New NBC/Wall St. Journal Poll

by Ben Hoffman

These are a few of the questions from survey results released today:

  • In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job that Barack Obama is doing as president?
    Approve: 50%, Disapprove: 44, Not sure: 6%
  • Do you generally approve or disapprove of the job that Barack Obama is doing in handling the economy?
    Approve: 48%, Disapprove: 46, Not sure: 6%
  • When it comes to dealing with the war on terrorism, do you approve or disapprove of the job Barack Obama is doing?
    Approve: 48%, Disapprove: 42%, Not sure: 10%
  • In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job that Congress is doing?
    Approve: 21%, Disapprove: 72%, Not sure: 7%
  • Opinion of the Democratic party:
    Positive: 37%, Negative: 42%, Neutral: 19%
  • Opinion of the Republican party:
    Positive: 30%, Negative: 42%, Neutral: 26%
  • Opinion of the Tea Party movement:
    Positive: 31%, Negative: 30%, Neutral: 21%
  • What is your preference for the outcome of this year’s congressional elections?
    Republican controlled Congress: 44%, Democratic controlled Congress: 44%
  • Do you think last year’s economic stimulus legislation is already helping improve the economy, will help improve the economy in the future, or will it not help improve the economy?
    Helping: 18%, will help: 20%, Will not help: 42%, Don’t know: 18%
  • Thinking about efforts in Congress to regulate financial markets and institutions, which would concern you more?
    Not doing enough to protect consumers: 55%, Doing too much: 38%
  • Would you be more likely to vote for a candidate for Congress who says we should give
    the new health care law a chance to work and then make changes to it as needed, or a candidate for
    Congress who says we should repeal the new health care law entirely and then start over?
    Give it a chance and make changes: 55%, Repeal and start over: 42%
  • How worried are you that the United States will experience another major terrorist attack–very worried, fairly worried, only slightly worried, or not really worried at all?
    Very: 31%, fairly: 27%, slightly: 28%, not at all: 14%
  • How willing are you to give up personal freedoms and civil liberties to prevent another terrorist attack?
    Very willing: 18%, somewhat willing: 34%, somewhat unwilling: 21%, very unwilling: 23%

Just one comment for now… Ben Franklin once said, “He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.” 52% of the American people are willing to give up some liberty for security. That’s pretty scary.


22 Responses to “New NBC/Wall St. Journal Poll”

  1. Why did you leave big parts of the survey out?


    * Only 34% of the people polled think that the “nation is headed in the right direction” while 56% of the folks think its not.

    * Only 4% of those polled trust the government to do what is right all the time and 21% most of the time. Leaving only 1 out of 4 folks out there trusting the government! And yes, I look at that as both major parties! In Bush’s first year, that total was 64% and has now shrunk to 25%. With all the wasteful spending (as disclosed in PART), its understandable.

    * 51% of those polled disapprove of Obama’s policies while 46% approve. The real problem, that is growing within that stat,is that over half those who disapprove like Obama personally. They just don’t like his policies.

    * Only 19% of those polled are satisfied with the economy today with 81% dissatisfied.

    * 58% of those polled think the economy with get worse or at best stay the same as it is today over the next 12 months. With unemployment way over the promised 8% ceiling (if we passed the stimulus bill) and with the only job growth honestly seen is in the government itself, I can see where folks are coming from.

    * 60% still support drilling for oil.

    There is more but I have to work.

    Franklin’s quote was in regards to liberty as a whole. Our liberties are what we are fighting for here and it would be foolish to trade them (as a whole) out in order to protect them. Just doesn’t make sense. Folks at tea parties are just flat out tired of big government on both sides of the aisle and all the waste. I, myself, spoke at one in April and spent the majority of the time breaking down the wasteful spending under Bush. The crowd cheered very loud. Its not about left vs right but about the people just tired of the special interest games, wasteful spending by all of government and protecting out civil liberties! Protecting them from big government, todays government, from stepping in and taking over. add to that the fact that the federal government does not have the right to do what they are doing and its not in their duties to do so, and you are left with a ton of upset Americans. Whats scary is that you support this massive government who seeks more and more control over the people and thus less liberties for the people but yet you can end your post like you care about personal liberties. Now that’s pretty scary!

    • Okay, so what personal liberties are we losing under Obama?

      • Um, this guy’s apparently losing some liberties, and could lose more!

        “But critics fear a recent move by the Obama administration could give INTERPOL free reign inside America and lead to the targeting of more U.S. residents like Homayoun.

        We lost a bunch of liberties under Bush, and we’ll likely lose more under Obama. I think the days of any sort of personal privacy are long over, and it’s a reality of the world we live in.

        I just flew through two airports and got two full body scans. If strangers can now see us naked every time we travel, what liberties do we really have anymore?! 😉

      • When I buy a consumer product – shampoo or whatever – at CVS (not at Walgreens though), within two days I receive a piece of snail mail from the manufacturer with coupons inside for more of their product.

        When we go to youtube or Amazon, both immediately suggest videos or books tailored to our taste.

        In my little town, there are police cameras on most street lights.

        That privacy thing is long gone. I’m not sure I’d define liberty and privacy as the same thing, but the direction is clear.

        And I think that’s the way the entire Western World is moving. Too big to stop?

      • Here’s where we’re headed:

  2. Oh, it’s definitely relevant – I just didn’t want to sound all doomsday-ish.

    • Here is what right-wingers were told to be outraged about:

      [Big Brother wants to watch you more closely — especially how you spend your money. His latest snooping plan is included in the banking bill being debated in the Senate. Among other things, the bill is supposed to alert regulators to hazards in the industry to prevent another financial meltdown like the one that started in September 2008, and to make it easier to spot rip-off artists like Bernie Madoff.

      The bill sets up two new supersnooping federal agencies to collect data on ordinary Americans:

      The Office of Financial Research. This supposedly would predict risk in the system by collecting new financial data, such as patterns of credit card use.

      The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. This would collect data on consumer transactions.

      The data are supposed to be “scrubbed” of individual identifiers to protect your privacy. But that might not work, said Mark Calabria, director of financial regulation studies at the Cato Institute.

      “If you can link the data to courthouse records of housing sales,” Mr. Calabria explained, then anyone can find information on others. Under the bill, the government would detail “your charges at Macy’s and car payments. It would be fairly detailed information.”]

      It’s only acceptable if it’s Republicans who are spying on us.

      • The OFR:
        I have to read more on it, but I really don’t see how detailed individual credit card information is necessary. Couldn’t the big card companies simply say something like, “85% of adults aged 34-55 are maxed over 60-90 days”, or that people in the same demographic have “only made minimum payments 6 months in a row”? I’m sure economists and financial experts could make use of the data to take the country’s financial temperature, and I imagine that credit card companies already gather this data anyways.

        The CFPB:
        I’ve heard this is being sold (in part) to help protect against the “Bernie Madoffs”. I think that’s rubbish. The SEC was tipped off to Madoff how many times, and what happened? The laws were already in place to arrest and convict him – they just weren’t enforced. Perhaps people want the government to do the work when they see 15% returns on their statement when the market’s only producing 1%.

        If it’s to help better identify banks, mortgage companies, brokers, etc. in trouble, then I can see the purpose in theory, but in practice – what do they expect to do, make a government announcement that a company is in trouble and warn people? A problem I have with that it that it may be premature, and it would end up being a self-fulfilling prophecy.

        I have no practical issue with the supposed invasion of privacy, I just have issues with the reasons they’re saying both agencies are necessary. I don’t see how gathering data on individual consumers helps them better monitor and police public companies. I think there are enough economic indicators and protections in place (like the FDIC) already.

        I also don’t trust that the IRS won’t have access to this data. Nothing to hide, but an audit is an annoying, time consuming, and expensive process even if you’re right. They could easily use this data to go on fishing expeditions, which is an invasion.

      • Democrats should be questioning the cost and necessity of yet another government agency. Or, are they naively thinking simply that government is providing yet another efficient and effective way to protect us from “big business”?

      • Vern – I don’t think this thing is even a blip on the radar for most people.

        What we’ll do is scream bloody murder AFTER it’s done. That’s the American way!

      • [Couldn’t the big card companies simply say something like, “85% of adults aged 34-55 are maxed over 60-90 days”, or that people in the same demographic have “only made minimum payments 6 months in a row”?]

        They could easily provide the data without personal information. It’s just a bunch of fear mongering.

      • [It’s just fear-mongering.]
        Fear-mongering or not, though – a) why does this department have to be set up in the first place, b) who benefits if it is, and c) why do they need personal information?

      • [why does this department have to be set up in the first place, b) who benefits if it is, and c) why do they need personal information?]

        Obviously, the current system doesn’t work.
        Obviously, they need data to do trending analysis.

      • [Obviously, the current system doesn’t work.]
        Obviously, they need data to do trending analysis.]
        Please – that’s a lame, cop-out answer. If it’s so “obvious”, then enlighten me: exactly how is having detail of someone’s Macy’s transactions going to prevent the next financial disaster?

        And “trend analysis”? There’s enough government agencies, banks, retail chains, and research firms already out there doing it, which means there’s obviously enough data out there to do it with.

        If that’s all of a sudden now insufficient for a government that would surely do a slower, sloppier job than the rest of them do, then the government should more be specific as to why it needs this level of detail and what it would do different than these others if it had it.

      • {Please – that’s a lame, cop-out answer. If it’s so “obvious”, then enlighten me: exactly how is having detail of someone’s Macy’s transactions going to prevent the next financial disaster?]
        Needed some emoticons in there – wasn’t trying to sound snotty! 🙂

      • First of all, it’s doubtful that they’re going to get data from department stores. Second, I’d trust the government more than I’d trust Macy’s with my personal information. There are probably kids working there making minimum wage with access to your personal information. The whole thing is just fear mongering.

  3. Haha! How true. 🙂

  4. The supporting AZ seems to be missing… 🙂
    Here’s another set of numbers from the new NBC/WSJ poll we’re teasing:

    Nearly two-thirds of Americans back Arizona’s new anti-illegal immigration law, which makes it a state crime for a person to be in the country illegally. The law also requires local and state law enforcement officials to question people about their immigration status if they suspect they’re in the country illegally. (MSDNC)

  5. I should have put an emoticon behind it, as it was posted a bit tongue-in-cheek. Thanks for the mini-referral though! 🙂


Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: