UPDATED: 1 in 2 Voters Has Changed Their Mind About Obama

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. The margin of sampling error—for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters–is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

The results centered on Obama’s inauguration (surveys collected 1/19/09 – 1/21/09) were released 1/22/09.

The results centered on Teddy Kennedy’s funeral (surveys collected 8/28/09 – 8/30/09) were released 8/31/09.

In that time span, from Obama’s inauguration to Teddy Kennedy’s funeral, roughly 1 in 4 2 voters has changed their mind about Obama.

Compare the historical results:

Date   Strongly Approve Somewhat Approve Neutral Somewhat Disapprove  Strongly Disapprove
1/22/2009 44% 20% 7% 15% 14%
8/31/2009 30% 16% 1% 12% 41%


24% of the voting population have changed their mind and now Disapprove of Obama: (53% – 29%) =  24%

27% of the voting population have changed their mind and now STRONGLY Disapprove of Obama: (41% – 14%) = 27%

Also, as Ed Morrissey notes:

If Barack Obama thought he could ride sympathy over the death of Ted Kennedy to new support for his legislative agenda, the latest Rasmussen polling will throw cold water on that hope. Overall approval for Obama has now reached 46%, with 53% disapproving. Strong disapproval now comes within five points of overall approval, almost within the margin of error:

UPDATE: A few additional observations…

Observation #1:

Obama was supposed to bring HOPE for CHANGE in Washington, D.C. Many of those who were duped into voting for him didn’t know (or didn’t believe those who told them) that the CHANGE Obama intended was to “fundamentally transform” this country into a more Socialist/Communist union. Instead, they HOPEd that Obama would CHANGE this country into a less polarized place. But just the opposite has happened… Obama has made the country MORE polarized.

When Obama took office, the percentage of polarized voters (those who strongly approved + those who strongly disapproved) was 58% (44% + 14%). 

Now, the percentage of polarized voters is 71% (30% + 41%).

Observation #2:

As noted previously, 27% of the voting population have changed their mind and now STRONGLY Disapprove of Obama: (41% – 14%) = 27%. But the % of the voting population that now has a more negative impression than they did at his inauguration may be significantly higher than 27%…

What is unknown is where exactly that 27% came from. I’ll present two different scenarios to show that 27% is the minimum percentage of the voting population who now feels more negatively about Obama.

What is known is the change in the different categories:

Date Strongly Approve Somewhat Approve Neutral Somewhat Disapprove Strongly Disapprove
1/22/2009 44% 20% 7% 15% 14%
8/31/2009 30% 16% 1% 12% 41%
Difference -14% -4% -6% -3% +27%

Do you really think that the increase of 27% of the voting population who now strongly disapprove of obama really came from those categories (i.e., that 14 of those 27% came from people who strongly approved of Obama at his inauguration?  That’s possible, but not likely. 

If we look at the other extreme, and make an assumption of the least amount of category change per voter, we assume that the 14% of the voting population who left the “Strongly Approve” category moved over into the “Somewhat Approve” category.  That should have resulted in an increase from 20 to 34% in the “Somewhat Approve” category… but instead we see that the “Somewhat Approve” category decreased to 16%… meaning that 18% of the voting population left the “Somewhat Approve” category.  At most only 1 of those 18% ended up in the “Neutral” category.  The other 17%, plus the 7% of the voting population who left the “Neutral” category would have moved into the “Somewhat Disapprove” category… which should have increased by 24% from 15% to 39%… but instead it decreased to 12%.  If we assume that the current 12% in the “Somewhat Disapprove” category comes from half of the 24% that came in from the previously “Neutral” or “Somewhat Approve” categories, then that means the 15% of the voting population left the “Somewhat Disaprove” category and, together with the other half of the 24% (12%) that came in from the previously “Neutral” or “Somewhat Approve” categories, made up the increase of 27% of the voting population who now strongly disapprove of Obama.

So, recapping this “minimum movement” scenario, 54% of the voting population now has a more negative opinion of Obama than they did at his inauguration.  (14% + 18% + 7% + 15% = 54%

I changed the title of this post from “1 in 4 Voters Has Changed Their Mind About Obama” to “1 in 2 Voters Has Changed Their Mind About Obama“.

And the increase of 27% of the voting population in the “Strongly Disaprove” category is made up of, at a minimum, 5% of the voting population who previously had “Somewhat Approved” of Obama.  (5% from “Somewhat Approve” + 7% from “Neutral” + 15% from “Somewhat Disapprove” = 27% increase in “Strongly Disapprove”).


That’s “Change I Can Believe In”!



I think it is safe to say that most of the commenters here are among the 14% of the voting population who “Strongly Disapproved” of Obama at his inauguration.  But let’s take us out of the picture.  And, let’s take out of the picture those who will always “Strongly Approve” of Obama (becuase they are either Marxists themselves, or “Strongly Approve” that he “looks like” them, or both).  The lowest percentage of the voting population that has “Strongly Approved” of Obama is 27% (on 08/23/2009).  Add us (14%) and them (27%) together, and you have 41% of the voting population who is strongly polarized and will not change their opinion about Obama.  But what about the other 59% of the voting population who are not strongly polarized and are willing to change their opinion about Obama?

As I showed above, assuming the “minimum movement” scenario, 54% of the voting population now has a more negative opinion of Obama than they did at his inauguration. 

This means that 54 of the 59% who could have their opinion changed, DID have have their opinion changed!

54/59 = 92%!

Ninety-two percent (92%) of those who could have their opinion changed about Obama, now have a more negative opinion of him!!!


Why does 27% of the voting population “Strongly Approve” of Obama? 


A) They are “progressives” themselves and strongly approve of his Marxist agenda.

B) They don’t approve of his Marxist agenda, but they judge him by (and “Strongly Approve” of) the color of his skin, not the content of his character.  (I.E., they are racists who are living in direct opposition to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream). 

Another Rasmussen poll gives an indication of the size of the first group… sadly, it’s about 22% of our voting population, who think that Congress is too conservative!

51% Say Congress is Too Liberal,
22% Say It’s Too Conservative


29 responses to “UPDATED: 1 in 2 Voters Has Changed Their Mind About Obama

  1. Thank God! I hope his disapproval numbers grow higher because it will mean more people are waking up to the real Barack Obama. Maybe his marxist ideas for change can be stopped after all.

  2. Pingback: Presidential Approval Update « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)

  3. I selected this Johnny Cash song for those burned Obama voters who were once so childishly “in love” with “the One” and are watching Obama’s poll numbers fall into a….

    Ring Of Fire

    Love is a burning thing
    And it makes a fiery ring
    Bound by wild desire
    I fell into a ring of fire

    I fell into a burning ring of fire
    I went down, down, down and the flames went higher
    And it burns, burns, burns, the ring of fire
    The ring of fire

    The taste of love is sweet
    When hearts like ours meet
    I fell for you like a child
    Oh, but the fire went wild

    I fell into a burning ring of fire
    I went down, down, down and the flames went higher
    And it burns, burns, burns, the ring of fire
    The ring of fire
    The ring of fire

    Written by Merle Kilgore & June Carter


  4. The words fit the Obama situation, I think.
    Ship of Fools
    World Party

  5. This is a swine flu vaccination warning.
    It is from an alarmist website which generally sees
    conspiracies everywhere. Modifying a famous
    joke, “Being a conspiracy theorist doesn’t mean
    all your theories are false”.

    Why bother to read it?

    There are some inconsistencies in the general world
    panic to administer a vaccine to everyone that does
    not match up with the actual fatality rate which so
    far is lower than ordinary seasonal flu.

    Here is the website:

    and this is a small snippet of he article:

    The average quantity of squalene injected into the US soldiers abroad and at home in the anthrax vaccine during and after the Gulf War was 34.2 micrograms per billion micrograms of water. According to one study, this was the cause othe Gulf War syndrome in 25% of 697.000 US personnel at home and abroad. (3). You can find this table of FDA analyses from the Gulf War lots on The Military Vaccine Resource Directory website (4)

    a.. AVA 020 – 11 ppb squalene (parts per billion)
    b.. AVA 030 – 10 ppb squalene
    c.. AVA 038 – 27 ppb squalene
    d.. AVA 043 – 40 ppb squalene
    e.. AVA 047 – 83 ppb squalene

    These values were confirmed by Prof. R. F. Garry (5) before the House of Representatives. Prof Garry was the man to discover the connection between the Gulf War syndrome and squalene.

    According to his findings, the Gulf War syndrome was caused by squalene, which was banned by a Federal Court Judge in 2004 from the Pentagons use. (6)

    As seen on p. 6 of this EMEA document (7), the Pandremix vaccine contains 10,68 mg of squalene per 0,5 ml. This corresponds to 2.136.0000 microgrammes pr. billion microgrammes of water, i.e. one million times more squalene per dose than in (4). There is any reason to believe that this will make people sick to a much higher extent than in 1990/91. This appears murderous to me.”


    There is a simple question that you probably should
    demand of your doctor. Does this vaccine contain
    squalene as an adjuvant, yes or no?

    I know this about Obama. Nowhere in his life
    history do we see an example of him losing
    a battle gracefully. I do not expect him to watch
    his polls decline without a determined and vicious
    manoeuvre to secure his continued power at any

    Other commenters have spoken of the fear of
    reaching a tipping point, where a takeover occurs
    overnight leaving no democratic options left for
    fighting this plot.

    Tipping points could include starting a war
    and receiving another mass casualty attack on
    our soil, a fake pandemic, or calling a
    Constitutional Convention with delegates
    picked by this corrupt Congress.

    I know this, Obama doesn’t intend to leave office.

    I’ll be away on vacation for a couple of weeks.
    Hold the Fort!

    • Thanks for the vaccine update dave m. Wishing you a safe and pleasant vacation.

    • Whatever the point of Dav M’s comment, I have done enough research to know that the vaccine is toxic.

      I warned everyone against taking the vaccine last thing at TD, and I warn you all again.


  6. Good news, or is it? Since the corruption I witnessed throughout the primary/general, I no longer trust any poll, media, etc.. I think all is manipulated. Geez, I really have a horrible attitude since the rose colored glass disappeared — in its place, harsh reality.

  7. Re: Update #2

    It looks like the health care issue has awakened a sleeping giant. These are the people who have had little interest in the political process until now, and usually vote the party ticket because they don’t know any better.

    Now they are looking, and they don’t like what they see.

  8. RP,

    Your tabulations are a welcome summary of the newest polling data. Many thanks for your clear, logical presentation.

  9. Great presentation…

    On my local news this a.m. broadcasters said trials for the vaccine would be taking place here & the vaccine would need only half as much virus as a regular vaccine.
    They never mentioned the word squalene, and had a smile on their faces the whole time. Are they idiots or part of the Obama problem? (Both)

  10. This is an Orly update,

    Her next court appearance is Sept 8. She has filed
    with the court a certified copy of Obama’s
    Kenyan birth certificate.

    (It looks nothing like other images I have seen
    on the Net.)

    She has also filed an affadavit from the man
    who brought this document back from Kenya.

    I have put the graphics images here, for
    easy reference:

    OK, I’m off on my vacation now, see ya all in two weeks.

    By the way Fernley Girl,
    I found the press release from Glaxo Smith Kline (they are a big pharma company) and they
    were issuing info to business journalists and

    “GSK has received orders from severa goverments aiming to stockpile a new H1N1
    adjuvanted influenza vaccine”

    The key word is adjuvant. I don’t have time to
    chase this now but squalene is an adjuvant,
    so is aluminum. Their vaccine will contain more
    than just the weakened virus.

    See ya and watch out for obots!

  11. I read that the U.S. vaccines won’t have adjuvants. If they tell you that you need only one shot, then be suspicious because vaccine without adjuvants will require two doses. That’s if you’re going to get the vaccine. I haven’t decided yet, but I’m not in the priority category, anyway.

    • Miri,

      PLEASE, say no to mandtory vaccination! We have known for over a year, it is not our good that obama has in mind.

      The stuff is poison! Known to cause neurological damage.

    • I will get the regular seasonal flu shot that I always get but I will not be vaccinated with an unproven vaccine the developers themselves will not take.

  12. I found this link thru The Obama File. Pretty interesting.

  13. Another one bites the dust under the bus: Van Jones resigned, as I’m sure you already know. One down, about 30 to go.

    Here’s more good news:


    Do you think they’re inspired by Tea Partiers? Gotta love it.

    How about this quote from Honduran president Michelletti:

    “Any politician who tries to stay in power by hitching up with a dictator like Hugo Chavez, he won’t achieve it,” Micheletti said. “We’ll stop him.”

    Gee, I wonder who he’s talking about? I hope it’s our Chavista POTUS.

  14. I have changed my mind about Obama too. Not that I voted for him but that my opinion of him has gone from thinking he was not qualified to thinking he is a disaster. From thinking he didn’t know what he was talking about to realizing he is a habitual liar.

  15. Just announced on FOX news. Chris Kelly, fund raiser of Rod Blago died this AM. No further info from hospital. Sounds odd doesn’t it ? Curious to read more information as it is released. He was a large part of the Blago trial it seems.

    • Renee, I saw that, too. There’s something going on there. No doubt about it.

      They said he was going to be a key witness in the Blagojevich corruption trial.

      Yesterday, I saw Blago on TV, seeming totally unconcerned about his upcoming trial. He swore he’d be vindicated. Without this guy’s testimony, will that prediction perhaps come true?

      I wonder whether they needed that corruption trial to go away, anyway. Think about it: What does Blago know? He’s no fool, despite how they present him in the media. You can bet that he knows where a lot of skeletons are buried and he WOULD take people down with him or take them down in a trade off to keep himself out of prison.

      So, who else will benefit by the “overdose” death of this Kelly fellow? He was 51 years old, not some young doper. I didn’t hear what he overdosed on, but it sure sounds suspicious, doesn’t it?

      Another person within the Obama-sphere conveniently dead.

      I read the most ridiculous thing in the Wall Street Journal. It seems that after Joe Wilson blurted out “you lie” during Obama’s speech to Congress, Rahm Emmanuel rushed over to the Republican side of the aisle as soon as Obama stopped talking. Emmanuel launched into a curse-word-laden rant to three Republican Congresspersons. Presumably, he was complaining about Wilson’s rudeness to Obama.

      Now you tell me: Would you think it’s rude for a “guest” in someone else’s house to upbrade them with profanity?

      Emmanuel is not an elected member of Congress. He’s a minion. An employee of the POTUS.

      What kind of nerve does it take for this toady to go into Congress and rant and rave at the representatives of the people, in their house?

      HE was outraged that Wilson dissed Obama? How about his own behavior?

      I’m outraged that he has the gall to use profanity in OUR House to OUR representatives. Where’s Emmanuel’s respect for Members of Congress?

  16. The pimp and hooker caught some more ACORN idiots. Check it out at biggovernment.com. NYC now!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s