PPP polling: Obama has plenty of problems but his base isn't one of them

[bigdarryl]

So all the talk of Obama is loosing his base is bull.81% isn't bad but want to see that at 95% http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/07/obama-and-democrats.html

[Lost4words]

1. only a fool would say that! nt

[bigdarryl]

2. Big Ed and Cenk have been saying it

[WI_DEM]

3. Obama's numbers aren't vastly different from other presidents at similar points in their presidency

In fact, in some cases they are better. I know that the Obama dissenters on DU don't want to hear that but it's true and it's also true that among the Democratic Base Obama is quite strong--if it weren't for democrats Obama would be in the cellar. It's independents that he is having problems with.

[Jennicut]

6. Yes, it is independents that make his poll #'s fluctuate.

Dems are pretty solid...in most of the polls I look at it is 80 to 85%.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

49. Obama's numbers are far better than Ray-guns', but the M$M will have

even us Democrats falling over backwards over these stupid fucking polls!!!

...and boy do we fall for it each time. :puke:

[Exilednight]

4. That depends on how you define "base". n/t

[WI_DEM]

5. I think the pollster is defining "base" as Democratic voters of which

in his poll support the president 81/16--and in other polls by similar or larger margins. I don't think he is considering the Naderites who helped give Bush the presidency in 2000 as part of the base. They may be part of the independent left who are really not alligned with the Democratic party--and I would assume that yes, with them, Obama is not strong in many cases.

[Spazito]

14. The 81% of democrats who support him...

seems like a 'base' to me, a damn good one.

[Exilednight]

39. So the non-centerist are not part of the Democratic base?

These are the people who are pissed off. And I bet that number would be a lot worse if they were counted in the "base".

[Spazito]

43. They may well be the 5% drop from his 86% support he previously had...

or, to be even more generous, numerically speaking, they may well be the 19% that are stopping him from getting 100% support from his Democratic base.

There are always pissed off people about something or others, many just rant to release their frustrations but, when the time comes, they know who the REAL enemy is and vote for the Democrats even if they have to hold their noses to do so.

There are a few who have been pissed off since day one of Obama's inauguration and work very hard to try and convince others to be pissed off as well, it's not working but, hey, free speech is a good thing!

Edited to correct typo.

[Exilednight]

44. I supported Obama through the primary, and in the General, but .............

he's been very disappointing. He had a good first six months or so, but in the past year he hasn't accomplished much in the way of real reform. None of the bills he has signed into law have addressed the core problems.

I also take exception to you thinking that people who disagree with him are trying to get people to be pissed off at him. Many of us are just trying to push others to help push Obama. Using Congress as a scapegoat for failed legislation is getting really old, and everyone knows that it's not entirely Congress' fault. Obama fails to utilize the tools he has at hand to convince Congress to do the right thing.

And as far as, "there are always pissed off people about something or others, many just rant to release their frustrations but, when the time comes, they know who the REAL enemy is and vote for the Democrats even if they have to hold their noses to do so." Ask Al Gore how well that worked for him. 600 votes was all it took for him to lose the election.

[Spazito]

45. If you note, I referred to those who were critical from day one of his inauguration...

as being those who started off pissed off and have worked to try and get others to be pissed off as well. If one is pissed off from day one of the inauguration then it stands to reason they were never inclined to give this Administration a chance from the very beginning.

Hmmm, as to Gore, the decision was made by the Supreme Court so using that as an example does not serve you well, imo.

[zipplewrath]

7. Yup, the losing will be in his coat tails

I dont' think he is in any more serious risk of personally losing votes in 2012 than GWB was in his second race. The real damage will be at the House, State, and Local level where the loss of interest/enthusiasm results in low turnouts. Without good turnouts, the loss of independents can't be counteracted as effectively.

[Oregone]

8. One body, one vote--but is everyone equal in a reelection effort?

Sure, Obama's "base" may not be shaken too dramatically, but perhaps those that are peeling away are the "fringe" activists on the left. You know, those who get out the vote, volunteer the sweat, get their neighbors excited, create momentum. Just what if the portion of the base that is being unmotivated to vote for him is the very portion he needs the most? Just food for thought.

[BlueIdaho]

9. I keep hearing that...

And I'm not demeaning the work of progressives and liberals in the election process, but that's not the way I remember it working in Obama's victory. The thing that made the Obama victory so remarkable was the vast number of of previously uninvolved folks that held house parties, knocked on doors, made phone calls, drove voters to the polls and yes - gave huge sums of money to the cause. The Presidents victory was not about energizing the usual shock troops, it was about involving lots of hopeful Americans. For my money no one single group can claim the title of "king maker."

Are progressives and liberals important to the electoral process, yup. But at least around here there aren't enough of us to tip the scale. It takes a broad coalition of liberals, progressives, moderates, and "civilians" that refuse to be pigeon holed all looking for a better world to win an election. It will take that broad coalition to win again.

I think it can happen.

[Bullet1987]

54. That's the thing most polls won't or can't show

I wonder what Obama's numbers are among newly-registered voters who didn't vote before 2008?

[JNelson6563]

11. The "fringe" are the movers and shakers?

Really?!? During my years of real world politics fringers (for lack of better word) might show up for something once in a while, to bitch mostly, but it was the more steady Eddies who are hard at out there.

Of course they'd be there to protest if Levin had an event in the area or maybe run as a Green for office (usually an office they had no chance of winning in the first place but they are too special to start small).

Odd how my experience is so different from yours (you ARE speaking from experience, right?).

Julie

[Oregone]

12. As I said, food for thought. Its just an idea Im advancing

My experience is that those who are passionate are also educated, and to the left of the party. That passion manifests into action.

If you don't think these type of people are valuable, do not fret then. The party seems to be in agreement.

For every vote you may lose on the left, maybe you'll pick up two in the center (if they show up, double-plus good for you).

[mkultra]

15. the educated rarley sit out elections

that kind of cynasism is for those in the middle and the far far edges.

[JNelson6563]

51. Who said anything about anyone's "value"?

I simply stated the facts on the matter regarding my personal experience.

Julie

[Spazito]

16. Excellent post and absolutely right re the fringe!

It is plenty of talk, very little to none in the way of actions.

[Oregone]

17. Then why do people fret so much about what they do with their votes and time?

It seems people here are painting leftists activists as "worthless". I wonder, why such a effort to deamonize their alternatives to voting Democratic?

[Spazito]

19. Hmmm, so your post is saying the leftist activists are the 'fringe'?

The Green party and it's supporters certainly are and will remain so. "Leftist" Democrats, as far as I can see, have not been classified as the 'fringe' at all.

"I wonder, why such a effort to deamonize their alternatives to voting Democratic?"

Are you, by the above statement, advocating voting for third party candidates? I sure hope not as that is against DU rules.

[Oregone]

22. I originally put "fringe" in quotes, not leftist activists

I was probably more aptly referring to leftists activists, and using the term "fringe" facetiously to refer perceptions of them.

I guess everyone reads into it what they wish; under no means was I referring to Code Pink, for example.


"Are you, by the above statement, advocating voting for third party candidates?"

How is a question equivalent to advocating an action? I'm merely curious if they are so "useless", why there is such an effort to retain them

[Spazito]

23. Well, using the phrase "their alternatives to voting Democratic?" seems...

to indicate action as it relates to voting, which IS an action.

What are "their alternatives to voting Democratic", from your perspective?

[Oregone]

25. Noting the existence of alternatives is not advocating them

Trap well laid, but poorly played.

[Spazito]

28. LOL, your backtracking has been quite humorous....

and the fact you see a 'trap' says to me your alternatives are that which you cannot offer without breaking DU rules. That certainly gives clarity to the tenor of your posts over time. Thanks for that!

[Oregone]

33. Again, noting alternatives is not the same as "offering" & "advocating" them

Im trying to have a debate about political & electoral theory, and you are trying to stonewall that debate by laying traps to get me banned. What kind of culture does that create on this board? How does that culture aid intellectual discussion of complex ideas?

Breitbart is better at this than you. Don't quit your day job

[Spazito]

37. Some sage advice; when in a hole, quit digging...

I did not type the phrase "their alternatives to voting Democratic?", you did which caused me to want clarity as to what you meant. I now have that clarity, again, thanks for that.

[Oregone]

40. We both know, there are couches to sit on and more than two people on the ballot

So, to rephrase for the coy trap setter needing clarity:

"I wonder, why there is such a effort against the "useless" to deamonize couch sitting or voting for non-Democratic people?"

Is that question ban worthy? Are you going alert the mods to do away with anyone who invokes reality by hinting the existence of taboo activities in a question? Seriously, a ban for that is like killing a cartoonist who draws a picture of the Prophet.

You must be proud of yourself. You got me in your little hole.

While one who sings with his tongue on fire
Gargles in the rat race choir
Bent out of shape from society's pliers
Cares not to come up any higher
But rather get you down in the hole
That he's in.

I bid you Adieu

[Dr Fate]

41. What hole? I think it is a valid concern.

Prediciting that certain liberal activists might peel off is now a mark of a disloyal DEM? I doubt it.

It's not like Liberal Democrats are DLC/Lieberman types- they never actually go through with it like the pro-Bush DLC 3rd party candidate did.

Any hoo, I can still see why some think it is a legit concern.

[Dr Fate]

29. Like when "centrists" advocated support for Joe Lieberman.

The irony here is that the only successful splinterist movement among the DEM party came from the DLC and Joe Liberman, not Liberal Democrats.

Funny that Liberal Democrats are the ones that always getting accused of this, but it was the DLC that actually went forward and did it.

The DLC is the one who ran a conservative 3rd party that defeated a Democratic candidate, not Liberal Democrats.

[Dr Fate]

26. I'm more worried about activist boots on the ground than votes.

I think even most "far left" types will vote DEM- but will they show up with paychecks and volunteer work like they have been?

This thread seems to say that it wont matter either way, so maybe it does not.


If so, and we do lose numbers in congress, then the centrists need to blame the centrist voters who failed to be impressed, not the usual Liberal scapegoats.

[Oregone]

30. And *that* is the counter-argument of "driving to the center"

While mathematically this notion may prove true on paper, in real life it could *potentially* suck the air out of a campaign by eliminating many willing and able to put in the man hours.


"This thread seems to say that it wont matter either way, so maybe it does not."

Yeah, maybe not. I think its yet to be determined, and I bet not every environment will have the same results. On the other hand, "driving to the center" may ultimately impact policy over a large span of time.

[Spazito]

35. I wouldn't worry too much....

81% of Obama's Democratic base still supports him and they will be out in force as they were during the 2008 election with both donations and offering to volunteer, feet on the ground volunteering.

Many of those who state they will not go an extra inch this time are, imo, not ones who went out of their way to help elect him in the first place and I base that on the consistent posts by some highly critical of Obama and his Administration from the day of his inauguration.

[Dr Fate]

36. If correct, then no fuss, no muss. Why even have this thread?

If you are right, then the topic ends b/f it even starts. I hope you are.

[Spazito]

38. I hope I am too, the stats certainly lean that way so all is good! n/t

[Oregone]

42. Though the stats may provide insufficient evidence to draw a conclusion

The 19% of peelers may potentially contribute a proportionally larger amount of the re-election effort than the average "base" member.

They may contribute less.

As it stands, we don't really know that. If its not going to be an issue, then fine. You do seem worried though

[Dr Fate]

24. Orgone- I worked as a fundraiser for the DNC and I worked for the GA DEMS.

I can honestly say that I never- never- never- met a conservative Democrat activist in the trenches. NEVER. Even in GA.

Never knocked on a door with one. NEVER. Never manned a phone bank with one. Never. Never visited a donor to ask for a check with one. NEVER.

The only time we ever interacted with a "centrist" type was when some slicked up office guy in a suit would come down from Atlanta or DC to the office and make a bunch of excuses-which I suppose he thought was a "pep talk"- as to all the concerns we were hearing from donors, volunteers and other DEM supporters.

Your experience seems to match mine- I've never met a conservative DEMS activist except maybe on DU. I think I've seen them on TV before too-never in person, not even in Georgia. All partisan DEMS, yes- but very proud and very Liberal.

[Oregone]

27. "I've never met a conservative DEMS activist except maybe on DU"

Funny that...as they seem to remark the same about leftists activists and their limited vocal internet activity.

Thanks for sharing your experience. :toast:

Im not trying to create rules here, or even certify the truth to the notion that these type of people are the actual 19% of so peeling off. I am rather asking *IF* that is the case, will the impact be disproportional to the actual amount of disaffected (because they contribute more).

[Dr Fate]

31. I'm leaning towards your argument. Thanks. n/t

n/t

[mkultra]

13. that is if you believe the fringe are the ones who drive the organization

which is just not true. They are internet vocal though.

[Oregone]

18. So leftists activists have no enahnced value in the Democratic Party?

[DCBob]

10. Of course most of us knew that already..

Its good news! Maybe the clueless primary-fanatics on this site will back off a bit.

[RBInMaine]

20. Obama has ONE problem: the unemployment statistic which he said would take YEARS to fix.

[Dr Fate]

21. So if we lose the midterms, then "centrists" can just blame other "centrists."

Which has been my position all along.

If our strategy is to appeal to centrists and conservatives, and we lose, then that means that centrists & conservatives failed to show up for us, in spite of all the wonderful things we did for them.

I think we will do better in the midterms than FOX predcits, but if not, my guess is the DCL types will continue to blame Liberals regardless.

[BootinUp]

32. Liberals support the President

I don't know what the people who don't support him should be called, but liberals is taken. You can't have it.

[Dr Fate]

34. True- so if we lose the midterms, you can blame the centrist voters...

...who failed to be impressed by all the things Liberals like me were told we had to compromise away to them.


Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the fact that the DLC constantly attacks Liberals and claims they are opposed to Liberals on many issues- they are the ones who distinguish themselves from Liberals, not me.

I could be wrong, but I doubt you can even find a DLCer who even calls himself a Liberal.


Since we agree that real Democrats are proud to call themselves Liberals, then it sounds like you are saying that DLCers are not real Democrats. ;)

[Yavin4]

46. Obama's Got 99 Problems But His Base Aint One. Hit Me!

If you having base problems, I feel bad for you son.

Obama's got 99 problems but his base aint one.

[quantass]

47. ...AND THAT IS WHY the Obama Admin DOES NOT RESPECT it's base....

it's all about appeasing the corp interests for funding, hoping to sway some repub voters, and then come election time "act" progressive to hopefully excite enough to come out to vote. Rinse-Stir-Repeat. They know progressives would rather stay home than vote repub and hence the fake progressive "change" rant come election time. It's funny. You'd think they'd just DO progressive changes, what they're voted to do. I guess the money is SOOOOO much sweeter.

[Oregone]

48. When abstaining and waiting for your vote to be "earned" is not the default position...

...its easy to be disrespected. Its never about what a politician must do to get you to vote for them, but rather, how much abuse you will take before your *entitled* vote is no longer available. With this paradigm, its no wonder voters are treated like nothing but number to be counted at election time

[derby378]

50. That poll dates back to MARCH

And they don't even detail how many people they polled. Did they ask anyone here on DU?

[Forkboy]

52. Cool...no worries then.

[CTLawGuy]

53. you have to take into account also

that a lot of conservatives, especially in the south, are democrats. I would like to see his numbers among LIBERAL Democrats.