What do you think about this recent poll that 51% of GOP Primary voters believe Obama isn't US born?
Asked by
cockswain (
15286
)
February 15th, 2011
Here is the article. What do you think about it? What do you think it says about our media and our population?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
93 Answers
Wonder where they did their poling? How scientific was it? I can stand at a mall or a corner and do a poll, but it won’t really portray what the majority of America thinks.
I love that neutral, unbiased NPR headline: Half Of GOP Primary Voters Wrongly Say Obama Non-U.S. Born: Poll
To your question. I was having this discussion last week with some folks. The main concensus was, why didn’t he just produce the original birth certificate in the beginning and release his school records? Well, I personally don’t think the birth certificate cover-up is because of where Obama was born. I think it is because the truth will come out about his true father.
But, my favorite conspiracy theory is that Obama didn’t put his hand on the Holy Bible when he was sworn in as President and promised to the best of his ability, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Wait, that one is true.
That’s what I’m here for.
Do you think his true father could be a dark lord of the Sith?
oops, @cockswain I hope you don’t mind me posting a poll on your poll question. I’ll take it out if you want me to.
@lillycoyote that wasn’t the official oath. Justice Roberts flubbed the oath when he said it and Obama messed up repeating the oath. Remember? He had to retake it and no photographers were allowed to see it happen. Only one White House photographer. No Bible.
@bkcunningham If there were no pictures, how do you know he did or did not put his hand on the bible?
It’s probably the same percentage that thinks he’s a Muslim…
@chyna there was one official photo. A White House photographer took the photo. No Bible.
@bkcunningham Thanks for adding that to the post above mine and not adding the word edit.~
it could just be the collective subliminal that trust most politicians coming from Chicago are just a tad slippery anyway. Where did that rumor start I wonder?
@cockswain does what really matter? The second oath with the Bible or the place of birth?
Sorry @chyna. I didn’t see your response and added “No Bible.” I’m sorry.
Not that I have a brief for the Republican party or its supporters, but…
Are there any polls that show the percentage of Democratic voters who believe that Obama is the Messiah? I’m just wondering.
I mean “without” the Bible. Edit above question.
The second oath with the bible. Personally, as an atheist, I could care less if he had a Torah, Bible, or Quran. I’d prefer no one used any religious book since I think they are meaningless in the context of political office. Who cares if someone takes an oath on a religious book? Does that make the person more likely to behave better?
@cockswain It certainly didn’t help Nixon behave better.
@cockswain obviously Obama cared or he wouldn’t have done the public thing with the Bible even though that one didn’t count. That is just my conspiracy theory. He professes to be a Christian so, if it wasn’t with a Bible during the “official swearing in,” why not?
@cockswain why do you think so many people don’t think he was born in the US?
I love that part in the constitution where it says the president must be sworn in on a holy book. Hold on while I find it for you…~
@bkcunningham Yes, I remember. And I love the neutral, unbiased telling of only part of the story. The do over was a back up, no one knows whether it was really necessary. You say the original swearing in “didn’t count.” Are you sure? You say that as though it were simply a matter of fact. No one, not even people who know a lot more about constitutional law than you and I know or can say whether or not it really “counted”. And the law, the Constitution does not require that a President be sworn in with his (or her) hand on the Bible or even that one be anywhere around. It is a matter of tradition and not an unbroken one either. You might find this article, from that bunch of liberal liars over at the Washington Post, interesting.
@lillycoyote it is an interesting article. I saw it when it was first published in WaPo. Why would you post something and call the source a bunch of “liberal liars?” What is your point?
I think it’s because so many people think of Obama as “other.” He is so different from their image of what an American president looks like. These myths arise and persist despite any evidence to support them simply because these people need to have some “truth” upon which to justify their sense of unease. Their sense that their country has been taken away from them.
A lot of it is racism. Again, many people are uncomfortable having a black person as president, but they can’t say that. So they glom onto these myths or fables, and keep them alive.
People who think their country has been “stolen” believe in something that they can’t quite articulate—a sense of wrongness. How a country could be stolen from people who still live there is inexplicable. Art least, not explainable in terms of physical reality. But it is explainable in terms of mythic reality.
People don’t have any sensible way of explaining this, so they lock onto this purported “fact” as a symbol of their feelings. Basically, it means that 51% of those polled can’t identify at all with Obama. He is foreign to them, literally as well as figuratively. They can’t imagine how they are in a world where he could be President. That’s why the belief is immune to being changed by facts.
I’d like to say, “God help us,” but I don’t believe in God and I don’t think it really matters why people are opposed to him. Reality has nothing to do with it. Feelings have everything to do with it.
The point, @bkcunningham, was just a little sarcastic humor, just a little dig at whoever, at those non-neutral, biased purveyors of the news, of the truth, like the people that write that those who believe that Obama is not native born believe it falsely, as though Obama’s birth is somehow a matter of fact and public record, instead of something one can have an opinion about… perhaps, I don’t know. Who knows. I’m not even always sure what my point is. But, apparently, as humor, it fell pretty damn flat. I will refrain from such rhetoric in the future, sorry.
@breedmitch Love ya tonight and forever for that one. Searching the Constitution for the Bible references and jotting them down shouldn’t take very long at all. Oh my. Done already!
It is nothing more than an indirect way of saying that he is a moron. Every president has something about them that their opponents latch onto and use as a focus for their disapproval. Reagan was dumb, Clinton was a draft dodging adulterer, Bush was a puppet of the neo-cons etc. What’s new?
@lillycoyote I understood your humor.
@josie Why is Obama a moron because people think he wasn’t born here? I don’t get your logic yet.
@wundayatta questioning Obama when he never produced a birth certificate is racist because he’s black? What if someone is black and questions something about Obama, are they racist? I’m being serious, not looking for a fight. Serious question.
@bkcunningham I think people don’t believe he was born here because of Fox News and the rumor mill of local idiots spinning the story further.
Read this PolitiFact article on the subject and tell me why you don’t believe his birth certificate is valid for factual, not circumstantial or opinionated reasons.
You accuse NPR of being biased by saying the people “wrongly” believe the birth certificate is fake. Hopefully you don’t conclude Politifact is also biased.
@cockswain
He may or may not be a moron.
Most politicians are.
But his opponents certainly think he is.
@bkcunningham Why do you keep insisting that Obama’s birth certificate has not been produced, at least not sufficiently to put this matter to rest once and for all? It has been repeatedly produced and is as valid as my birth certificate is. I have my original but the copies I get get, certified and with raised seals, from my state’s Department of Vital Records are as valid as the original. Valid enough for me to use them to secure a U.S. passport. Is that a loophole? Are my birth certificates not valid? Am I not a U.S. citizen? Should I be reported to the State Department and have my passport revoked? How much proof is necessary before it is matter of people simply not being able to discern the difference between the truth and a lie?
Most states will not issue the original of the birth certificate. If that got lost, there would be no replacement. THey send out a certified copy with the state seal embossed on it. That is Hawaii’s practice and that’s what Obama “produced”. This faux “controversy” is whacko conspiracy theory stuff. The fact that 51% of Republican primary voters are now deliberate know nothings is what’s highly disturbing.
@bkcunningham Your link to the reputed CNN Poll in your response here actually goes to an article on the notorious lie factory and right-wing propaganda site, WorldNetDaily.com. The actual CNN Poll returned numbers that are wildly different from the big lie propagandists claims.
The GOP is drifting into uncharted waters by courting birthers, deathers and people who ONLY respond to the Big Lie. When a party needs to rely of deliberately false propaganda to win votes, its real interests are such that they can’t be made public. What Joseph Goebbels said about the Big Lie as a political strategy is as true today as it was back when the Nazis used it to grab dictatorial power in Germany and plunge the world into a war that ended up killing 60 million people. If they had run in open elections telling the people what the honestly planned to do, they wouldn’t have come to power, they would have been ridden out of town on a rail.
@bkcunningham It’s part of demonizing the “other.” Dark skin is a visible sign of his “otherness” to many folks. Of course, it’s not cool to be racist, so it gets transferred to whatever is convenient and vaguely defendable. It’s not usually a conscious thing, It is, however, the same kind of thing as being racist, although I think it would be more accurate to call it “otherist.” When we don’t like someone, and a lot of the reasons we don’t like them are really just because we don’t like them, we need to hang that dislike on something vaguely appropriate. In other words, if it wasn’t the momentary uncertainty about his birth certificate, the detractors would find something else that could be sold as a legitimate beef.
I say this because these accusations are so absurd and so meaningless, that they have to have something to do with a cultural meme, rather than the surface facts. Character is another thing like this. People believe they can read a person’s character by looking at their faces for a few debates, or by reading a few stories in the news that may or may not be true. If a person has committed an infidelity, that is automatic grounds, in most cases, for impeaching his character. But it isn’t always true. Homosexuality is no longer an automatic disqualification. Not sure if financial improprieties ever were.
@ETpro‘s explanation of the Big Lie is similar. These ideas persist despite any amount of debunking. I’m sure you have a dozen reasons in your mind already about why the poll really did tell the truth. But in the end it’s what you, and what all of us want to believe more than it is about any facts we might bring to the table.
This is something that always bothered me about liberals. We always try to do research and present scientific data, as if that mattered. In so many cases, all we need to do is be first on the scene and keep repeating lies early and often, just like people like Rush Limbaugh do. But we usually don’t do that. We usually think that political debate is honest and people will listen to reason. But then, we’re starry-eyed idealists. Not really prepared to sell our souls. Not that we would have a problem with that, since most of us don’t believe in souls.
@cockswain the NPR headline was not good journalism for the story that it headlined. It was obviously biased in regards to the story about the poll. I questioned who his father is and then gave my conspiracy theory on the Bible. I think it wouldn’t have been any kind of deal if Obama had been forthcoming in releasing the birth certificate. I think that added/adds to peoples’ doubts about him. You guys are in love with Obama and defend him to the end. That is fine. That what makes this a great country.
@wundayatta all of that is well and good. But you didn’t answer my question.
Don’t attack us. I’m not an Obama apologist and just want to see the truth spread. Read the article I linked and let me know what your beef is. We need a common point to discuss.
Of course he isn’t American! He’s Black!!!
@cockswain I never said that I don’t think the birth certificate is valid. My concern is with the length of time it took to produce the certificate. I do have to say that the other little thing in the back of my mind includes Michelle Obama’s speech at the Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council of the Democratic National Committee in New York City back in June 2008 when she said Obama’s home country is Kenya. I’m not a birther, but I’m being honest with you and maybe some of this is how other people think that aren’t so in love with Obama.
@bkcunningham No, it’s not racist because he’s black. It’s racist because it’s demonizing the other who is black in a culture that is historically and currently racist or has hidden undertones of racism. It is racist because it is a trumped up charge against someone who is black; charged, in some degree, because he is black and uppity.
Ok. But I don’t see why loving or hating Obama has anything to do with cherry-picking facts to support an opinion of him. I’m referring to the “other” people you describe.
@cockswain I’ve really, sadly I must say, gotten to a point in recent years that I don’t trust many of the main stream media sources. I’m not saying that in response to your source. Just in general. I trust that, but still something in the back of my mind, and it isn’t that mumbo-jumbo racist crap that @wundayatta is spouting, no offense @wundayatta I’m just sick of being called a racist I don’t trust even that. I do trust it, but I’m just saying I’m getting so freaking cynical in my old age.
What happened to the OP question? Sheez, get a room guys!
It’s my question and I don’t mind.
And I don’t like feeling like that. I like to be able to trust people and take them at their word, especially the press and my elected flipping officials.
And another thing, @woodcutter had a good point that I overlooked until just now. “it could just be the collective subliminal that trust most politicians coming from Chicago are just a tad slippery anyway.”
@bkcunningham And who are the American presidents who have produced their birth certificates in a more timely manner than Obama? By what measure, by what standard, are you gauging this supposed lag in Obama’s time frame for producing his birth certificate, by what standard are you measuring his alleged reluctance to provide his birth certificate?
@cockswain every morning I read The Wall Street Journal, WaPo, National Review, The Hill, the New York Times, the Providence Journal, the Orlando Sentinal and some other local newspapers from places where I’ve lived.
Not every day, but at least two or three times a week, I go to the Newseum website where they list the headlines from all the states and scan headlines and see if something catches my eye then I go to that paper. I read Pajamas Media (hilarious) and Media Matters. I go to the English version of different news sites in Egypt and Isreal.
You’re doing a good job then.
I think it means at least 51% of the GOP are idiots.
@psychocandy It isn’t quite that bad… Yet. It’s 51% of GOP primary voters not party members.
Well, at least the GOP knows that global warming isn’t man-made. We can thank them for solving that one. ~
If a lie is repeated often enough, people will believe it.
Ah yes, the “hide the decline” scandal. Man, she’s an expert on tree-ring data too. What an asset to our society.
I think it means that the Democrats are morons for simply not admitting that they’re just as power-hungry as the Republicans and that they all have an interest in keeping the two-party system going in order to have the possibility that they may dominate it some of the time.
I mean, if they had just said, “Look, we’re trying to win the election. Do you really think se didn’t frickin do our research and make sure that the person we nominated wasn’t at the very least constitutionally able to take the office of President that we would back him? Huh? Do you?
The insulting part is that he was even asked to produce a birth certificate.
I heard that the state assembly in Arizona is trying to pass a law that would prevent any candidate who couldn’t produce a “long form” birth certificate from being on a ballot. Well President Obama hasn’t got one. He’s got a very legal one, just not the specific one that Arizona is asking for.
This could get weird.
TL;DR
Truth, facts, and logic have no bearing on what many (most?) Americans think, and have no place in US politics.
@breedmitch Arizona is also doing other weird things. Well, at least Obama isn’t Mexican; if he were, Arizona would arrest him and hold him without charges, assuming he wasn’t shot by the Minutemen.
However, South Dakota is considering weirder stuff
Why is it so important that the president of the US must be born there? What advantages does the accident of birth confer? Let’s assume Obama was born outside of the US. Why would this make him less qualified to lead the country than, for example, José Padilla?
@meiosis,
It’s a matter of principles.
Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution sets forth the eligibility requirements for serving as President of the United States…
“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
@cackle I know the law exists. I’m wondering why it actually matters, why Section 1 of Article 2 exists, why it was deemed important.
That people who are stupid enough to be Republicans will believe anything.
@bkcunningham How many times does he have to “be forthcoming” with his birth certificate? He’s already produced it. I agree with those who consider it insulting that he was even asked, but he did so in a completely proper way. Its just people who choose not to believe what’s in front of them that see it any other way. Where was the demand to see Palin’s BC? McCain’s? McCain wasn’t even born on US soil (technically). Biden’s? Yet we demand to see the “other’s” birth certificate and bitch that he’s taking too long to provide it when he’s likely just consulting with his people as to whether its really necessary and possibly getting over his indignation that he, as the only black candidate and the only one who was asked, was “required” to produce his. Which he did in a timely manner, more than “forthcoming” with it.
Do people REALLY think that the GOP leadership, who was making every effort to bring Obama down wouldn’t have pursued this if it was at all a legitimate complaint to stop him in his tracks? They know its legitimate which is why you don’t see them filing lawsuits. Why can’t the party members accept what the leadership has clearly seen, that they have no grounds on this particular matter to complain or to have legal recourse? Its pretty simple. They care more about hating the black Democrat than anything that might actually be true.
@bkcunningham Who do you think Obama’s ‘true father’ is? I’m genuinely curious.
It could be any number of Sith Lords, not just Vader.
@bkcunningham Racism, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. Many people believe they are not racist, but people who are being discriminated against would say otherwise. I believe that if Obama had been white and had a Anglo-Saxon name, none of the birth certificate hullabaloo would be happening. But that’s alternate history, and pure speculation.
If I want to explain your views in the way I have, you can call it crap, but that doesn’t affect the accuracy of the theory. In fact, you could probably say that it’s racist to say that it’s racist to think Obama isn’t a native because he’s black. It’s not a provable argument. It’s about feelings more than evidence.
You can call it crap, and you are welcome to. I doubt we’ll ever find there’s much we agree on. However, I would suggest that if you want to call it crap, you offer a little more of your thinking to support that idea. I’ve provided a pretty significant chunk of my reasoning. But the truth is that I doubt if I’ll learn anything reasonable from you. I will learn more about how you think, and I can’t argue with how you think. Kind of pointless. No offense.
The only thing really interesting you could say to me is to tell me the story of how your grew up and how you came to the views that you have. But that would take too long. Which leaves me wondering why we even bother to talk to each other. Probably because we are not talking to each other. We are talking to another audience entirely.
It’s consistent. Sadly, many conservative voters and most ultra-conservative voters in the US are stricken with above average ignorance. More than 50% of this group thought Saddam Hussein was behind the 911 attacks. FOX Network is only slightly better than North Korean State Television. So what can we expect?
Just to clarify: I know many very intelligent and well-educated conservative people too.
@mattbrowne But how loud are those intelligent Conservatives? How much media play do they get? People naturally want to be interesting, and spouting extremist rhetoric is one way to grab peoples attention.
Besides, thinking for yourself is boring.
@jerv – I guess some of them are active on Fluther. Does this count for media play? No, seriously, here’s one: Colin Powell.
@mattbrowne Colin Powell is outnumbered in the media world. I’m not saying that intelligent Conservatives don’t exist, just that they don’t get much attention compared to, say, Beck or Palin.
I’m personally pretty impressed by the way jaxk and bkcunningham conduct themselves as conservatives on this site. Regardless of if I agree, they remain civil and give thoughtful answers.
@cockswain – I totally agree with that assertion. They both slip up, but so do we all – and it’s very rare as to be a testament to their conduct, considering that they are in the minority and therefore are baited far more often than most, I believe.
Yes, I can only imagine how often I’d lose my shit if I was on some conservative equivalent of Fluther.
Almost all of the conservatives I met on Fluther are very intelligent and well educated. That’s not surprising. They are willing to expose themselves to different opinions about topics discussed on Fluther. They are trying to understand two sides of an argument. We don’t really get to meet the dumb and ignorant ones restricting themselves to Fox’s cheap propaganda and ultra-conservative online forums. I’ve seen a few on Fluther, but normally they don’t stay very long.
@mattbrowne I totally agree. I participate on Sodahead.com as well as here. There the bulk of the people that call themselves conservatives are nothing of the sort. They are radical right-wing revolutionaries intent on destroying much of what sets today apart from the Old South of pre Civil War days, just with lots and lots of modern weapons which they would have us using now in virtually every country in the Middle East.
There are a few that can intellignelty discuss true conservative values, but the vast bulk are incapable of anything beyond a crude ad hominem in response to anything short of perfect lock-step agreement with them on all thoughts. On Sodahead, you can block other members, thus making it impossible for them to answer your questions or comment on things they say in response to your questions. These millitant Con men almost all have every voice on the site they disagree with blocked. They cannot stray outside their inbred mutual admiration society. I am afraid that a growing tide of such people, fueled by such hate mongers as Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Fox News, Redstate.com, WorldNetDaily and the rest of the Vast Right-Wing Noise Machine are taking control of the Republican Party and taking it so far to the right that party leadership now amounts to a contest to see who can come up with the most batshit crazy right-wing fantasy to rally the base.
@ETpro Part of the reason people often call me a Liberal is that I am anti-stupidity and anti-insanity. In todays political climate, that pretty much forces me to the Democratic side of the ballot not because I believe they are the better candidates, but because they are merely crazy as opposed to totally batshit insane.
Spending time on Sodahead is a lot like being a cop. If you only see the ugly side for even a few hours a day, you begin to believe everything is ugly. Kinda like what most of TV fare does to the average viewer.
@Espiritus_Corvus It’s like being a cop in another way as well. It you never bother with the enemy at the gate and just assume that’s somebody else’s job, don’t be too surprised when the jack-booted storm SS troopers kick your door down and cart you away for “reeducation.”
Good points. We should actually use the term right-wing revolutionaries instead of conservatives.
I like calling them “big government republicans.”
It’s true and it gets at exactly where the problem is in right-wing rhetoric.
Has right-wing rhetoric decreased since the Tuscon shooting?
@mattbrowne – Nope – but neither has left-wing rhetoric.
I think it’s dangerous to associate right-wing rhetoric with the Tucson shooting – even if you’re not drawing a causal link between the two, there’s objectively no connection between them and putting them in the same sentence continuous the unfortunate argument that there is.
Since I started this thread and it is now “old” by Fluther standards, and @mattbrowne has mentioned right-wing rhetoric, I feel entitled to veer a bit in a new direction with this thread. Since I lived in Wisconsin for a while, I’ve been paying attention to these developments. This appears to me to be the effects of trying to turn rhetoric into reality. I know dozens of the protesters personally (many of them good friends with whom I went to school), and they are enraged. Walker has threatened use of the National Guard, and state Dems have left the state to avoid a vote.
Would any of you care to comment on it? Perhaps I should start a new thread. Possibly there are pros to Walker’s approach which I’m too biased to notice, but this entire concept seems awful.
Thanks. Those threads will likely have two distinct tones based on the wording of the details. I’ll follow both.
@iamthemob – I wasn’t drawing a direct causal link, but an increase in the use of violent language can lower the threshold for physical violence. And I reject left-wing rhetoric just the same. But the existence of it doesn’t make right-wing rhetoric any better.
@mattbrowne – I wasn’t trying to say that you were – but the problem with the reaction to the shooting is that one side was blamed, it was shown to be completely wrong, and the right used that in some cases to justify their rhetoric.
Given that, we shouldn’t even suggest that connection.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
