is far more popular among liberal Democrats than moderate or conservative ones, consistently. I can't really say I understand why (meaning why he suffers among moderate and conservative Dems that is) but that's where he's the weakest and always has been. Good old boy racism possibly.

I abhor a lot of his decisions but looking at what there is to choose from I would also answer a poll with a positive. Apples and Oranges.

It's not the number that surprises me - it's the direction.

I think honestly that the more "centrist" or "moderate" (quotes mine on both since they are usually neither) a democrat is, the less informed they are. They tend to be people like my parents who are in their 60's and reflexively Democrats. They don't dislike or hate Obama but they are also not political junkies and low information voters. So they get most of their information from whatever cable news shows they happen to flip on and unfortunately stuff like e-mail forwards and facebook posts from more conservative friends. So I can see them thinking if not outwardly, at least a little bit that he might be "too liberal" or more in favor of socialism or whatever.

It does render the concept of "approval" rather . . . elastic, no? What makes a "liberal" Democrat? Would Rahm Emanuel qualify as such for the purposes of this poll? And what does it mean to "approve" of Obama? I "approve" of Obama as against other choices (not named)? Or I affirmatively "approve" of the administration and every decision, policy and pronouncement that have come out of it? Or I guess I "approve" of more things than I "disapprove", so overall I'm in the "approve" category? Or I "approve" a plurality of things the administration has done (but not a majority)? Or I have one and only one issue that matters to me, and since the Obama administration hasn't totally destroyed that issue, I "approve" of the administration?

The rubber band poll, it can stretch to whatever you want it to mean. And I have my own suspicions on what a lot of folks would like it to mean for any number of those nagging, rat bastard, Jiminy Cricket voices that just don't know when to stop.

They're not REALLY liberals! How do they define "liberal" anyway! Nobody administered them a purity test! What does "approve" really mean anyway!

All attempts to ignore the fact that the people who gripe at and bash Obama endlessly are actually the micro-minority and not at all representative of liberals as a whole.

I guess asking questions is just too much to countenance. I notice you carefully avoided proffering any answers to who the poll decides is a liberal and what it means by approve. So much easier just to name-call and marginalize than preoccupy your beautiful mind with inconvenient thoughts.

You can't have a poll where you 1) do a political compass test that takes several hours and 2) answer the poll question.

In statistics this isn't a big deal, because you can do that political compass test, figure out where ones political roots are, and then statistically it will match up with those who "self identify" as however, if the sample size is large enough.

I know a few that are not happy.

“Proposed laws must not tamper with the technical architecture of the Internet through manipulation of the Domain Name System (DNS), a foundation of Internet security,” the administration said in a statement. “Our analysis of the DNS filtering provisions in some proposed legislation suggests that they pose a real risk to cybersecurity and yet leave contraband goods and services accessible online. We must avoid legislation that drives users to dangerous, unreliable DNS servers and puts next-generation security policies, such as the deployment of DNSSEC, at risk.”

Isn't it time for someone to post a link to "the list" again?

Isn't it time for someone to tell us that he got the mandatory-purchase-of-health-care-insurance for all of us? A Republican dream of Sen. Grassley (R-Iowa).

Or isn't it time to remind us all again that he's not Gingrich, not Rmoney, or not-whoever-the-Republican-front-runner-is-this-week?

If these polls are accurate, then the people dissatisfied with him represent such a small number that they couldn't possibly have any impact on anything.

Yet to hear people talk, anyone with any complaint at all is pretty much single handedly setting the cause of liberalism back 100 years. Unlike...you know, the guy who actually has power and is adopting and endorsing Republican plans and policies from the 80's and 90's on everything from healthcare, to education, to economics.

But no, the bigger problem and the bigger threat to democracy is clearly anonymous commentators on the internet expressing any dissatisfaction with dear leader.

It's masterful, really.

NGU.

How many? Is that sort of like "some say?"



NGU.

"purists" (as you call them) and/or activists declaring that they speak for "progressives", and I think these poll numbers put that assertion to bed. The smugness, with which you addressed the o.p., is case in point.

who want less democracy. They want less web-site participation by others who value traditional Democratic principles.

Such critics want ranks and files. They want lock-step thinking. If that's what you want, you're going to be disappointed.

A Koch-funded one?



NGU.

...about pretty much everything.



NGU.

independents.

Obama also has a 3rd arm!

I hate facts /sarcasm