Have Obama's Poll Numbers Slipped? I Guess It's Time For an Article About How Stupid and Ill-Informed and Emotional American Voters Are

We didn't see this article when Obama's numbers touched 50% for the first time in years.

Nor did we see it when Obama won the election.

But now? Well, if Obama's numbers have fallen precipitously, it must be time for liberals to explain to other liberals that the public is stupid.

How much do voters know?

By ALEXANDER BURNS

That Forrest Gump picture is really there in the article. You know, the retarded man.

Voters are appalled at President Barack Obama’s handling of gas prices, even though virtually every policy expert in both parties says there’s little a president can do to affect the day-to-day price of fuel in a global market.

Perhaps the stupid voters remember a "policy expert" named Barack Obama, who they were assured was a rara avis expert in all things, slamming George W. Bush for gas prices in 2008.

And perhaps they remember the press not contradicting him, but in fact running a lot of stories linking high gas prices to Bush policies.

Perhaps they're not stupid -- or at least not as stupid as the media-liberal complex requires them to be.

In any event, the public knows that there are a series of supply-boosting steps Obama vetoes.

Despite what "virtually every policy expert" may say.

By the way, I know a lot of "policy experts" who do in fact charge that Obama's supply-limiting policies are driving up the price of gas.

I guess Alexander Burns doesn't have their emails.

If he shoots me an email, I could put him in touch.

I can't expect him to do his job for himself.

...

Add up that litany of contradictory, irrational or simply silly opinions, and it’s enough to make a political professional suspect the electorate is, well, not entirely sophisticated about the choices it’s facing in 2012.

“The first lesson you learn as a pollster is that people are stupid,” said Tom Jensen of Public Policy Polling, a Democratic polling firm. “I tell a client trying to make sense of numbers on a poll that are inherently contradictory that at least once a week.”

Jensen, a Democrat, pointed to surveys showing that voters embraced individual elements of the Affordable Care Act, while rejecting the overall law, as an example of the political schizophrenia or simple ignorance that pollsters and politicians must contend with.

As I have explained to these baffled "policy experts" six million times, I may like a lot of features on the new Mustang Boss 302, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to purchase it.

In the real world, policies have costs. Liberals never seem to understand this. While I may like the notion that no one should be denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition -- in the same way I like the notion of Tolkein's Middle Earth -- that does not mean I want to create a death-spiral effect wherein no one has to purchase insurance until they need it.

Nor do I wish to spend $1.76 trillion on this boondoggle.

Liberals -- "policy experts" to a man -- never seem to grasp that I might not turn my nose at something if it's stone-cold free, but will balk if I'm asked to pay for it.

And yes I know they claim all these things are "free." I am, unfortunately, not stupid enough to believe in foolish things.

“We’re seeing that kind of thing more and more. I think it’s a function of increased political polarization and voters just digging in their heels and refusing to consider the opposing facts once they’ve formed an opinion about something,” said Jensen, who has generated eye-catching data showing many GOP primary voters still question the president’s religion and nationality. “I also think voters are showing a tendency to turn issues that should be factual or non-factual into opinions. If you show a Tennessee birther Obama’s birth certificate, they’re just going to say ‘well in my opinion he’s not a real American.’ It’s not about the birth certificate; it’s about expressing hatred for Obama in any form they can.”

I guess Alexander Burns does not know the name of a single Republican who can explain these inexplicable beliefs to him.

But irrationality on policy issues transcends party lines and cuts across groups that feel differently about the president... the contest has been more like a game of Marco Polo, as a hapless gang of Republican candidates and a damaged, frantic incumbent try to connect with a historically fickle and frustrated electorate.

And “fickle” is a nice way of describing the voters of 2012, who appear to be wandering, confused and Forrest Gump-like through the experience of a presidential campaign. It isn’t just unclear which party’s vision they’d rather embrace; it’s entirely questionable whether the great mass of voters has even the most basic grasp of the details – or for that matter, the most elementary factual components – of the national political debate.

I actually agree with that. But the reason they are confused is due to outlets like Politico, which lie to them on a daily basis.

...

For voters to disapprove of Obama’s energy and economic policies may be completely rational. But to reassess a president’s performance in the context of a short-term increase in gas prices is more of a tantrum-like response to a new feeling of discomfort over which the president has relatively little control.

Tantrum-like. We're back at that one, eh?

I guess I don't have a point here, except liberals are irrational, stuffed full with silly opinions, do not seem to have a grasp of what the actual debate is about, and react to small movements in poll numbers in a tantrum-like fashion.

Thanks to JeffB.

posted by Ace at 12:51 PM

| Access Comments