"CNN (The Most Trusted . .haha): Blacks no longer thrilled with President Obama"

You think Chuck Todd is bad well his deputy, Paul Steinhauser, is even funnier.


CNN in their menu page shows the bullet points for their politics page as follows


*The return of terror politics
*Poll: For blacks, Obama 'thrill' is gone
*White House 'money hunk' engaged
*DeMint defends TSA block
*Public option may be dropped
*Poll: Pelosi, GOP lawmakers 'losers'
*Napolitano says system didn't work


Clicking on the story that shows the President no longer 'thrills' blacks you find this story;




1) I guess it was a legitimate sociological question to ask African Americans if they were thrilled on innauguration day, it would also be OK to ask catholics the same question on JFK's election. However charachterizing their enthusiasm as being "dramatically down" is well, stupid. "Thrill" is not the same as "Enthusiasm". I suppose that the number of Catholics that are still thrilled with JFK's election has declined as the "thrill" of a new historic event becomes no longer new or historic.

2) To continue to use "thrilled" as a political science parameter after the newness of the innauguration is rather silly and they should go back to the standard support, strongly support, etc.

3) If they are going to track "thrillness" then they should not hold back but go full out paternalistic and ask if blacks break out into spontaneous tap dancing and singing of beautiful harmonic gospel versions of "Swing Lo Sweet Chariot" everytime the President appears on TV.


Oh and about that whole "Most trusted name" BS. You qualify that with full time cable news services which means that you barely score better (and some surveys show you losing) to the worst news outlet in the history of TV.

If you open it up to the most trusted in the news business, that is this guy



As a white guy under 6 feet that once lived in Stewarts home state of New Jersey, I am officially "thrilled".

I have had such fun from campaign time right up to present....She is no longer thrilled. She likes the word "dither" and says (she's very funny and sometimes more than on target) she wants to grab him, shake him and tell him to get with it. I often talk her down and she's very appreciative but....as the song says.."The thrill is gone."

There were such high expectations, but Obama appears very cautious about risking his political neck for any class of people the way some once expected. I never expected it, never saw that in him, so I don't know if I ever had the "thrill." But I am hopeful for the future.

and talked to AA girl late 20's in gift shop at Spy Museum and we got in a long talk. While she still likes Obama (heh don't we all LIKE him?) she is upset at the Health Care bill.

I told her a bunch of people on the blogs who worked like me on the last two campaigns have just about had it.

My children will now ask what can they do instead of lamenting what they cant.

Chuck todd needs to recalibrate his thrill-o-meter.

actually pleased with Obama? I just don't see that as likely. He hasn't done much to help the huge unemployment that black males are experiencing, nor the unfairness of our judicial system regarding blacks and black males in particular, he hasn't addressed the union-busting rules that keep employed blacks under the thumb of their overlords.

How can you in any imagination think that blacks are as thrilled with the reality of Obama as they were with the hope of Obama?

So lets start with the basics

Polling shows that "blacks" "non whites" and "hispanic" support for the President are high and going higher



The OP actually wasn't about minority support for the President at all but about using an emotional term "thrilled" as an ongoing parameter for political polling only for blacks when it would never be used for any other group.

Hope that helps with your confusion problem.

The one you are using is from Gallup, the one used in the article you posted is from The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey.

"More than nine in 10 blacks questioned in the poll approve of the job Obama's doing in the White House, far higher than 42 percent of whites who approve of his performance as president"
"But when asked how they personally feel about Obama's presidency, only 42 percent of black respondents say they're thrilled, with nearly half of those questioned saying they are happy but not thrilled.

"The 42 percent who are thrilled is down from 61 percent in January, when Obama was inaugurated."

"According to the poll, 51 percent of African-Americans say Obama's presidency has brought some improvement in race relations in the U.S., but only 18 percent feel it's the start of a new era. Another 23 percent say they've seen a real change in race relations over the past 11 months and 7 percent say things have gotten worse. "

"The survey indicates that three-quarters of blacks believe race relations will improve eventually, which is up from 49 percent of blacks who felt that way a year before Obama was elected."

"Whites take a dimmer view of Obama's effect on race relations, with a third believing that the new presidency has not changed race relations in the country and 15 percent of whites saying that Obama has made race relations worse," Holland added. "Not surprisingly, whites are less supportive of Obama, although for a notable number of whites, their negative view of the president is due to the perception that he's not been liberal enough."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091227/wl_sthasia_afp/afghanistanunrestustoll

Jesus. And people get paid for that?

LOL!

I had to use the gallup poll to show that the premise of the reply that minorities are declining in support of the President is not supported by polling.

The OP actually has little to do with the actual (very high) support of blacks for the President but that they would use and emotional term "thrilled" as an ongoing parameter to judge the degree of support.

All other polling uses something like

Strongly Support
Support
No Opinion
Don't Agree
Strongly Don't Agree

to judge degree of support.


"Thrilled" however doesn't reflect "enthusiasm" for the President but an emotional reaction to a historic and new event, which one year late is no longer new.

For years from now it is possible that the President will sustain a high degree of "strong support" from the African American community but that with the passing of time no longer be "thrilled" about it.

It is sloppy political science and sloppy reporting.

Why even bother to use that article, then? It was their article & their poll. Why not just stick with Gallup & post their article?

I also think that poster has a point, when you see The Congressional Black Caucus complaining Obama isn't doing enough for African Americans, you can understand where some of the discontent may lie. And please note..I am saying "some". http://www.bvonmoney.com/2009/12/05/congressional-black-caucus-obama/5

So I really don't think the poster was out of line or confused, with his observation. He was looking at the article you posted & their poll.

As far as I'm concerned polls are polls..you can take them seriously or not. Gibbs downplayed when Obama's approvals went down. And he has a point...a lot of Presidents had approvals that went down in their 1st year. When Obama's approvals get to the bush level, at the end of his term, then it's time to panic.

What I thought was interesting about the CNN poll was this..while Obama's approvals have dipped with Whites, their reason was he wasn't liberal enough. So it's more political than racial, which means we are making progress.

That is the point of the article

I have posted on gallup's numbers elsewhere, including its minority numbers.

of discrepancy going on, no matter how many people try to pretend that blacks are no longer happy or "thrilled" with the President.

I've noticed that the closer we get to the 2010 mid-terms the further to the right the media is and will continue to go. I'd have to say that Rachel Maddow and Mr. Olbermann will be the only news shows worth watching.

supported Hillary in the primaries. I'm just sayin'.

what color I am and so are all my friends and family I talk to about the state of affairs.

We're fortunate to have him and those who don't appreciate what he and his Team were and are up against and the time it's taking to get a solid foundation to correct it..can just stand there tapping their feet and wagging their fingers.

they will "Not Likely" Vote in 2010 with 23% saying they will "Not Vote". As Nate said in his write up about that poll, if that trend holds the losses will be devastating.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/poll-finds-widespread-apathty-among.html

How many people actually vote during off year elections anyway? Isn't it usually activists and political junkies who show up at the polls during midterm elections?

11 mos later as much as he did on his inaugural day?

typical cnn anti-democratic party nonsense.

to tell me how i feel about our President. If you go to the right place and town to do the polling you can slant the polls anyway you like.Meaning demographics is key to all polling.I was thrilled when our President took the oath of office.Now i am appreciative that he had the gumption to run and try to help pull our country out of one of the worst eight years we have ever seen. I am surprised that he wanted the job.This country was a hot mess and is still in need of a whole lot of work,but if i had to choose between what we are facing and where we just left.There is no choice. I am looking ahead with our President because to look back makes me puke:puke: :puke: :puke:

I was reading the onion news.

So does all my family----and that's a lot of Black people apparently--oh and White people.

Edited because I mispelled "my"----:eyes:

everything else said in this thread twisting what Thrill is irrelevant.

And for sure, CNN should be totally irrelevant!