Even his fans don’t like him

Roll Call:

Netroots Straw Poll Shows Obama Still Strong

Despite their grousing about the administration during the Netroots Nation conference, liberal activists and bloggers are relatively happy with President Barack Obama’s performance.

A straw poll conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research showed that 80 percent either approve or strongly approve of the president more than a year before voters head to the polls to decide whether he deserves a second term. The results broke down to 27 percent strongly approving of Obama and 53 percent approving “somewhat.” Thirteen percent said they “somewhat disapprove,” and 7 percent strongly disapprove of the president.

The Nutroots are the most rabid Obots on the planet. If 20 percent of them disapprove of him he is in deep doo-doo.

Not only that but only 27 percent “strongly approve.” That demonstrates a big enthusiasm gap compared to 2008.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Even his fans don’t like him

  1. ralphb says:

    GTFO can’t come too soon.

  2. GTFO already. And take your fucking Obot idiots with you. Take a hike. Make like a tree and leave. Scoot. Vamanos. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

  3. WMCB says:

    Heh, I have that bumper sticker on my car.

  4. Three Wickets says:

    Axelrod Assures Admirers: “It’s Cool To Be An Obama Supporter” I thought this guy was supposed to be smart.

  5. Mr. Mike says:

    Some what approve = At least he ain’t a republican. The “some what” group is over two thirds the polling sample, somebody on the Obama re-election team must be soiling their adult diapers. 27%, isn’t that close to Bush the Lesser’s approval numbers when he left?

  6. Mimi says:

    Everything about this President, his campaign, his acolytes, his advisers, his most rabid supporters, his level of competence, his smart nasty mouth, and his shallow interests reminds me of high school. I now think of him as the Prom
    King/National Honor Society/ Teacher Pet Suckup Champ/Student Council President. He is the original BMOC. And no one likes him just like in high school.

  7. foxyladi14 says:

    he just might get fired
    and by the way
    Happy Summer Solstice! everyone!!!!!! 🙂

  8. DeniseVB says:

    No “hostilities” in Libya, though the troops are drawing combat pay ?


    When you’ve lost WaPo……….:D

    • myiq2xu says:

      I remember when Ronnie Raygun bombed Ka-daffy’s palace and killed his daughter. The WH said we weren’t trying to kill him.

      Some comedian said “C’mon Ron, that’s his house. It’s where he lives!”.

      • WMCB says:

        Yeah, don’t think I could get away with that defense if I bombed someone’s house. “It wasn’t hostile! I wasn’t trying to kill anyone!”

  9. WMCB says:

    “If an iPhone were held up and used to film during a concert infra-red sensors would detect it.”
    “These sensors would then contact the iPhone and automatically disable its camera function.”
    This will only be used to keep concertgoers from infringing on copyrights, right? It would never, ever be used by the government to prevent us from filming demonstrations, police behavior, and so forth.


    Imagine the reaction on the Left if a large cell phone company who was cozy with and a big donor to GWB had announced a new technology that would enable them to detect camera use and remotely TURN OFF the phone’s camera/video recording capability at will.

    The Left would go ballistic. No more youtubes of embarrassing moments of politicians. No more citizen stings. No more footage of cops beating citizens, or TSA abusing their power. And if the company in question had pinky-promised that the capability was ONLY going to be used for things like blackouts of recording concerts to protect from copyright infringement? Even leaving aside the fact that private companies should not be in the business of enforcing the law, we the Left would have screamed bloody murder at the very idea of free speech being threatened that way, and at the spectre of our phones being infrared zapped as we try to document legal peaceful protestors being harassed by the cops.

    But it’s Apple, and Apple is BFF with the angelic Obama who is NOT AT ALL like that dirty evil Bush who expanded govt powers and started wars and kept GITMO going and executive ordered what hadn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of being passed by a representative congress, and reinterpreted law to suit him via signing statements……

    So, if private companies with political connections are to be enforcing the law, then where’s the line? Can a car manufacturer put in a chip that will stop your car if they even suspect you of something illegal? With no due process? Can an electric service provider or an internet provider hit the kill switch to a private home? Or a business? Or a political protest group’s offices?
    And is the Left, who would have palpitations at this kind of power in the hands of ,say, a Haliburton, cognizant of the fact that power once ceded accrues to corporations and govt regardless of political affiliation? That it can’t be rolled back once a “good guy” is no longer in office, and the corporate players change?

    See, I think about these things.

    I have not changed. I am just as suspicious of the gov/corp nexus as I ever was. I HAVE NOT CHANGED. But somehow, applying my entirely consistent suspicions to an administration with a D after its name instead of an R means I have radically morphed into a fire-breathing republican and betrayed every principle I ever stood for.

    Fuck em all – it’s THEY who traded principle for pom poms and whining cringing pleading co-dependent excuse-making for their abusive boyfriend. Not me. I am the same as I ever was.

    • votermom says:

      Wow. So basically iPhones are just being rented out, not bought, if Apple can do this.

      I have not changed. I am just as suspicious of the gov/corp nexus as I ever was. I HAVE NOT CHANGED. But somehow, applying my entirely consistent suspicions to an administration with a D after its name instead of an R means I have radically morphed into a fire-breathing republican and betrayed every principle I ever stood for.

      Yup. Principles before Party. They never understood that.

    • Three Wickets says:

      Obots, Progressives, they all seem confused. Most didn’t support Obama on principles, so when campaign promises are betrayed, they either don’t care or don’t understand or don’t know what to think. Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, I’m sure they all watch us. Hackers, leakers, spies, security specialists are probably all mixed in together. I assume zero privacy when I’m on the web. Facebook did hire Joe Lockhart recently instead of Gibbs to lead their government relations work, and their popular COO also comes from the Clinton administration. Google has always been in the tank for Obama.

    • WMCB says:

      Good article. I liked this point:

      Economists have a particular fondness for studying what Democrats and Republicans have become: the longest-lived duopoly in American history. The Nobel Prize-winning economist John Forbes Nash (the subject of the book and movie “A Beautiful Mind”) was all about duopolies. He showed that two powerful competitors frequently end up locked in a stable, mutually beneficial dance of tit-for-tat—they collude, in short, to carve up a captive market.

      Economists have paid less attention to the chief vulnerability of duopolies: How collusion against the interests of customers produces an inevitable revolt, sweeping one or both dominant players into the dustbin of history.

      I am seeing a LOT of people who are sick of the duopoly, both left and right-leaning. They may not agree on what comes after, but they agree that the current system fucks us all, and needs to go. Lefties who will abandon the democrats to push green or other candidates, righties who will abandon the old GOP to push populist teaparty types. I myself hope BOTH parties get dismantled by their respective constituents, and both power bases destroyed. I’d rather have an honest election and debate with a true-believer grassroots conservative or a true-believer communist than continue to play this entrenched duopoly game. TEAR IT DOWN. Both of them.

  10. DeniseVB says:

    Gotta love John Stossel 😀


    “I used to be a Kennedy-style “liberal.” Then I wised up. Now I’m a libertarian.

    But what does that mean?

    When I asked people on the street, half had no clue.

    We know that conservatives want government to conserve traditional values. They say they’re for limited government, but they’re pro-drug war, pro-immigration restriction and anti-abortion, and they often support “nation-building.”

    And so-called liberals? They tend to be anti-gun and pro-choice on abortion. They favor big, powerful government — they say — to make life kinder for people.

    By contrast, libertarians want government to leave people alone — in both the economic and personal spheres. Leave us free to pursue our hopes and dreams, as long as we don’t hurt anybody else.

    Ironically, that used to be called “liberal,” …….more…..”

    • myiq2xu says:

      Libertarian paradise:

      • votermom says:


        I am not sure what I am anymore. I suspect I am some kind of Independent Populist.

        Although I am quite sure I am still a bitter knitter.

      • WMCB says:

        LOL! Yeah, that’s why I am not a capital “L” Libertarian. Stossel makes good points at times, but he makes the same mistake, to me, that the rabid communists make: a refusal to face reality, history, and human nature as it is, not as you would wish it to be. Pure libertarianism is unworkable in reality, as is pure statism.

        I have libertarian leanings in the sense that I am in favor of as much individual liberty as practically feasible, and am suspicious of concentrations of power – whether it be govt, corp, church, whatever. But I am not stupid. No, we don’t want an ever-increasing dependent class. Neither is it realistic that charities will take care of all problems. The problem with me not fitting with either party is that I DO want govt to undertake things – to act as the agent of the People in gathering what monies we are willing to pay for a kinder society, and using them to alleviate the problem we specify, and STOPPING THERE. My beef with Big Govt is that they seem incapable of that – it always becomes power grabs and extraneous bullshit and interfering with the minutia of daily life. And they spend more creating the offices and apparatchiks to “solve” the problem than they do ON THE PROBLEM.

        What I am is maybe a good old Federalist: widely separated powers, lots of local control. A system set up to deny great concentrations of power. It’s messy, and unwieldy, but it works the best IMO. I want both limited AND effective govt. And neither party wants to offer that, and neither do the libertarians.

  11. myiq2xu says:

    Cluck, cluck, cluck:

    Confirmed – Netroots Nation 2012 Chose Providence To Keep RightOnline Away

    I posted yesterday about my suspicions that Netroots Nation 2012 was scheduled for Providence, RI, a small convention market (and near my home in RI) in order to keep RightOnline away by booking almost all the major convention space and hotel rooms.

    Netroots Nation has been bothered and embarrassed by the close proximity of RightOnline, including a now-famous appearance by Andrew Breitbart.

    The Boston Globe confirms that Netroots Nation 2012 chose Providence to keep RightOnline away, and even has put non-compete agreements in its contracts

  12. djmm says:

    President Obama could run as a Republican:

    Of course, the author has to prove he is a “serious person” by lying about the Clinton administration, but his main proposal is interesting.


Comments are closed.