So many people get their news from sources that (if not telling outright lies) misrepresent facts and color the news to support their positions. Based on that, I care less and less about polls that purport to tell us what people think and believe.
From replies so far it sounds as if the NSA controversy is a primary factor causing Obama’s falling trust and honesty numbers to drop suddenly.
That may be so, but I am asking what Obama has done or what had been revealed about what he has done that causes the sudden drop in trust.
My contention is that Obama had not done anything to earn this lack if trust but that RW organized lying on about nine fronts had finally started some opinions specifically among young people.
It is the lies in my view because in the policy controversy at the NSA (NSA is not a scandal is it - it is a policy issue) I have just heard Rush Limbaugh blurt out a lie about that. Rush says young people, Generation Text, are angry at Obama because they don’t want the government reading their texts and emails. Yes Rush said ‘reading’ and that is a severe falsification of what the government is doing.
So why isn’t lying even by a buffoon like Limbaugh a problem that should be addressed? And why should we accept this lying as part of what happens to second term presidents as if the issues don’t matter - it’s just par for the course of politics.
I don’t think previous scandals/controversies faced by Presidents were all based on such phony trumped up BS as these thrown at Obama since he clobbered Mitt Romney quite soundly as he should have.
I heard the Sequestration is now a scandal on right wing radio morning drive talk.
Right Wingers tend to over-reach when they get excited about taking Obama down by any means. Lets hope the disenchanted Obama supporters see Republican bs for what it is.
No.
Anyone else notice that “mistakes” has now been upgraded to “controversies”
What’s the alternative? Repeal the First Amendment?
(And calling that line from Limbaugh a “lie” is a stretch, unless you paraphrased it inaccurately. For one, it’s an opinion, for two, people who are upset at what the NSA is doing would naturally be concerned that it would escalate if unchallenged).
I’ll turn it around on you: keeping in mind on the historical trends, what has Obama done to earn more trust or popularity from the public than he had in his first term?
That is to say, I can understand why Reagan and Clinton became more popular in their second terms; what has Obama done to buck the historical trend, which is the erosion of popularity over time?
They missed their chance to take him down on November 6, 2012. Are you worried Obama won’t win a third term, or what?
Yeah, the NSA thing that Bush started before Obama was in the White House? Only thing Obama is “guilty” of is not managing to cancel the whole NSA evesdropping stuff.
Well, then, I see no course of action but to hold an 8-page debate about the difference between mistakes and controversies and the alleged hypocrisy of people using the terms inconsistently.
I’ve decided that I’m not going to vote for Obama in 2016.
So Obama continued something that Bush started. We’re all supposed to panic now, or what? So the government can tell I called my wife at work from my car phone at 3:33 on Tuesday. So what? It isn’t anything the phone companies couldn’t have told us. I’m really trying hard to see what all the fuss is all about.
As for the IRS, yes it’s a scandal. The Teabagger groups were delayed in getting tax-exempt status. They should have been denied. The IRS, in the Eisenhower years, ignored a statute that requires that tax-exempt organizations operate exclusively for the public welfare, and changed it to primarily for the public welfare. Thus any group that dabbles in politics should not be granted tax exemption. That’s the real scandal.
All this scandal-mongering is doing is preaching to the choir. If you hate Obama, you will continue to hate him. For everyone else, it’s like water off a duck’s back.
Seriously…are some of you reading the same thread I am??
[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
So Obama continued something that Bush started. We’re all supposed to panic now, or what? So the government can tell I called my wife at work from my car phone at 3:33 on Tuesday. So what? It isn’t anything the phone companies couldn’t have told us. I’m really trying hard to see what all the fuss is all about.
[/QUOTE]
Panic? Did you read the OP? Did you read the responses? What thread ARE you reading?
Um…huh? Obama didn’t get a drop in his polls because Republicans or folks who hate him suddenly decided, hey…I hate Obama! 
Seriously, WTF? It’s actually folks like YOU who are discontented with Obama and are bringing his numbers down because he IS allowing a lot of the same programs that liberals and lefties bitched about under Bush. And he’s not doing all of the pet things you guys all seemed to want.
[QUOTE=aruvqan]
Yeah, the NSA thing that Bush started before Obama was in the White House? Only thing Obama is “guilty” of is not managing to cancel the whole NSA evesdropping stuff.
[/QUOTE]
Um…well, yeah. That was kind of the point. Weren’t you following along?
And for the biggest WTF moment so far, we turn to the OP:
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
From replies so far it sounds as if the NSA controversy is a primary factor causing Obama’s falling trust and honesty numbers to drop suddenly.
[/QUOTE]
I haven’t seen any replies so far that say that the NSA controversy is the ‘primary factor causing Obama’s falling trust’. What responses do you see as saying that?
How could he cancel something he didn’t know about? He’s only the president so you can’t expect him to be aware of what the government is doing.
What happens if Obama canceled the NSA data collecting and a major al Qaeda attack gets through? How quick does how many Americans turn on him for being weak and naive about the war on terror.
So Human Action do you think the NSA is “Reading” just anyone’s emails and texts?
No.
So XT, where did I say there were replies that said, “the NSA controversy is the 'primary factor”? I was not quoting posts verbatim. After filtering out the grippers and insulters and wannabe comedians I looked at what controversy was mentioned most.
And one of the mentions came from you.
So try to stick with being factual about what I’ve written.
But congratulations for putting a meaningful paragraph together for a moment there.
So why is it not a lie when someone states they are?
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
So XT, where did I say there were replies that said, “the NSA controversy is the 'primary factor”? I was not quoting posts verbatim. After filtering out the grippers and insulters and wannabe comedians I looked at what controversy was mentioned most.
[/QUOTE]
Um, in the quote I posted. Here, let me help:
Bolding, italic and underlining mine…just wanted to ensure you saw it though. You basically read what you wanted to in their responses, since no one said the NSA controversy was ‘a primary factor’, or even words to that effect. A more nuanced reading would show that the NSA thing is just another factor in liberal or left leaning Democrat discontent with Obama, which is where his numbers are slumping. There have been many things, however, that the left of the Democratic Party has been complaining about wrt Obama, and their tempo has increased…you can see evidence of this on this very board. Hell, you could see it even before the election, with some lefties here basically saying they were holding their nose to vote for the man simply because they didn’t want a Republican (granted, that was good enough since it got him re-elected, for which I’m happy). But since that’s not what you wanted to hear, and instead you want to hear how ‘scandal mongers’ on the right have been telling lies (true, as far as it goes) about Obama, and that THIS is why he’s losing ground in the polls, you decided to reinterpret the responses thus far to suit your conclusions.
I quoted what you wrote verbatim. Dude, seriously…you know, people can just scroll up and see for themselves, right?? Do you understand this concept? You don’t seem to in the various threads I’ve seen you in, but it’s really, really true. They can. Trust me on this one.
Sadly, you don’t seem equally capable.
ETA, as I missed the edit window:
[QUOTE=Me]
A more nuanced reading would show that the NSA thing is just another factor in liberal or left leaning Democrat discontent with Obama, which is where his numbers are slumping.
[/QUOTE]
I actually think it’s the drone attacks and Gitmo, even though for the life of me I can’t see how that’s Obama’s fault (Gitmo that is), that have them down so much on the man…the NSA thing is really going to piss off right winger types more, I would think, and they are already not going to pour out love for Obama in the polls. Maybe some independent types would find fault, but I think it’s a series of things, not any one that’s got him slumping in the polls ATM. As another poster up thread said, it’s pretty much normal for a second term president to slump at around this time, so it would be unusual if he wasn’t. No right wing scandal mongering needed to make it happen, nor does this indicate that lies from the right are now paying off.
You have been caught again distorting what I wrote:
“From replies so far it sounds as if the NSA controversy is a primary factor causing Obama’s falling trust and honesty numbers to drop suddenly.”
I was counting the number of replies that mentioned the NSA controversy. I didn’t suggest anyone ‘SAID’ words to that effect.
Of the few replies that were not simple idiotic nonsense of which I thought were an attempt at intelligent conversation on the topic, they mentioned the NSA.
I guess you could not find any other lame excuse to attack so you had to fabricate a new version of what I said.
OH well, you’ll go away like you did on the Bush Library thread. There’s nothing new here.
Gitmo and the drone attacks don’t account for the sudden drop from last month to now. They’ve been around for a long time.
As for right wingers being pissed about the NSA, that depends. The old McCain national security guard Republicans would be pissed if Obama didn’t continue that program. The new libertarian Republican types like Rand Paul are getting worked up about it…
But the news I heard today is that the NSA issue has caused a 17 percent change in attitude from people under thirty from approving and trusting Obama to not approving and not trusting him.
Similarly on the IRS scandal, more than half polled ‘BELIEVE’ that Obama directed the IRS to target his political enemies.\
While on this topic, is the NSA a scandal?.. It is on the Republican list of nine Obama Scandals that are being tracked and hyped and will take forever to investigate drip drip drip… licking his chops, one Republican Congressman told us on WMAL Radio in the DC area this morning.
So is the NSA a scandal because a bunch of people say it is?
It certainly could be. Being mistaken is also possible.
Assuming this is in reference to Rush Limbaugh, and relying upon your paraphrase, as I’m not a listener:
That’s not the same as saying that the government is reading their texts and emails.
By analogy: “Some people are angry at Obama because they don’t want drones used on U.S. soil”. That doesn’t necessarily mean that drones are being used on U.S. soil, it can mean that the “some people” believe that’s the next likely step in Obama’s policies, or that he’s otherwise likely to engage in that tactic, and that they oppose Obama in this.
Also, debates work better when the OP responds to other posters:
What’s the alternative to “accepting this lying as part of what happens to second term presidents as if the issues don’t matter”?
Keeping in mind on the historical trends, what has Obama done to earn more trust or popularity from the public than he had in his first term?
What has Obama done to buck the historical trend, which is the erosion of popularity over time?
Are you worried Obama won’t win a third term, or what?
I’ll leave it to the readers to decide if what you clearly said is what you clearly said. Ironic that you should bring up the Bush Library thread though, and the ‘There’s nothing new here’ comment though. It’s pretty much off the scale, irony wise.
It’s a series of things that have caused the drop. Again, nuance…you should look that term up sometime.
Cite that the NSA issue is the cause? What have you got besides your own unsupported conjecture? Or are you going to deny you just said what the second paragraph I’m quoting says?
As to the first, why would either ‘McCain national security guard Republicans’ or ‘new libertarian Republican types like Rand Paul’ factor into this new poll?? They were ALREADY against Obama, and would hardly have recently changed their views. Again, you need to look to the Democrats and Independents for this swing, not Republicans, who are pretty much universally against Obama and have been since he got elected.
More than half of who? The American public? Cite? Or more than half of the Republicans…in which case, duh. And I thought you asserted that it was the NSA ‘scandal’ that caused the drop. Which is it?
You tell me, since that’s essentially what I asked you. Personally, I think he’s done a hell of a lot, but a lot of it isn’t making more radically left leaning liberal types too happy…which is why his poll numbers have dropped. Makes sense, since I think he’s doing a great job, it’s bound to mean that liberals and lefties, at least some, are going to hold the opposite opinion.
It’s a scandal if it gains the public mass to BE a scandal. Why is this so hard for you to grasp. Personally, I don’t have a real issue with the NSA doing this, but surly you can see why lefties would feel a bit betrayed that Obama is continuing programs started under Bush, while righties…well, who cares why it would piss them off, since, again, they never would have polled for Obama regardless?