will get a considerably different opinion.

[CakeGrrl]

54. Not surprised

DU is not a representative sample of the Democratic Party at large.

The President has consistently posted over 80% approval from Dems in national polls.

Here, there are some who want to impeach, and you'd think the NSA issue is THE dominant issue today.

Not so outside of this forum.

[Just Saying]

55. +1

[Pretzel_Warrior]

57. A lot of people see the economy improving. A lot of people are getting jobs. A lot of people

are glad the wars are winding down (despite new tensions in Syria).

There's a lot to approve of in the job Obama is doing.

[treestar]

74. which is more important to people

than making themselves into imaginary victims of an imaginary Big Brother.

[cui bono]

59. I'm both surprised and not surprised.

I'm surprised because I would think a POTUS who had the backing and support he had when he first took the oath of office would have a much higher approval rating than that. He had such an enthusiastic public, he was riding a wave and he should have taken it and really done something with it. Instead he pleased the banksters and put Wall Street in the WH, Monsanto in the EPA, etc, etc, etc...

Had he really fought for the people and used the bully pulpit and gone after the crooked banksters and reregulated wall street and tried for a new New Deal, man, he would have approval ratings that matched the level of joy present when he got elected.

Instead he squandered it away. He expanded the warrantless wiretapping of BushCo, he even moved to make what was illegal legal. He increased drone strikes. He sold out on health care, with backroom deals with the insurance companies and never really even trying for the public option. He put Wall Street in the WH.

So now he's got the people who will always hate him no matter what, and he's alienated progressives. So he keeps the die hard supporters who don't care what he does and the centrists/moderate Republicans. If he hadn't alienated his base he would probably still have all those people and the base and a higher approval rating. So not surprised in that respect.

[Jim Lane]

64. Speaking as one of those have criticisms, I'm not surprised.

I agree with Fire Walk With Me's hidden post. It's very surprising that #22 in this thread was hidden. Its substance is nothing more than a fairly common criticism of U.S. government policy -- a criticism from the left. Its tone is harsher than most but, really, the DUers who are whole-heartedly in favor of Obama need to have a tougher skin, and to recognize that many of us are only half-heartedly in favor of him.

Nevertheless, if I were ever a respondent in one of the polls referred to in the OP, I would give Obama approval rather than disapproval. I would look as if I had just bitten into something sour, but I would do it. His differences with the Republicans are more important than his differences with, say, Alan Grayson.

Therefore, I'm not surprised that any hit Obama took, in terms of disgruntled progressives, is small.

[Cha]

65. Not at all. And, I'm really

grateful that so many appreciate him like I and my cyberbuddies do!

mahalo louis

[kelliekat44]

66. Because idiots and bigots are the most vocal among the population, giving the impression that most

people think like they do. This is not the case.

[devils chaplain]

78. I suspect...

A very large percent of that 49% still feel that the NSA is vastly overreaching, and this includes myself.

[LWolf]

83. I have no idea.

If you are the only one surprised.

I can't be surprised. I never look at them. My opinion of Obama, like anything else, is not based on other people's opinions. I never look at his numbers, because, frankly, I don't give a shit about them one way or another.

[bravenak]

93. Not surprised.

Most people I know are working class or poor and could care less about the scandal of the week. They say they never heard of Snowden the sneak or Glenn I'm so fly Greenwald until I refresh their memories.
People like him.