Poll: U.S. sees Obama as liberal

[TomCADem]

Most Americans believe President Obama is more liberal than they are, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll.

On a scale of 1 to 5 -- with 1 being very liberal and 5 being very conservative -- respondents rated themselves as a 3.3 ideologically, slightly to the right of center.

They perceive Obama to be a 2.3, to the left of center.

Some of the Republican candidates are more aligned with the respondents, said the poll: "Americans perceive Jon Huntsman, Mitt Romney, and Ron Paul as closest to themselves ideologically, and Michele Bachmann and Barack Obama as furthest away."

Link - http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/12/poll-us-sees-obama-as-liberal/1

You know the corporate fix is in when Romney and Gingrich are portrayed as mainstream even in the midst of the 99 percent movement and the OWS protests.

[Vincardog]

1. Cough (Bullshit push poll) Cough

[kenfrequed]

21. Yup

People need to stop paying attention to BS Push pulls like this. Though obviously this poll actually works against any republican candidate percieved as being "too conservative" as well... which would be all of them. Maybe this poll was indirectly paid for by the Romney campaign.

[PATRICK]

79. Generally this seems spot on

The entire "news" and polling apparatus seems designed to pump up the GOP and deflate Dems regardless of the reality within the commons. The game of the mad Tea party succeeded in a) making noise to cover the vacuum of accountability or truth in any sense for that matter(success) b) letting off steam for the tools now being tossed back in the bucket until GOTV comes along. It may have failed utterly in raising up Romney and in actually turning off the voters, but the continued media respect for the game keeps it not only afloat but poised for any actual state of com petition that in any rational; framework at all is a laughable pathetic fraud of incredibly insulting dimensions.

The machinations of late seem to be that now that the clowns have run their "not Romney" pathos full circle the primaries must be rigged against Ron Paul or one of the others actually winning or destroying Romney utterly in the process. A brokered convention seems equally hopeless yet it could launch the career of yet another wannabe monster. A ticket including the least damaging tea Party sellout seems as unlikely.
The news people desperately want the "contest" to succeed. So far it is all fraud, all moronic, anti everything poor performances including retreads already pre-rejected with good cause.

What then is the stage they have in mind for 2012 which alone might be of realistic significance?

What a farce of misinformation. There might be hope for this nation were the people truly aware of this two party train-wreck that precludes all choice of the best of two good options and a corporate world that lusts for madness and control with moronic abandon.

I have as many complaints about Obama as anyone but as in 2008 there is no other sane option and most people I believe know this whatever the rationale they could offer. Romney just gives them a soft landing to help build up their ludicrous misrepresentations in Congress.

[Demit]

26. This is interesting, the survey methods—

I'm replying to you, Vincardog, so that this info will be towards the top of the thread

"Survey Methods

Results for this USA Today/Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Dec. 15-18, 2011, with a random sample of 1,019 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.

For results based on the total sample of 284 Democrats, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±7 percentage points.

For results based on the total sample of 303 Republicans, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±7 percentage points.

For results based on the total sample of 406 independents, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±6 percentage points.

...
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls."


The margins of error for those three groups are sizable, but how on earth (I'm not a statistician) do they average out to a total MoE of ±4? And yes, asking people to self-report, or self identify, gives you misleading information. It's completely unreliable. Except, of course, for pushing an idea by presenting it as 'scientific'.

[dkf]

33. Isn't MOE based on number of participants?

It makes sense to me that the subgroups would have higher MOEs as they have less subjects, but when you put them together then they are a larger sampling.

[Demit]

42. Is that how it usually works? I didn't know that.

Except they're the same participants. How would the margin of error be reduced by adding up the same people?

Sounds like what the banks did, lump bad mortgages together & suddenly get a AAA rating

[Igel]

51. It's a question of sampling.

If your assumptions are right, what's the likelihood that the group you have is an accurate, proportional subset of the total population.

If the population is 200 million, the best sample is 200 million. But it's likely that if you randomly pick 100 million your sample is going to be a really good reflection of the population.

If you pick 2, it's possible that you'll pick a good sample--1 male, 1 female, 1 white and one that's non-white, etc., etc. While it's more likely that you'll pick this kind of set than any other, it's still not horribly likely.

If you have 20 different groups of 30 people, you have to calculate the probability that a random sample with 30 people will accurately reflect the larger group, the entire population. Will you get the right mix of ages or sexes or ethnicities or education or jobs?

Now, if I merge all those groups of 30 into a single group of 600, it's more likely that my one large group will mirror the overall population. The any one group of 30 may not have enough Asians or Latinos or whites, but it's likely that any bias in any one small group will be mostly countered by opposite biases in other small groups.

So a standard way of disposing of error is to combine random samples. It's widely used in meta-studies, where 5 researchers will have random samples of perhaps 300 to 1000 people and be looking for something rare. Some groups find what they're after, but other groups don't. You merge the groups into one large group, statistically, and it's easier to see if what they were looking for *was* there. Sometimes it's not, random variation gave positive results. Sometimes it was, and random variation gave negative results. Sometimes the trait's there, but too small to be reliably measured using any one of the small groups.

[Demit]

64. Ah, I see.

Thanks for explaining, that was very helpful.

[Doctor_J]

2. No hope for the country until the propaganda apparatus is destroyed

beginning with 1000 hate radio stations. Solution is simple, but messy. When we decide we're up to it, the revolution will have begun, and will succeed.

[Dawson Leery]

11. People call themselves coservative, yet support many liberal/progressive policies.

[CrispyQ]

22. This is true.

Many have been brainwashed by the 'liberal is evil' propaganda that began with Reagan & continues through that hateful windbag, Limbaugh & his ilk. My mother was one. She was on a fixed income & received some social services, although she whined about government all the time. And of course those damned liberals, who ruined everything.

One day, I gave her a copy of the Joe Conservative story & after she read it, I asked her, "What things that liberals advocate & want to protect do you think are bad? Safe water? Clean air? Education for all? What?" She sputtered in frustration, but didn't really answer.

Still, she fell for the ideology so hard, that she remained one of those, that votes against their own best interest, to the end of her life. I don't know how you wake people like that up.

[gateley]

32. Or, been brainwashed into equating "conservative" with 'rational' and 'fair', as opposed to

irrationally dumping money into the black hole of government.

[66 dmhlt]

71. Pew Poll: Term "Progressive" Viewed as MOST Political Positive Label

Positive/Negative for ...

Progressive: 67/22
Conservative: 62/30
Liberal: 50/39
Capitalism: 50/40
Libertarian: 38/37
Socialism: 31/60

Source:
http://www.people-press.org/2011/12/28/little-change-in-publics-response-to-capitalism-socialism/?src=prc-headline

[Gemini Cat]

78. They do for themselves, but not for anyone else.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

35. occupying the media would be the best thing

[slay]

47. +1

indeed. a true liberal would never be allowed NEAR the white house. he or she might actually change things for the better - and those in power sure as hell don't want that. hopefully the #Occupy movement is the beginning of something big.

[newspeak]

80. yeah, well, if this poll was actually correct

and there are quite a few identifying themselves with people like bachman, I'd consider leaving. So, obama is a "liberal" that's why he pushed a repug health plan-a heritage plan- because he's liberal. They must have polled the clueless ones that think anyone who is democratic is a liberal or listened to the corporate media talking points over and over until they believe, like zombies.

[Demonaut]

3. correction....commie liberal

marxist...yada yada yada
sad that the center has moved so far right as to label Obama a liberal

so as not to confuse, title is sarcasm

[Xipe Totec]

4. And Dr Strangelove as a moderate. nt

[girl gone mad]

5. It's sad what "liberal" has come to mean.

Bank bailouts, mandated insurance purchases, corporate welfare and endless war.

[msongs]

6. democrats Inc have allowed liberal to become a dirty word in its ever rightward lurch nt

[SteveW]

23. This is true. If you don't define yourself, others will. And they have. nt

[markpkessinger]

76. Agreed. ...

And if you are never willing to hold your ground, even if doing so may result in a short term political loss, you will find yourself looking more and more like the opposition with each passing day.

[bowens43]

7. but we know better....obama is about s liberal as Reagan, nt

[Kahuna]

68. Yeah because everybody is stupid except you, because

we all believe he IS liberal.

[Zhade]

75. You're not stupid. Just wrong.

NT!

[harun]

83. Correct.

[frylock]

8. so was there a questionnaire, or did they merely ask people to rate themselves on a scale of 1-5?

[JohnnyRingo]

9. Pounded home by Fox News for a year before the election, and continuing today

Now they just mention "the far left liberal policies" Obama pushes without elaboration, but I recall the runup to the election when every news story about the candidate had the quote: "the most liberal senator in history, even to the left of Ted Kennedy". Nevermind they used the same quote four years earlier for John Kerry, on Fox it never gets old.

The problem is, people believe that. The word liberal has adopted such an abstract meaning for conservatives that I don't think many Fox viewers even share the same definition anymore. They just know it's unAmerican.

On the other hand, I'll bet few conservatives would define themselves as "far right". Everybody likes to think they stand somewhere near the fifty yard line, Even the most avid Tea Party member probably assumes he's somewhere in the middle.

I always have fun with these people when they derisively call me a liberal. I accuse them of standing on the extreme right politically. They deny this of course, so I list a couple politicians who are to the left of myself. I watch as their head nods in agreement, then challenge them to name one Republican who they think is too far to the right. While they still have the deer in headlight face, I push further. I quickly press them to look to their political right and tell me who they see from their middle of the road position.

It's certainly a good way to change the subject quickly.

[ixion]

10. which means they're not paying attention

because he's center-right, at best.

[SteveW]

24. Yes, indeed....

The Far Right knows to keep pounding away at THEIR definition of "liberal," 24-7, month-after-month, year-after-year. Obama and the Democrats run from that definition, yet do NOT define themselves.

Absolutely predictable results: One side is a bully; the other is a punching bag. Guess who the public will favor?

[torotoro]

12. ...And why Obama Keep going MORE and MORE Right!

This explains why Obama is now a right-leaning president because its polls like this that pressure him to try to prove he isnt liberal. Now he is more right than Bush II

[zbdent]

18. I'd like documented instances of when he "capitulated" to the "left" anywhere near

10 percent of the time he's capitulated to the right ...

[SteveW]

25. The "left?" What is the left? What is the left? Anything left of the left? nt

[kenfrequed]

34. Yes...

I too would like to know when he has been forced by the left to do anything.

The first person that says "the liberals made him pass healthcare" gets gut-punched.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

19. More right than Bush II?

Ummm........sure.

[treestar]

13. More proof Americans are not smart

And do not appear to know what a liberal is. And why then is Huntsman scoring so low?

[SteveW]

28. Don't fault Americans...

They DO know what a liberal is: Whatever the RW GOPer says it is. Why? Because "liberals" DO NOT define or defend their status, preferring to run off to "No Label" Land, or hide under the faux-technical bureau-speak so prevalent now:

"Gathering the stakeholders to build concensus on a win-win so that we can move FORWARD!"

No one can eschew labels in public life. Define yourself or be defined. The RW GOPer defines themselves and liberals. Effectively.

[Charlemagne]

14. The right wing smear machine works

Apparently.....

He has followed a lot of bush era policies. Would people say that is more liberal than them?

[HughBeaumont]

15. Right, because most leftists I know would keep dem Tax Cuts for the Wealthy intact!

'Murka = Dumb.

[totodeinhere]

16. He's not that liberal, but he should be. The perception that Obama is a liberal should be a good

thing anyway, not a negative. If only he were more liberal.

[Doc_Technical]

17. The last liberal President we've had was Richard Nixon.

OSHA, federally mandated fuel mileage and
emission standards for automobiles, normalization
of relations with Red China, etc.

[SteveW]

30. Probably right. He also started the EPA. nt

[Lone_Star_Dem]

20. Most Americans believe what they hear on their TV's

What they hear on our TV's is that Obama is Liberal, with a capital L. It must be true if it's been said on television, thus he's more liberal than most Americans. Just don't ask any of these Americans to explain why this must be true, or to pinpoint one single liberal action he's taken. That they cannot do.

[tularetom]

27. We have allowed these labels to define all political issues in America

And allowed the liberal media to marginalize the "liberal" label and portray "liberals" as somehow way outside the mainstream of political opinion.

And yet, at least in my experience, people who refer to themselves as "conservative" or "on the right", consistently take positions in support of what would normally be considered "liberal" programs and policies.

The lesson to be learned is pay no attention to the liberal media. Better yet don't watch cable news on yer telly.

[ProgressoDem]

29. Funny thing is also more Americans think they're conservatives.

This country doesn't have a clue as to what they are. CONSERVATIVE VALUES sounds great to the uninformed. How do they not know conservatism means dismantling everything they love about America?

[certainot]

31. that's what happens when the 'left' gives 1000 coordinated RW radio stations a free speech free ride

for 20 years

[Enrique]

36. i bet the same people think MSNBC is liberal n/t

[vi5]

37. Oh great, just what he/we need...

Another bullshit excuse for him to overcompensate in the opposite direction.

And yes, I agree this poll is a bullshit push style poll, but also bullshit is everything that comes from the mouths/pens of beltway media insider "centrist" types (broder, brooks, freidman, scarborough, cohen, klein, etc.) and thats the stuff that Obama and his yes men let guide what he does.

[abq e streeter]

38. Related poll-Millions of Americans found to have heads up their asses.

[Uncle Joe]

39. This is an example of how the corporate media distorts the American People's perception

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 05:20 PM - Edit history (1)

via propaganda.

If your own perception is viewed through the lens of 3.3 or .8 over the hypothetical 2.5 center mark then Obama's true ranking would be more along the lines of 3.1 because your own view of where the center should be is distorted.

[div class= "excerpt"]

"They perceive Obama to be a 2.3, to the left of center."



2.3 + .8 = 3.1

All the Republicans would be over 4.

The people best equipped to gauge where Obama truly is on this ideological scale isn't the mean or "average" so much as those people; scoring at 2.5 themselves.

To do otherwise will only continue to lead the nation toward a rightward drift into eventual fascism.

Thanks for the thread, TomCADem.

[patrice]

45. Agree!

[Deep13]

40. Define "liberal."

I think he is a liberal thinker in the sense that he believes that we can improve the human condition by tweaking the existing system. Part of the problem is that the existing system has moved so far to the right in terms of corporate and neo-liberal economic ideology and authoritarian practices that to many people the current system itself is the problem.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

41. That's because the MSM keep calling Obama "liberal"

I've had conversations with non-wing nuts who just blithely accept the MSM line, and when I mention things like widening the war in Afghanistan, making private insurance compulsory (a lot of people STILL think that "Obamacare" is "government health care&quot , handing over the bailout funds without any conditions, etc. etc. and ask what is "liberal" about those positions, they have to stop and think.

[high density]

43. Asking people to self-identify based on the label "liberal" or "conservative" is nonsense

Nobody knows what liberal means anymore. List off their support for "liberal" things and then we'll really find out where they fall.

[patrice]

44. This is because "America" has little or no actual experience of what a Liberal is, so they don't

know that the President is NOT one.

[slay]

46. And Obama is not even liberal!

shows how brainwashed the American public is (thanks foxnews you fuckers!) that they think Obama is a liberal when in reality his positions are much more in line with those of a moderate republican. Well, nobody ever accused the American people of being overly bright unfortunately.

[TBF]

48. I'd say you know the fix is in when Obama is portrayed as liberal. nt

[jwirr]

49. Wonder what they would call us?

[humbled_opinion]

50. WHAT?

They think Obama is very liberal...

Obviously this poll is flawed, Obama is mainstream centrist on most issues, sometimes he tilts to the left but than other times he tilts to the right. The danger is that the propaganda machine of the right (Faux noise) has been very successful at creating this Obama is a far left radical perception.

Again if the poll is true it spells trouble for Democrats in general but for liberals most of all because it will cause Obama to swing further right to try and overcompensate for the perception.

[pam4water]

52. Either US still mostly inhabited by low information voters. Or it's another BS push poll.

[libmom74]

53. I think it is

mostly uninformed voters, most people don't know and don't care.

[Doc Holliday]

58. Actually...

....it's both.

Just my opinion.

[madokie]

54. Yeah I believe that

about as far as I could throw an elephant

[Tx4obama]

55. Everyone please check out the page and Chart on the link below

I think the OnTheIssues.org site it great.
It lists tons of stuff regarding 'issues' for each person and at the BOTTOM of the issues list is a diamond Chart/Graph showing how 'liberal or conservative' they are.

Here's the page for Obama: http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm
under the diamond graph it says: Barack Obama is a Hard-Core Liberal.

[progressoid]

65. Everyone please check out charts below

Not so liberal:



This chart was constructed on the basis of the speeches, public statements and , crucially, the voting records of each of the candidates. During the election campaign, we'll be tweaking their positions as, inevitably, some of them change. We'll also be adding other charts as the campaign continues.

When examining the chart it's important to note that although most of the candidates seem quite different, in substance they occupy a relatively restricted area within the universal political spectrum. Democracies with a system of proportional representation give expression to a wider range of political views. While Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader are depicted on the extreme left in an American context, they would simply be mainstream social democrats within the wider political landscape of Europe. Similarly, Obama is popularly perceived as a leftist in the United States while elsewhere in the west his record is that of a moderate conservative. For example, in the case of the death penalty he is not an uncompromising abolitionist, while mainstream conservatives in all other western democracies are deeply opposed to capital punishment. The Democratic party's presidential candidate also reneged on his commitment to oppose the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He sided with the ultra conservative bloc in the Supreme Court against the Washington DC handgun ban and for capital punishment in child rape cases. He supports President Bush's faith-based initiatives and is reported in Fortune to have said that NAFTA isn't so bad....

http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2008

[Tx4obama]

66. Your chart/link does NOT list any data used for the chart - my chart/link DOES :)

Also the chart/link you posted is WAY OUT OF DATE, from back in 2008.

My chart/link has 2009, 2010, and 2011 included.



Barack Obama is a Hard-Core Liberal.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

[progressoid]

77. Data?

Defining a "Hard-Core Liberal" is like defining a "True Christian". And data can be subjectively applied to fit the description.

[Doctor_J]

81. So ontheissues agrees with Fox "News"

color me unimpressed

[Odin2005]

56. because of the MSM.

[joshcryer]

57. Given that this poll in 2008 put Obama at 2.5 I think American's are smarter...

...than they're being given credit for in this thread.

Overall I do think American's are right of center, in general.

[and-justice-for-all]

59. uh, well, not exactly..nt

[MrSlayer]

60. The U.S. is chock full of morons.

They have no clue what liberal even means.

[BadGimp]

61. Straight up F&$/@ng bullshit

[musicblind]

62. This reminds me of a republican I spoke to at Thanksgiving on Disability who believes in gay marriag

marriage and all gay rights.

Who believes in healthcare reform, who hates the corrupt wall street bankers, who hates the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so much more.

I kept wondering, "Are you even aware what the republican party supports?"

[CoffeeCat]

63. Corporate fix is right...

You are spot on regarding your analysis of this "poll" being part of the election fix.

I work at home and have CNBC on all day. I couldn't believe it when I saw this endless
parade of CEOs being interviewed on CNBC--and how they were practically frothing at the
mouth over the very idea of Mitt Romney as President.

Corporate American wants Romney. They want him bad.

We all know that it's the corporate overlords who work in tandem with corrupt politicians to steal the
elections and fudge up the numbers.

I think they'll make damn sure that they get what they want---and it all starts with media disinformation
like this bunk poll.

[NuttyFluffers]

67. "USA Today/Gallup Poll"... *snort*

just highlighting the truly important part of this article. when people actually give credence to a newspaper that's barely half as deep as the four-colors action superhero comics whose design it emulates, and a neurotically conservative, nouveaux-outlier poll competing with the likes of Rasmussen, then there really isn't much more to work with, nu?

the 1% media is getting unbearably tedious.

[Scuba]

69. That's good news, especially considering how the right...

.... and their wholly-owned lapdog media have portrayed him as a hard-line communist, baby-eating dictator.



The public is, of course, ignorant as hell, just like the right wants them.



educated for critical comma

[Javaman]

70. The follow up question should be: As compared to? nt

[Jack Rabbit]

73. . . . and "is being liberal good or bad?"

FoxNews viewers and other right wing morons don't have a very good perspective from the the edge of the earth. They think that they are "conservative" and anything to the left of Attila the Hun is commiesocialistliberalpinko.

[center rising]

72. That's about right

Obama is a liberal, certainly more liberal than any of the GOP candidates. Took the quiz myself and found out I match well with Hillary Clinton and oppose Herman Cain the most.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

74. Almost exactly in the middle is "liberal?"

How does that work?

[bigdarryl]

82. TOTAL CLUELESS!!! Americans there's NOTHING Liberal about President Obama

This country has never had a genuine liberal President even Carter wasn't that liberal.He became liberal after his Presidency Idiots must be watching to much FIXED NEWS