| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
Rising Rightroots and Declining Netroots Now at Parity (or Better)
Submitted by Patrick Ruffini on Sun, 09/27/2009 - 00:42
Flickr photo by Mike Bryant
Lost in the hubbub about the tea parties, the health care town hall protests, Joe Wilson, and the ACORN sting is the outcome of a long-simmering meta debate about the vibrancy of the grassroots right and its capacity to organize online. Along with a slew of other bad political indicators, the perception that the GOP might be stuck in a permanent Luddite rut reached its peak with the election of Obama and the role the Internet played in his victory.
Nearly a year later, not only have things turned around, but they've done so faster than anyone could have dreamed or imagined in those post-election doldrums.
First, hundreds of thousands of people showed up, flash mob-like, at Tea Parties not even three months after Obama Nation reached its apogee with the inauguration. The left was caught flat-footed and stammered that it must have been the creation of Fox News, although Fox News existed in the latter Bush years and during the McCain interlude and was unable to conjure up a similar display of enthusiasm in that period.
In August, the rightroots gained further velocity with the health care protests. This was significant in that it was the first head to head match with OFA and the unions, and it was no contest.
The third key moment came when Joe Wilson was able to raise as much (if not more) money than his Democratic opponent after the "You lie!" outburst. The left's immediate rallying around Rob Miller was a textbook netroots play, aided by ready-made infrastructure (an ActBlue page ready to accept contributions without crashing and display real-time feedback). For a Republican -- especially one deemed to be on the "wrong" side of a PR war -- to have been competitive in money raised with a netroots Democrat is something that simply would not have happened in the Bush years. This is especially striking given that Markos, Stoller, Bowers et al. made money raised for candidates the sine qua non of the netroots, an outgrowth of the left's 1970s era obsession with countering "big money" in politics.
Finally, the O'Keefe/Giles video bust of ACORN -- the right's biggest media coup since Rathergate -- showed the right to be getting its sea legs in investigative journalism, a space virtually patented by the left in recent years.
What we seem to be witnessing is the Feiler Faster Thesis in action, with a robust grassroots opposition to Obama, aided by the Internet, taking shape far more quickly than anyone could have predicted, and comparatively speaking, in a far more timely fashion than it took the left to gets its act together against Bush.
(The big asterisk in that comparison with the Bush years is 9/11 and the wars, but looking back to August and early September 2001, the Democratic opposition to Bush was weak and defined largely by spineless Washington pols like Tom Daschle rather than a sea of grassroots protest, which became apparent only later when the Internet became a viable organizing vehicle.)
So, the fear that Republicans would be disorganized for months if not years after Obama taking office has proven to be unfounded. The right's rise online (and offline too) has been a pretty automatic reaction to Democratic hegemony in Washington, disproving the notion that there is anything intrinsic to the right or the left driving the use of specific tools. And wrapping this up in a neat little bow, the political environment turns out to be the decisive factor in how emphatically people use the technology, not the other way around.
Understandably, not all of this has been online. Talk radio, and yes, cable news, still plays a role, particularly in the critical task of driving calls to member offices. As I noted on Twitter in August,
For all the talk about lefty activism recently, it seems the right has an institutional advantage in contacting Congress... on every issue
From immigration to health care, most of the time you hear about a lopsided disparity with one side shutting down phone lines on Capitol Hill, it's conservatives doing it. While the political climate may dictate how effectively the tools get used, the right and left still have a tendency to focus on different things, with the right jumpstarting its movement in recent months with legislative advocacy and moving bodies to events, and while the left first built the netroots around raising money for candidates.
As a skeptic of the hegemony of money in campaigns and a believer in shoeleather organizing, it's not surprising to me that a newly resurgent right has made such an explosive impact on the national debate in the last two months. All the folks who wondered for five years where our response to the netroots was now have their answer.
(6 votes)
- Patrick Ruffini's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Promos
Recent blog posts
Ironman
0 comments
John Smith
0 comments
Anita MonCrief
2 comments
Wayne from Jere...
0 comments
John Smith
2 comments
lgm
30 comments
Skip MacLure
3 comments
In between
2 comments
John Smith
6 comments
Brian Donahue
6 comments
Recent comments
-
mlindroo
-
John Smith
-
In between
-
Ray in TX
-
John Smith
Search
Links
The American Scene
Conservablogs
Election Projection
FiveThirtyEight.com
Jonathan Martin
Marc Ambinder
Megan McArdle
Patrick Ruffini
Pollster.com
The Foundry
Government Bytes
Race 4 2008
Real Clear Politics
RedState
Ross Douthat
Soren Dayton
Infrastructure
America's Future Foundation
Americans for Prosperity
Americans for Tax Reform
American Majority
Club for Growth
Election Journal
Heritage Foundation
ATR Blog
Leadership Institute
NewsBusters
Sam Adams Alliance
Republican National Lawyers Association
Republican Liberty Caucus
Washington Watch
National Taxpayers Union
NetRight Nation
Good Lefty Blogs
MyDD
Open Left
Swing State Project
Comments
Rising Rightroots
Great post Patrick. As an example, I never went to any "Demonstration/Protest Rally" in my life. So here's a 63 year old, who drove 7 hours, just to add my voice to a few hundred thousand at the 912DC March.
It was inspiring to see waves of "ordinary" people objecting to the Dems takeover of our govt and our culture.
Well written, Patrick. Right on.
Our far Left Democrat Party trolls here have been meeting over at the Daily Kos and they think the best remedy to your article is to take the discussion off-thread... again... sigh.
Impact remains to be seen
I agree that the development and growth of Tea Party grassroots has been impressive though I would caution against overestimating the achievement to date. Yet despite the emergence of an authentic grassroots engagement on the right, the core sentiment is focused on opposiing the left's agenda and the federal government generally. As a result, there does not yet seem any strong affinity between conservatives, the GOP and this new grassroots right.
It remains to conservative leaders to discover how to harness the passion on the right to affect real change.
Impact still in question
Simply I agree its a definite wait and see game, ignorance is bliss and the left may choose to ignore the tea party grassroots ignorantly blissfully until its too late to stop a coup or talk and decide that the United States is indeed about grassroots organizations. I think its amazing that if we were a third world country a real coup to oust Obama would have already occured, however due to the the fake money being printed everyday the coup is not an option unless a country, who is obviously stronger, richer and more cohesivie would attempt to take over the United States. China is choosing not to. Al Guada threat delusionally would like to take over the U.S. however, these so called terror pockets are no more of a threat than consuming Conagra's frozen hot pockets you purchase at your local supermarket. We are a safe and secure country, not my genius management from the executive branch of government, its just 1. China chooses not to take over. 2. Russia has decided not to take over the United States building nuclear weapons in Cuba and 3. Al Guada keeps sending audio from a cave, not much of a threat. So in the meantime we wait and see if impeachment should be in order or suffer 3 more years.
Biggest advantage the right has
is the whole calling into Congress to register (mostly) disapproval of certain bills. The right is so much more dominant in this particular area of politics that it makes up for many current deficiencies on the right. We saw this with the 2007 immigration bill, and have seen it a few times since.
main stream cred
I dispute two points of Ruffini’s post. First, Fox News and conservative talk radio did as much to publicize the tea parties as the web. While there is liberalish TV (Schultz, Maddow, Olberman), I never have heard them promote specific events in advance or appear at them.
More important is the credibility of right wing blogosphere. The main liberal blogs are closer to the main stream than the main conservative blogs. Even Next Right, which is more sane than most, commonly features global warming denial. I haven’t seen Darwin = Hitler = Obama = Stalin or birtherism here yet, but it’s the mainstay of most conservative blogs. Pandering to this 20% fringe, puts you outside the range of what the other 80% ever would support, and locks you into permanent minority status.
Americans as a whole, even those who voted for McCain and oppose health care reform, don't seem to be buying the idea that Obama stole the election and is hell bent on establishing a dictatorship. If you want to run against health care reform (takeover/whatever), fine. You don't improve your chances of blocking health care reform by being nutty.
The larger problem with the piece
Correct, and that points to the larger problem in Ruffini's thesis: The "teap party movement," in its various manifestations, isn't "grassroots" anything. It's the 100% manufactured product of massive funding by some of the wealthiest and most powerful interests in the U.S., who saw their prerogatives threatened by the incoming Obama administration. Fox News programming has been the equivalent of hundreds of hours of free advertising and promotion provided by NewsCorp--their contribution, alone, has probably amounted to tens of millions of dollars or more this year. Throw in the same by the hosts of Clear Channel and other radio networks, you have millions more. Throw in the money ponied up to the astroturfers who have organized this "movement," you have millions more. And so on. It's silly to pretend as though any of this is "grassroots" or "netroots" or anything else. It's a product of corporate America, trying to look out for its own interests, and nothing more.
That sort of gets to why this phony "movement" can't really go anywhere. It can do harm to something like health care reform, as it's intended to do, but the "movement" has been based on things like Obama not being a U.S. citizen, or being a Muslim, or creating “death panels” to kill old people, or trying to provide health care to illegal immigrants, or because he has “czars” in his administration, or because he wants to address school students, or because he’s a “socialist,” based on the bailouts, which are, in fact, aimed at saving various collapsed private industries, rather than permanently controlling them (and the bailouts are always attributed to Obama, though, in reality, every one, without exception, was an initiative of the Bush administration, and merely inherited). And so on. There's something else every few days to "stoke the troops," and, without exception, It’s all nonsense. The teabaggers don’t have any sort of program. Forget health-care–they don’t have any sort of program for anything, or even any central organizing principle beyond “we hate Obama,” based on a lot of things they’ve been fed that aren’t even true.
I can't respond to this
I can't respond to this because Rush Limbaugh isn't beaming anything into my brain right now.
Set seriousness bit to ON.
The belief that conservatives are merely following leaders is common on the left and is responsible for the left-wing tactic of taking over institutions formerly respected by conservatives. When the conservatives don't surrender, the leftists then look for the "real leaders."
By the way, we aware of the fact that Bush was also a liberal.
Bush was a liberal *when*
On this troubling trend among "real" conservatives:
I guess the question I would ask is when you became "aware of the fact." Were you aware of it in 1999? 2000? 2001? 2004? While he was advocating privatizing Social Security in 2005? Post-Katrina? After the 2006 mid-terms but before the surge? After the surge? Or was it only after TARP?
I supported Bush with reservations but I will never think he is a liberal--primarily because he isn't one. What does it say about we conservatives when our standard-bearer becomes our enemy when he disappoints us? Conservatives loved Bush through at least 2004. Now we say he isn't even one of us. Who are we?
Joseph Hertzlinger's definition of "liberal" and "conservative"
I would guess that Joseph Hertzlinger would define "conservative" as "whatever appeals to Joseph Hertzlinger's gut instincts", and "liberal" is "whatever Joseph Hertzlinger doesn't like, plus anything that history has demonstrated to be a mistake, a failure, or a bad idea".
For example, Woodrow Wilson would be a conservative through 1918; after that, we was a liberal.
Aww, johnson springs, your
Aww, johnson springs, your naivete is charming. When did he become aware Bush was a liberal? He became aware when the talking heads activated the stategery of declaring Bush a liberal to distance the GOP from his record, which IIRC began in August. So I'd estimate he became aware of it within the past month, after the trope was rolled out. The only interesting exercise left is to start the pool on when Fox displays the "(D)" after Bush's name. I'm in for mid-November. You? But I do have to give the purists and purgers credit: there are no sacred cows. He hasn't been out of office for a year and they're already drumming him out of the ranks.
And I have to admit to looking forward to the day Dick Cheney is drummed out. Let's see... he didn't torture enough because al-Qaeda is still here, he won't distance himself from teh gays, and worst of all, he didn't rein in that liberal Bush. Yes, it will be a sight to behold.
And the Tea Party moniker was a stroke of genius. The GOP is racing down the rabbit hole to resurrect itself using the Mad Hatter Tea Party strategy: up is down, down is up, etc., etc., etc. If FoxTalk says it, so shall it be.
Hertzlinger, do let us know when the shuttle lands, won't you?
They loved him right to the bitter end, and, though I know of no polling data to prove it, they probably still love him to this day. Even as late as December, when the disaster that had been the Bush presidency had become painfully apparent to nearly everyone, the economy had collapsed, and Republicans had been decimated in the elections, self-identified conservative Republicans were still giving Bush a 72% approval rating. Bush was, throughout his entire administration, probably both more popular and more consistently popular among the conservatives than was Reagan. Their devotion to him was fanatical to the point of being creepy. While he built an embroyonic police state, they built a cult-of-personality around him, and practically worshipped the ground he walked on--massive approval ratings all the way. If Bush ever became a liberal, it was news to them.
GW Bush: conservatives still love him
Yup.
For example, he was voted one of the top fifteen "Most Respected People On The Right" by Right Wing News (he also made the top 15 last year and undoubtedly was in the top five before the 2006 debacle)
http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2009/08/rightofcenter_bloggers_select_12.php
MARCU$
Branding Republicans as responsible
Regardless of liberal/conservative labels, Americans rightly believe that if they vote for the Republican candidates, they will get governance like Bush. Many associate Bush with recklessness. Deregulating banks without paying attention to the consequences, invading Iraq with too few troops, huge tax cuts "funded" by deficits, ignoring global warming, ignoring the looming breakdown of our health care system, etc.
Maybe they would trust a real conservative with the guts to do things right:
Got a candidate like that?
I disagree
I think what you are seeing is the last, desperate violent gasps of what remains of the Old Right.
There is so much racism and hate coming out of these protests now that it's hard to see how they can have a lasting and beneficial effect on conservatism.
California Dreaming - - Who is the "Main Stream"
The main liberal blogs are closer to the main stream than the main conservative blogs.
And the Facts to back up this Claim are ?
The TV Ratings of CNNCBSABCNBC compared to FOX ? Maybe the instant "Flash" mob of the Tea Party movement ? The liberals I know and Converse with have turned into Ostriches, the Big Bird with their head in the Sand.
And so goes Obama, ignoring the "Main Stream" as he is surrounded by audiences in Montana remote sites, a visit to Minnesota, or hiding at the UN building, away from the maddening "Mainstream".
How about a Trip back to Catepillar in Peoria Illinois ? See if those people who got hired after the prediction of "O"s last trip show up to sing "We love Obama" ?
And lets not mention the trend in the POLLS........and the ACORN beat goes on.
Here is a pretty good indicator of where the mainsteam lies
Gallup:
When 68% of the population think your newly-appointed poster boy is a jackass, it is a bad sign.
USA TODAY vs. 2 million in donations to Joe Wilson
USA today never publishes a poll it doesn't like.
Joe the Plumber was attacked incessantly, and Joe Wilson is no different. Certainly WIlson's opponent drug in a million in donations also, but his Website wasn't down for 4 to 5 hours due to attacks like Wilsons.
But, I was talking OBAMA and polls..... you didn't want to go there ?
Here is the Best pro "O" poll, and its a sinking ship...
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/gallup-daily-obama-job-approval.aspx
The new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll asked respondents whether they would prefer to see next year's elections result in a Congress controlled by Democrats or a Congress controlled by Republicans. The result: 48 percent say they would prefer Democrats in control, and 45 percent say Republicans. That three-point Democratic lead is down from seven points lead in July and nine points in April.
And saving the WORST for last (not that lefties read beyone the first negative sentence), the Rasmussen Daily Presidential tracking poll for "O" has been negative for quite awhile, now it's -10 double digits.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
AND the UN speech is going to really push him negative....as someone just said, On Foreign policy he is an "Immature Adolescent", and the UN is very capable of "Strongly Worded" E-mails, and thats about the extent of the UN "Action". Obama would get better r'International" results talking to a Boy Scout Troop.
The poll is by Gallup
The poll I cited was conducted by Gallup.
Wilson's unkown opponent is raising as much money as he is, which rather quashes whatever point you were trying to make. Moreover, he has gone from having a safe seat to being behind his challenger.
That same NBC/WSJ poll you cited shows the Republican Party as having roughly the same appeal as...wait for it...Nancy Pelosi. Do you think Nancy Pelosi is mainstream?
Mead 50, are you channeling The Wiz now?
NancyBoTox is mainstream for the Democrat Party. NancyBoTox is mainstream for those San Francisco Value Voters that hate the military, hate our troops, hate the CIA, despise average people, think "cut & run" is a good strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran and NKorea, think all whites are inherently guilty for something, sometime, somewhere and love all those who will spell corruption with a capital "C" because, we now know, NancyBoTox was actually the Queen of the Culture of Corruption whilst she was labeling all others as such.
I think you're confusing the low favorables of Congress as an institution --it's been horribly low when the GOP was in majority; it's even worse now. In fact, 6 months prior to the 2004 election, nearly 56% of Americans thought the Democrats already controlled Congress because NancyBoTox, HarryGreed and guys like Biden, Kennedy and others were featured on the MSM outlets like NBC, CBS and ABC 24x7.
But the answer to your querry, Dorothy --now hold on to Toto-- is that NancyBoToxedPelosi is indeed mainstream for the Democrat Party.
Ok, you can click your Red Slippers three times and join us in reality-land now.
God you are a pinhead
Link to the poll (PDF)
Nancy Pelosi:
The Republican Party:
Saying that Nancy Pelosi Pelosi is mainstream in the Democratic Party is as non-responsive to the issue at hand as pointing out that Haley Barbour is very electable in Mississippi.
Dorothy, I see you didn't click your heels...
gee, how could we have thought you'd actually want to be part of reality and truth?
OK, stay in the land of Oz... "Nancy Pelosi Pelosi" (sic) isn't mainstream to you. I'm guessing she's probably to the right of you, politically.
BTW, Gov Barbour was the head of Republica Party and served us with distinction. When he was our leader, we captured the House and Senate --the first time in 40+ yrs.
Yeah, bad pick. Haley Barbour is mainstream Republican, mainstream America and a patriot. Something we can't say about NancyBoTox.
From Rasmussen
Poll, July, of Republicans:
Possibly because he owns a lobbying firm? Used to work as a tobacco lobbyist? Pals around with a pro-segregation group (the CCC)? Raised taxes on health care, but vetoed a bill that would lower grocery taxes and raise tobacco taxes?
I'd say the fact that you think Hayley Barbour is mainstream America accurately sums up the statement of the problem at hand.
Actually, that poll is accurate... but you missed context.
Just like you did when you accepted that NancyBoTox is indeed representative of the mainstream Democrat elite and her San Francisco Values are the values of most Democrats. I'm sorry the party of Scoop Jackson has fallen so far from its once high standards and values.
Context, Mead. That poll was conducted at a time when Haley Barbour had made it very clear to GOP insiders that he did NOT want to run for the GOP prez nomination in 2008 or 2012. He said at that time when he was done serving the People of Mississippi, he wanted "...to go back home and sit on the porch, think, maybe write a book or two, get to know my grandkids a whole lot better, do some hunting and fishing".
He told Sununu, for instance, that his trips to NH and other states would be to advance the GOP's interest in rebuilding the Party, not acclaim him a candidate. His eyes are completely on the prizes of 2010 --and finishing up his term as Governor. He's working with GOP leaders to ensure that the GOP gain the maximum seats in 2010 and he's laying the groundwork for a center-right candidate in 2012.
In Haley's own words:
We all know from the way you lost the debate about what Tom Ridge really said and what the hard-core Left MSM wanted to report what his editors said on a front flap of his book, you'll latch onto Haley's "we'll see later, if..." line as proof positive he's a'running. But those of us who have been around politics know that when a candidate doesn't stay focused, he loses opportunities to enter the campaign... even now. Just look to FreddieThompson as the latest proof of that notion.
GOP insiders, who this poll was directed toward since Rasmussen used his GOPLdrs list as a base --which is anyone from a county chairperson up to the incumbent Senator-- didn't like hearing that news from Haley Barbour. Over and over. He said it before he resumed his leadership role of the GOP Govs Association. He said it before the GOP Mississippi State Convention. Some think he ought to be nominee --or at least run to keep the field moving to the Right and not the Center.
That's is the context for his low favorables. Many of us remember his exemplary leadership as RNC Chair and his monumental help in the GOP effort to return the Congress to the People. We strongly disagree with his decision to stay out of the race for 2012. We think Haley Barbour ought to serve and help lead the Party out of the wilderness and back to power... just like many of us do when it comes to Gov Ridge or Gov Todd-Whitman. And Haley, like many other GOPs, could do exactly that given the direction Obama-da-Joker is taking the country.
Context, Mead 50. It escapes your grasp each time, it seems. Maybe the red slippers weren't the perfect insurance policy for your return to reality? Pity that.
All of which has nothing to do with the fact
that Haley Barbour is not "main stream" - and that is the matter at hand.
Nothing (sic) to the fact?
Hey, Mead 50, you're arguing inside that little brain of yours too much... you were the guy who said Gov Barbour wasn't viewed as mainstream because GOP leaders didn't give him high favorables --I explained why you were wrong again (sigh).
You gotta get out of your Mom's basement, even in your pj's, and touch base with reality more.
I'm very happy to hold on to my proposition
that Haley Barbour, like Nancy Pelosi, is not mainstream.
Sure is he; and so is NancyBoTox.
Haley Barbour is against ObamaCare --as are most Americans, except those on the Left.
Haley Barbour is against wholesale amnesty for illegals --as are most Americans, except for those on the Left.
Haley Barbour supports our allies & our troops --as do most Americans, except those on the Left.
Haley Barbour is against the wasteful, fraudulent spending under the Obama Stimulus Spending Plan- as are most Americans, except for the big spending, big deficit Democrats on the Left.
Haley Barbour is in favor of traditional American family values -as are most Americans, except for those Democrats on the Left.
Haley Barbour is a fisher, hunter and wants our wilderness protected --as do most Americans, except for those on the Left like PETA who think we ought to arm the deer to make it fair and Sierra Club who want to close down natl parks so no human footprints spoil nature.
Haley Barbour is in favor of lowering taxes, smaller govt, less intrusion --as are most Americans, except for the Left who want to tax America out of productivity, expand govt with more czars than Russia had in 1000 yrs and want the feds to mandate gay marriage, adoption, no religion, tax churches, tell us what to eat and when and --best of all-- change the role of the fed govt into a full-fledged Nanny-state.
On the other hand, NancyBoTox likes the idea of "cut & run" as an exit strategy in Iraq -- as do most mainstream Democrats.
NancyBoTox wants the US to withhold more troops from Afghanistan because she fears another VietNam quagmire --as do most mainstream Democrats.
NancyBoTox supports the public option in ObamaCare --as do most mainstream Democrats.
NancyBoTox wants the CIA and others investigated for anything and everything in order to return to the post-Watergate Era of a hamstrung, ineffective natl intell capacity because it allows NancyBoTox's friends to work against American interests abroad without too much scrutiny --as do most mainstream Democrats.
NancyBoTox is in favor of sweeping amnesty for illegals and full health care benefits because California and NY are suffering under the burden of providing them with health care and most mainstream Democrats are in favor of "federalizing" the problem.
NancyBoTox is in favor of higher taxes and even more spending on domestic programs --as are most mainstream Democrats.
You're most happy to hold your position, Mead 50, because being wrong puts you squarely in the midst of most mainstream Democrats. Frankly, I think you and your sock-puppet pal in ClassicDemocrat are to the left of most mainstream Democrats.
Nicely said... put that argument to bed.
Mead 50, it's hard for even a hard core bore partisan like you to say that NancyP is mainstream America and Haley isn't... Barbour has more in common with joe-6pack, mainstream America and average Americans than NancyP could have even if she moved to Tulsa.
You lost this one too. You just can't accept the truth, pal.
Yes, that would be hard argument to make.
Yes, that would be a hard argument to make - which is why I was saying that she is NOT mainstream. And, neither is Hayley Barbour. Or Mike Huckabee.
Is that your version of the Canadian Two Step, dance boi?
because the point is that NancyBoTox is mainstream for the Democrat Party... Haley Barbour is a mainstream American and right off of Main Street America. The difference, for your limited grasp, is easy to miss. BTW, it's Haley... not Hayley as you write.
Nice dance move, but your card is still empty on winning a single policy debate on this blog... maybe it's time to retire? Rest a while and come back when you have something other than referencing the ideas made by other commenters (sic) on other blogs... rest and think for yourself; construct a legitimate opinion that holds water.
A worse one
And the fact that 58%-62% of your own party either doesn't even believe Obama is a U.S. citizen or aren't sure is an even worse one.
ClassicLiberal is another classic liar.
Gee, ClassicLiar, where'd ya get that statistic? Gallup? Rasmussen? Roper? JennyCraig?
Oh, you got it from a poll sponsored by the Daily Kos?
Sometimes we can just let the Village Idiots be and they'll indict themselves everytime.
Of course, in that same poll, nearly 50% of hard-core partisan Democrats said they don't think the world's geography has shifted in 6000 yrs of Earth's history... and don't think the continents drifted apart over millions of years... it was the Daily Kos's first question on their survey instrument.
You don't even lie well, ClassicLiar. Most GOP leaders who care have rebuked the Birthers line, including RNC Chair Steele and GOP Prez nominee McCain. As have authors on this site.
Quoting a Daily Kos poll might work for you on the Democrat Underground... but here it's just evidence of your ClassicLying and ClassicLunacy.
Ouch, Classic Liberal gets caught in a LarryCraig moment...
Way to go, Jake!
It was a Daily Kos poll? What a canard this Classic Liberal can be... he's beating out Mead 50 for Village Idiot of the Week.
Thank you, but stay tuned... CLD2 will trot out some nonsense
to counter a real simple fact: that Research 2000 is a DailyKos polling firm and that on the far Left blog-o-sphere, they often cite it as "Daily Kos/Research 2000 survey".... poor ol' Del Ali, for selling his soul down the river, he doesn't even get first billing on the identification line.
What's troubling about ClassicLiberalDemocrat2 is his childishness in spinning polling results much like Mead 50 does here often. CLD2's take-away talking point about the DailyKos poll (which was only 2 questions, mind you, LOL some professional pollster there) indicated that a farLeft spinmyster could stretch the results to frame the headline that CLD2 wants us to take-away from the 2 question"poll".
Another commenter here noted that the headling could just as easily read:
But then that headling wouldn't help the Village Idiot Savant discredit all Republicans. I don't think CLD2 or Mead50 or NMDem or the new sockpuppets like Our Paul are here to discuss and debate.
I think they're here to irritate and inflame. It must be hard for them to get over 8 yrs of Bush Bashing... mindless, pathetic deep-seated Bush Derangement Syndrome in full bloom.
Research 2000
Well, here is a link to a Wall Street Journal article that is happy to cite Research 2000.
And here is a link to a FOX News item that is happy to cite Research 2000.
Also, Nate Silver, who enjoys beating down crappy polling firms, is happy to cite them.
You willfully confuse commissioning a poll with owning the polling firm.
Idiot
It was a Research 2000 poll, not something conducted by Daily Kos. Like most polling firms, Research 2000 does commissioned polls. Daily Kos commissioned this one. The result: 58% of self-identified Republicans say they either don't believe Obama is a U.S. citizen, or aren't sure he is one. These results have been replicated, as well. Shortly after the release of that first poll, Public Policy Polling of Virginia--in an attempt to refute that finding--included a question in a poll they conducted in that state, and found that 68% of Virginia Republicans were of the birther camp. A poll from North Carolina offered up similar results, so PPP conducted a national poll on the question. Their results: 64% of Republicans in the U.S. either don't believe Obama is a citizen or aren't sure he is one.
Their problem: the base ain't buyin' it. Rush Limbaugh, Alan Keyes, Micheal Reagan, Newsmax, Lou Dobbs, Liz Cheney, WorldNutDaily--some of the most prominent conservative voices in the U.S.--have promoted birther garbage, along with at least 17 members of congress--all conservative Republicans. Rep. Charles Boustany, sufficiently beloved within the party to be given the Republican response to Obama's health care speech, once toyed with birther-ism (he has sinced tried to distance himself from it).
Classic Liberal is "Village Idiot Savant"? It lives! He is!
No one outside of progressive Democratic Party politics would term Research 2000 a legitimate polling firm and, yes, it is pretty much a Daily Kos/Research 2000 operation run with a single phone line by its owner, Del Ali. I think it's safe to say that the people and many blogs at the Daily Kos represent the more extreme fringe Left and socialist elements of the Democratic Party and radical political activist groups. I think it's safe to say that, despite what PR bullshit Research 2000 lays out, it doesn't have a significant client base and it is lucky to have the Daily Kos account --but at a price of credibility for being the Daily Kos shill.
If you check into Research 2000's site, the most current testimonials are from 2002. Their service page sounds like Del Ali is begging for anyone to hire him for any purpose, including guest speaker at your local Rotarian luncheon or school PTA meeting. Pretty sad.
As for the Obama Birth Certificate issue, I first heard about it from listening to a RNC Chairman Michael Steel interview on CNN at the airport. He roundly discredited the conspiracy theorists holding to that line; if the head of the RNC knocks it, I think we can all take it as official. McCain knocked it, as well. Bush knocked it. Rove has knocked it. Alexander, Hatch, Specter before the switch, etc. If the leadership knocks it, why does the rank and file matter except for Classic Liberal 2 trying to discredit all Republicans?
But more importantly, let's look at Classic Liberal 2's point -eg "And the fact that 58%-62% of your own party (Republican ?) either doesn't even believe Obama is a U.S. citizen". Which was his way to jampile onto the notion that 68% of Americans think Joe Wilson is a "jackass" according to Mead 50. Ugh.
At most, I think Classic Liberal 2 has been lying, as has been noted many times at this blog. At the very least, Classic Liberal 2 is being intellectually dishonest and misleading in the extreme. Let's be intellectually dishonest and flip his "headline"?
If you add the "not sure factor" of 30% of respondents into the equation of those Republicans who are sure he's a US citizen (42%), the number of people who think or aren't sure (because of the way the question was worded or because they aren't following this inside-inside-inside the ballpark issue) rises to 72% and that tracks with the Daily Kos/Reserach 2000 "poll" results that indicate 77% of people think Obama is a US citizen. So the new headline reads "72% of Republicans don't buy into the Birther Bull"... not sure, in most sales situations, is still a negtive and it's certainly a "Not buying".
Additionally, some on the left and the intellectual soulmates of Classic Liberal 2, think that the Obama Birth Certificate matter is a smoke screen for incipient racism. Just like the 9/11 Truthers were thought to be alien spawn, Rosie O'Donnell excluded --no alien would create something that hideous. Both stupid conclusions when "stupid" is the only explanation needed for both birthers and truthers.
Bottom line is that Classic Liberal 2 is likely lying with a clear purpose to mislead and bend the truth to better suit his/her narrow political interests. Village Idiot Savant may be generous for his skill set.
Matt
Removing most of your BS leaves little to which one can reply
They mostly do polling work for local newspaper and television news operations--they claim over 300 such organizations (they've been around for years).
...except you don't get to do that on the birther question, because the birthers are the ones who have raised those doubts. That's what the birthers are--people who have doubts that the President of the United States is a U.S. citizen.
The trump card in all of this, of course, is that the Research 2000 poll results have been replicated by other pollsters. Weeks after the R2000 results, PPP, trying to shoot down those results, found an even higher number--64% of Republicans--either said Obama wasn't a U.S. citizen or weren't sure.
Ummm, Mead 50, "not supportive" doesn't mean jackass.
First, there's the problem of terming Rep Joe Wilson, a decorated US Army Colonel and distinguished lawyer and public servant, a poster boy for anyone. He's his own man -as his outburst proved. Earlier, your side was trying to make him the poster boy for JohnBirchers and former Confederate soldiers still fighting the War of Northern Aggression... any group that would further impeach him and excuse the House Democrats' ill-pursued tar-n-feathering program.
Your side of the partisan divide thought Joe-the-Plumber was our poster boy before him and you did the same to him. Your side of the partisan divide thought Sarah Palin was our poster girl before him and still do it to her. And, gosh knows the far Left partisan divide you populate tried to make Rush Limbaugh the poster boy before her and still lambast him daily. I'm thinking you can't get past page 1 of Hillary Clinton's book on the Practice of the Politics of Personal Destruction.
Wilson was right; Obama does lie --often and repeatedly-- about ObamaCare, about the Stimulus, about Cash4Clunkers, about deficits, about taxes, about who got bailouts, about Iran and Iraq and now, no surprise, about Afghanistan and about his promise to bring "Change" to Washington. He's made the rat hole worse, more partisan, more divided by advancing radical, anti-American legislation. Pushing America to the Left wasn't what America thought it was getting with "Change and Hope" campaign promises.
Rep Joe Wilson got it right: Obama lies. He's now lying about whether or not illegal aliens will get covered under ObamaCare. And, in a move that must embarass the White House to no end (if they had a conscience), House Democrats tell their President that illegals SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE.
Rep Joe Wilson, who is no one's poster boy, was right. Obama lies.
By the way, Mead50, if support translates into labeling some a jackass, I guess we'll can replace the title "Obama as Sociopathic Liar Joker" with "Obama as Jackass"? Nawh, I like the ring of the former better.
Lets hear more about his medals
Tell me more about his medals! Becasue I'm pretty sure that he has spend his entire career in the Reserves and the Guard and has never, ever been deployed; furthermore, if he had been, he never would have even heard a shot fired in anger, because he was a JAG, not a fighter.
Grab a copy of his Army record; it's posted in lots of Dem sites
that compared Rep Wilson's with his decorated campaign competitor. But that's not the main point, is it? And you know that, right? Deceitful little troll, you.
I can see why you'd rather grab onto anything other than the mainpoint here, Mead 50... which was why Rep Joe Wilson's intemperate remarks were inappropriate but true. Obama lied about the intent of Democrats to cover illegal aliens under ObamaCare.
When House Democrats recently came out from under the BoToxRock and entered into the sunshine, the first thing they dis was to send a letter to their president Obama and tell him that illegal aliens should get free medical care, short-term documented aliens should also get free health care... and, worst of all, they won't tolerate Obama backpedaling on any of it... if ACORN was still active and not hunkered down in audits, firings, investigations and spinning... they would probably lead the effort to get illegal aliens covered under ObamaCare. I guess they have to leave it up to La Raza and Sotomayor, if it makes it to a FedCirCt.
Of course, if Obama gets his way and the Congress passes his Amnesty Plan by December, there will no longer be anyone known as illegal aliens... they'll all be 'immigrants-prospective' with his new labeling --no need to say "truth in labeling", it isn't.
You can go on about Wilson's service to his country... that's ok. But when you're finished, let's get back to the Democrats lying about covering illegal aliens under ObamaCare. That's why we were even talking about Joe Wilson, in the first place.
"He lies" is about the only honest thing said in that joint session that evening.
You are the one who called him "decorated"
I called you out on that and you then reply that I am "deceitful"? Pee-Wee Herman would be proud.
Wilson is decorated for his long service, check on it yourself..
Meanwhile, you've still avoided the main point: Wilson was right: Obama lies.
I can see why you'd rather grab onto anything other than the mainpoint here, Mead 50... which was why Rep Joe Wilson's intemperate remarks were inappropriate but true. Obama lied about the intent of Democrats to cover illegal aliens under ObamaCare.
When House Democrats recently came out from under the BoToxRock and entered into the sunshine, the first thing they dis was to send a letter to their president Obama and tell him that illegal aliens should get free medical care, short-term documented aliens should also get free health care... and, worst of all, they won't tolerate Obama backpedaling on any of it... if ACORN was still active and not hunkered down in audits, firings, investigations and spinning... they would probably lead the effort to get illegal aliens covered under ObamaCare. I guess they have to leave it up to La Raza and Sotomayor, if it makes it to a FedCirCt.
Of course, if Obama gets his way and the Congress passes his Amnesty Plan by December, there will no longer be anyone known as illegal aliens... they'll all be 'immigrants-prospective' with his new labeling --no need to say "truth in labeling", it isn't.
You can go on about Wilson's service to his country... that's ok. But when you're finished, let's get back to the Democrats lying about covering illegal aliens under ObamaCare. That's why we were even talking about Joe Wilson, in the first place.
"He lies" is about the only honest thing said in that joint session that evening.
Great move, Mead... pick a meaningless detail and make it
grandly important. Medals? What an ass. Village Idiot is too generous.
Talk about diverting attention.
The point was that House Democrats are calling for ObamaCare to cover illegal aliens and undocumented workers. Kind of makes your statements about the plan doesn't cover illegals look like a lie.
Joe Wilson may have had you pegged, too.
I think making exaggerated claims about someone's service to
this country is worth pointing out, given the real sacrifices that are made by the men and women in our armed services who are in harms way.
4 speed, you're mixing reality with what Dems actually need...
the Democrats and Obama defenders here don't want to hear about reality or truth... they want to be able to echo back to the days when they had control over the debate, the agenda, the issues. That reality left them at the train station, they can't find their baggage, their train schedule or a way to get back onboard.
Patrick's smartly arguing a convincing case that the conservative movement is learning from the excesses of the far Left blog-o-sphere over the last 8 years... and part of that effort, like Ari Fleischer noted this weekend, is to slam, pummel, pound, beat and trash the worst aspects of Obama's and Democrat Party proposals... there's lots of time for the GOP to broker deals, to be bipartisan, to work on common ground, to advance alternative ideas --but for now, the GOP and conservatives need to keep driving down Obama's and the Left's polling numbers, separate them from their wavering constituencies like gullible Independents or people who stopped at "Hope & Change" as an excuse to vote for a mixed-race president and assuage their guilt.
The grilling of ACORN, the unprecedented reality of getting a highly partisan, highly Democrat Congress to pull ACORN's funding --ACORN, the President's Own (no, Obama doesn't care for the US Marine Corps Band which used to be known as the Prez's Own), the success of bringing hundreds of thousands of informed, average Americans to DC to protest Obama's Rush-2-da-Left, the sweeping viewership of FoxNews, the expanse and diversity of TalkRightRadio, the decline of the Left's media like WaPo, NYTImes, MSNBC and others... it's all great, living proof that the Lie-That-Is-Obama movement is coming to a shuddering, unscheduled stop.
We need to pummel and trash and scorn as often as Obama lusts for a smoke or SlickWilly lusts for an intern behind Hillary's back. Ideas and bipartisanship come later. Right now, it's build a strong, impeachable network and ignite that well-earned anger.
I agree
The right is central to the next generation of political inquiries that may be focused on current issues as you clearly state.
Patrick, spot on examination. You're probably now on the Obama
Enemies List and, like with hospital and medical insurance providers, they'll try to gag you next.
Why is it that Obama's Administration looks more fascist and less socialist everyday? Oh, probably because he's losing all the the legislative and public opinion battles on his socialist legislation, all he has left to do is indoctrinate kids, threaten the elderly with pulling their plug, keep the middle class in living in fear over a massive tax hike and tell the troops and our enemies abroad that we've lost the will and resolve to win any war --even the wars that Geo Bush was winning.
While I may not like it, it is free speech.
And while I might not like to see any president denigrated like this, I remember Democrats and ACORN staffers marching with posters that made fun of our President "kissing" a Saudi king, acting like a chimp in the zoo --in fact, didn't the Democrats use to call President Bush "AWOL McChimp"? Didn't MoveOn(dot)Org have a contest to see who could come up with the most trashy political ad --and it was one that suggested Bush should be killed?
I may not have liked those either, Our Paul, but we do live in a country that prides itself on free speech. Sorry, you lose on this argument. You owe Mi-GOPer an apology.
Matt