Here’s the results from the study, or what we know to be the results as presented by Carville’s firm:

The Very Separate World of Conservative Republicans

Race: Get Over It

In the wake of Rep. Joe Wilson’s outburst during the president’s joint session health care address and other strident personal and political attacks against President Obama, many in the media and Democratic circles advanced an explanation that this virulent opposition is rooted in racism and reactions to President Obama as an African American president. With this possibility in mind, we allowed for extended open-ended discussion on Obama (including visuals of him speaking) among voters – older, non-college, white, and conservative – who were most race conscious and score highest on scales measuring racial prejudice. Race was barely raised, certainly not what was bothering them about President Obama.

In fact, some of these voters talked about feeling some pride at his election.

They were conscious of the charge that opposition to Obama is racially motivated and that bothered conservative Republicans and independents alike. They basically could not let it go and returned to this issue again and again throughout our conversations across myriad topics.

You can’t openly criticize Obama. If you do, you’ll be labeled as a racist.

Whatever we say about Obama, no matter what we say about him, it is a racial comment so you know, we can’t say anything, we personally do not like him. I don’t care if he is purple, but whatever we say we’re racist.

As far as a person goes, I don’t want to say I hate him. I don’t like what he stands for… and I don’t like what he is doing and the choices he is making, but I mean I don’t know him as a gentleman so… You would be called a racist. You would not like him because he is black. That is what the media is saying.

They see this as a personal rights issue because the racism charge is being used to prevent them from fulfilling their duty to stand up to Obama and his agenda. They see no difference in the opposition Obama faces and the opposition other liberals have faced, because they believe it is based in the same unwavering, bedrock conservative principles that have always led them to oppose liberal policies. The only factor that has changed is the race of the leader being criticized.

The things that we’ve said have nothing to do with race. They have to do with policy and… an agenda, his agenda… Right… Manipulation.

I think basically we have a lot of the same views of Clinton as we do about Obama but most of us are freer to express it because we are not going to be accused of being racists.

It is important to note, however, that Obama is not personally linked to this effort. It was difficult for these conservative Republicans to say anything positive about Obama, but they freely volunteered without any prompting that he was not a part of this effort to silence and oppress conservative opposition.

Actually that is a good thing that he has done. In all the charges of it being racial he has defended, he has come out and said, no I don’t think that comment was meant that way and that was the one thing that I think he has done that you know.

I don’t think he thinks it, but I think other people think it. You know the ones that are really supportive of him. If we don’t like him, and we have something against him, then we’re a racist.

I agree wholehaertedly with the last two paragraphs. I don’t think it is Obama that is fueling the characterization of those opposed to Obama as racists who hate him for his skin color, but rather the media and the liberal blogs and you guys. It’s something I admire about him, but it’s also something I wish he’d do a much better job of dispelling the notion of. And that’s the reason I said on my very first post that I hope that talk with the kid in the video wasn’t staged.

Boring, Dennis. I explain pretty thoroughly up above why I thought Oliver’s poll was not an instance of “cherry-picking” comparable to yours. If you’d care to address my arguments and tell me why you think they’re wrong, I’d be glad to listen. You stamping your little foot and screaming “is too! is too!” isn’t going to make it so.

I don’t recall you ever doing it once.

And I repeat: if you’ve ever been as critical or skeptical of a right-wing talking point as I was of that poll that Oliver posted, I don’t recall it either. Perhaps you can refresh my memory. What I mostly remember you doing is cheering and gloating over any right-wing distortion as long as it gave us hissy fits.

The Harris Poll complements the Fox Poll. They are the most recent polls.

Maybe you have a trend there, maybe not. Time will tell. over the past few months polls on the issue have vacillated between the 45% and 55% range, so it still isn’t evidence of a major shift against Obama and still says nothing about whether people “hate” Obama or not, so it still does little to support your original comment.

Translation: “okay okay, that poll was lousy evidence for the pont I was making but geez, you expect me to be logical? I’m a wingnut, dammit!”

No, that’s not the translation. The correct translation wouldn’t pass the rules of civility here, whatever those are. This argument was silly from the beginning, and it’s only getting sillier.

I most certainly have. In the previous post you yourself cited I was far more critical and sceptical of what the poll posted by Oliver meant than you have been of the Fox poll (or any other poll that supports your prejudices).

I didn’t cite that. I said you didn’t say word one to Oliver for his cherry-picking a poll. You didn’t and you never have. I’ve asked you if you’ve ever chided anyone for it and if so, to please list it here, because I don’t recall you ever doing it once.

If you can’t, you’re a hypocrite, no matter how much you keep try to weasel out of my proving that you are one.

The Harris Poll complements the Fox Poll. They are the most recent polls. They both show a deterioration of Obama’s favorabilities. You wrote a lot of crap and the typical childish “Translation:…..” game liberals like to play here, but you didn’t address the poll I listed that backs the poll you deride as cherry-picking.

Wilbur Translation: “Damn, I lost again.”

Translation: “okay okay, that poll was lousy evidence for the pont I was making but geez, you expect me to be logical? I’m a wingnut, dammit!”

when you’ve never, not once, been critical of anyone else for doing the same

I most certainly have. In the previous post you yourself cited I was far more critical and sceptical of what the poll posted by Oliver meant than you have been of the Fox poll (or any other poll that supports your prejudices). Meanwhile I’m still waiting to see the messages you have sent to Limbaugh, Malkin, etc. chiding them for their one-sided analyses, thou even-handed scourge of hypocrisy thou.

You are nuancing your way out of it by using the argumentative tactic of verbosity

Translation: “I have no substantive response to any of your substantive points”

My advice to you Dennis:

if you’re being dense, then think, Dennis, think; slow down, read carefully, consider, ruminate.

if you’re being dishonest: go play in traffic.

Still no third option that I can see.

This poll just out supports the Fox Poll.

President Obama’s Ratings Continue Their Fall Again This Month

Three in five Americans believe country going off on wrong track

President Obama may have won the Nobel Peace Prize, but unfortunately, he is not winning accolades from the American public as his job approval rating continues its downward slide. In September, U.S. adults were split almost evenly on the job the President has been doing – 49% gave him positive ratings and 51% gave him negative ratings. This month, the number giving him positive ratings drops to 45% while over half of Americans (55%) give him negative ratings. ….

The approval ratings of the president by Democrats and Republicans are as one would expect with 77% of Democrats giving President Obama positive ratings compared to 14% of Republicans. Independents, however, are more down on the president as 60% give him negative ratings while 40% give him positive marks on his overall job performance.

The White House should also be concerned about weakness in some of President Obama’s strongest supporters. During the election, Echo Boomers (those aged 18-32) were the strongest age group supporting the president. Now they are of mixed minds on his performance as just over half (51%) give the president positive ratings and 49% give him negative ratings. The oldest generation, Matures (those aged 64 and older) are even more negative with just 39% giving President Obama positive marks and 61% giving him negative marks.

*Cherry-picking here, as the information shows him losing support among almost all individual categories, but Obama has a -20 favorability gap among unaffiliated voters, with only 6% rating him as “excellent” while 28% rate him “poor”.

*Harris did poll on whether people would have described themselves as having “hated” President Obama.

*Raw data is not given. Porcessed data is

*This poll is given for informational purposes only and is meant for the reader to draw his or her own conclusions, but in no way is it meant to portray a definitive picture of proof positive of President Obama’s true favorability ratings at this time.

*There is no intent to crow

*This poll may be an outlier, just as the Fox Poll may be an outlier. The reader is encouraged to make their own value judgments on their own. This poll is in no way presented here as a poll that is above being critiqued, either.

That is because they are not the same thing, not by a long shot. In the other case, a previous WSJ poll had shown what right-wingers had interpreted as massive public opposition to the public option. Oliver presented evidence of a poll that tried to replicate the methodology of the WSJ poll but asked the public option question differently, producing vastly different results. My interpretation of that – which I copied and pasted above and which you apparently still haven’t read — was not that 77% figure was anywhere close to accurate, but that there was reason to suspect that the previous poll used biased wording of the question to produce a skewed result. This suspicion has subsequently been corroborated by a number of other polls showing majority support for a public option when it is presented as a, you know, public option rather than as “government takeover” or “government run health care”.

Contrariwise, in this case, you have trumpeted one poll the results of which you like, while ignoring numerous other polls asking the same question that show a definite trend away from the answer you like.

Long story short: Oliver and I used a single poll to draw limited conclusions that were not contradicted by other polls. You used a single poll to draw sweeping conclusions that are flatly contradicted by numerous other polls. Furbelows and cherimoyas.

But I’m afraid, Dennis, that even with that we have not begun to plumb the depths of your inanity. What was it that you think that poll proved again? Oh yeah…

Obama is not hated, but rather people in greater numbers than before do not approve of the job he’s doing.

How inane is that? Let me count the ways:

1) The 49% approval score of your poll is lower than the vast majority of other polls

2) Even if the 49% number is correct it is higher than previous polls that you have cited yourself, so “greater numbers than ever” is nonsense.

3) The issue of whether or not Obama is “hated” is not addressed by this poll. Many of those that disagree with him or think he is doing a bad job may also hate him. EVen some who think he is doing a good job may hate him. The poll is simply irrelevant to that question.

And then there’s the issue of Fox’s toolish hawking of the meaningless “would you vote for Obama” metric as if it were truly significant of something. I brought that up above as well and you’ve had nothing to say for it.

I think all the above is pretty good evidence for my previous assertion: you’re either being a tool or an ignoramus. I still don’t see any third alternative.

You are too chickenshit to even address your hypocrisy of not calling out Oliver for doing exactly the same thing you doggedly pursue and chastise me for. If you thought I was wrong, you should call him out too. If you honest feel anyone who cites a poll should also add the RCP poll of polls, then you should call everyone out who doesn’t do that. But you don’t. You just cherry-pick who you decide you want to single out.

I was wrong to say you have two standards. You don’t. You’re just a chickenshit.

MoveOn didn’t poll anybody. MoveOn commissioned SurveyUSA and SurveyUSA polled them. Survey intentionally tried to match the demographics of the wsj/nbc poll that used less accurate wording in their “do you approve…” question. About 17% of this survey pool self-identified as liberal.

Now I for one wouldn’t put a lot of stock in that 77% number. SurveyUSA uses automated surveying and that introduces a number of question marks. I do think, though, that it’s pretty good evidence that despite all the right wing lying and howling, public support for the principle of health care reform is hardly cratering, as your garden variety Limbaughs et al. would have us believe.

In other words, I was honest about the limitations of the poll, and about what we can and cannot conclude from it. Which is the opposite of what you have been on this thread.

I also notice that on that thread you were crowing about another isolated outlier poll (Rassmussen, of course) that showed Obama’s approval rating at 45%, claiming that this indicated that Obama was circling the bowl. Now, surprise surprise, you’re once again citing an outlier poll that shows Obama’s approval four points higher than the earlier poll you cherrypicked as, once again, evidence that Obama’s support is cratering (Rassmussen, by the way, is up to 47%).

Lesson, Dennis: if you want to pwn someone as a hypocrite by linking to something they said earlier, it’s always best to actually read what the person said earlier first. I do admire your tenacity, though – you’re really one of these.

Done.

Enough, already!

Take it from someone who knows — this is going nowhere.

Jaim is, like all liberals, blissfully unaware of his own imperfection. Dennis, you, like all conservatives, are completely mystified as to why someone in a world of trees, can’t see the forest.

But you both are like two dogs tied to a stake in the ground – destined to fight without escaping, until one surrenders. Considering that Jaim has been following me around this weblog nipping at my heels for weeks, Dennis, I suppose the man who surrenders will have to be you.

Seriously, if you went over to Seoul to find yourself and become a man, your quest so far has been in vain.

You blog-whore here. Most other blogs don’t even allow that, but nevertheless, you brag about having a blog, post your link to it here, and then cry like a baby that you’re being stalked when I show what a hypocrite you are by using something you say on it to prove it.

You are the quintessential liberal cry-baby.

I’m embarrassed for you.

If I’d spent the day trolling Free Republic you might have a point but as usual, you don’t.

Tell your wife I said hi.

And I wasn’t talking to you this morning either, when you decided to stalk me again.

I’m just giving it back, and now you act like the aggrieved.

Typical lib.

So what’s the quota for today? 50? 100?

Not sure. The day’s political events will dictate, but I do have a lot on my plate and a couple games on tv I want to check out some of.

One thing is for sure, though, I won’t be here at the computer all day like you have, and I didn’t get up at noon like you did, either. On a Saturday.

Like I said, I love my life, and I love my family, but I would buy a shotgun and give it to you with specific instructions to shoot me if I was ever reduced to hanging out in a studio apartment ALL DAY LONG on a Saturday on the computer by myself in the most beautiful time of the year like this, like you are doing today.

A legend in his own mind.

So what’s the quota for today? 50? 100?

Which is why it’s so sad that your poor all of your bitterness and resentments onto somebody else’s blog. You obviously hate your life.

I love my life. I post on a few blogs, actually. What I do here is no different than what you do, though. This place makes me laugh as hard sometimes as I do when I watch a Show like the Office or Curb Your Enthusiasm; the only difference is it’s kind of embarrassing wehn my wife asks me what I’m laughing at and I answer that I just pwned the shit out of a couple guys named “mambochicke23″ and “Wil-burrr“,a nd she just shakes here head and tells me to come to bed.

You’re not here in any kind of an activist capacity for Democrats. Nothing to further any cause except to ridicule the commenters here you disagree with. No difference, I just get bored on conservative blogs commenting against liberal loons.