Was this all voters, or just Democrats?

You forgot to post the last paragraph of the Rasmussen survey, Eric:

The survey also confirmed that the Obama campaign and its surrogates were very shrewd to try and switch the conversation to whether or not people are bitter and want change in Washington. Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters agreed with Obama’s statement that “People are fed up. They're angry and they're frustrated and they're bitter, and they want to see a change in Washington.” Just 32% disagree. Most Democrats and most unaffiliated voters agree with Obama on this point. Clinton’s campaign initially challenged Obama’s use of the word “bitter” but quickly changed its focus to the more controversial aspects of Obama’s statement.

See the link below....a Jim Webb op-ed piece in the WSJ from 2006. He says the same thing as Obama. And there several things circulating on the web showing Bill Clinton saying the same thing. The poll is a reflection of the chattering class's blood-in-the-water hysteria. Nothing more.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009246

The fact of the matter is a poll does not change the fact that People in PA and other areas have gotten a raw deal. Having Hillary and John McCain say things are all rosy is a stupid stupid strategy. In the end, these two candidates will lose for such idiotic actions.

I'm bitter that a pollster thought it was a legitimate exercise to take a snippet of Obama's comment and use it in what amounts to a push poll. But oh well, so it goes.

The Repubs would have brought this line of attack up anyway (it's one of their old faves) so we just get to have the debate earlier. The great thing is that Obama is so not how is he being painted by CNN, Halperin and all (last night CNN's story described him as "agitated" and "shouting" in his oh-so-cool Annie Oakley riff-ha!).

Hey Josh,
I suggest that you replace Eric Kleefeld with FlyOnTheWall.

It does help that the media is focused on telling us "Obama says bitter people cling to guns and religion," instead of the meanings behind the context of the original discussion, that people in economically depressed areas have long been manipulated by politicians with phony issues of "the liberals want to take away your guns and your Bibles! You say you lost your job because the company went to Mexico? Uh, erm, well... Look! Two queers trying to marry!"

I think Obama is going to keep his message clear for the next week. Look for things to swing more in his favor. People are bitter, and tired of the bullshit.

Actually, folk are upset with what the media says Obama said . . . Most folk have no farging idea what the heck actually came out of his mouth or its context.

SIDENOTE: No one who has 'earned' $109M in their entire life should be delivering the elitist line. It sounds so . . . well . . . Republican.

Headline could just as easily read 56 percent agree that Obama is in touch and right to say that people are angry and frustrated.

4* In response, Obama said, “No, I'm in touch. I know exactly what's going on. I know what's going on in Pennsylvania, I know what's going in Indiana, I know what's going in Illinois. People are fed up. They're angry and they're frustrated and they're bitter, and they want to see a change in Washington.” Do you agree or disagree?

56% Agree
32% Disagree
12% Not sure

Josh, and anyone else who might be listening at TPM:

Will you correct this entry?

In addition, what was the total N on this "bitter" poll?? The poll that Rusmussen rushed out on Sunday that had Clinton up by a couple of %age points was from a grand sample of 400 (reported without any sort of demographic details or MOE). Therefore I was not surprised to see the "new" numbers at 48 (O) and 44 (C).

Gallup, not attempting to "capture" the hyped, made-for-CNN/Politico/Mayflower moment had numbers that were less "volatile" over the weekend.

We'll see what they produce today.

Again: This reporting of the Rasmussen poll is so very, very inaccurate, and if TPM is truly interested in being responsible bloggers, this needs to be corrected before it is picked up by other sites, and you have yet another BS talking to Canada NAFTA/"bitter"/"when did you last go to church" mess.

God: There is so much to think/talk about: A gov't that sanctioned torture, economic malaise, hell,Brittany's run-in with the law this weekend.

At least hyped stories about Spears are less consequential.

Did anyone notice that the Ras poll went from +1 Hillary on Sunday to +4 Obama today? Might that not be worth mentioning in a post about the Ras polling?

Is it just me or are we providing people with what they might think about an issue when we provide them with words like "reflect an elitist view of small-town America,". Isn't that something known as push-polling? How many people in everyday life use a word like "elitist" to describe something? This has gotten so ridiculous so quickly. Has anyone thought that the networks are pushing this to keep a controversy alive to boost their ratings? Besides, when we boil this down, this issue isn't whether or not folks are or are not bitter, it's about their economic opportunities or lack thereof.

"This is something he will probably have to address more, as it's a figure sure to be analyzed and exploited by the Republicans should he ultimately win the nomination."

Eric, I think this is weak analysis. People will not remember this in a month. So I don't think he will have to be explaining this in the general.

will he also have to be explaining the so-called "plagiarism" flap? Remember that one? See what I mean?

It's also interesting to note that news orgs like USA-Today and others in Pennsylvania reporting the story, seem to be finding more people who agree with his statements. I haven't come across one news story filled with people expressing outrage at Obama's remarks. What I have come across are news agencies continually reporting the Clinton talking points, where the Clintons are expressing outrage.

If there was this eruption of disagreement with Obama's comments, certainly we would have a steady parade of bowlers, hunters, unemployed workers, church-going, bible-thumping folks who couldn't wait to take their turns at the mic to go on a rant.

Since the media is quick to jump on the Clinton bandwagon, expect to see the first round of reporting -- I mean "stenography" -- tilted in her favor. When the media has a chance to actually "report" things return to "normal" and Obama is proven "right" once again.

In an Answer to a Question about small-town America Barack answered, although tired, in earnest and with thoughtfullness: "You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone...And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." What Barack meant in Essence -- which is the Clear-Cold Truth, unlike Hillary's Bosnia Fabrication and Continuing Performances, is that in General, Small-town America, due to a loss of jobs producing frustration and bitterness and with time on their hands, similarly to the Negros in Slavery time, who turned to Religion & Music for an outlet, small-town Americans turn to Religion, Hunting and yes, some blame the current conditions on Immigrants when they should be turning their blame on Politicians who allow employers to higher immigrants for a much lower wage than Americans would go for. He never said religion or hunting (music) were bad, because people tun to them for an outlet when they have lost hope in their government and with extra time on their hands in a way to channel their frustration and bitterness. The Wording could have been better, however I am sure this was due to Barack being tired and on the campaign trail for over 15 months. What he could have said instead, which are synonyms for bitter are that People are Resentful, experiencing Pain, and Prolonged Discomfort, due to harsh and painful economic conditions. However, the fact that McCain, Clinton and others are trying to take a poor choice of words and to make nothing into something-- blowing it out of proportion -- and playing politics as usual, is despicable in an atttempt to get you to see things not as they are but as distortion. People in small-town America have experienced a loss of jobs in a greater degree and opportunity than Cities and suburban America, with very little to look forward to and time on their hands other than to go to church, hunt, and visit their local taverns, and for the young, many join the Military, and so many small town Americans have become bitter and disillusioned. Obama never stated that it was wrong that they turned to Religion and Guns due to time on their hands and/or a loss of hope, culture, plays, theaters, etc., they for an outlet turned to religion and guns.

In a larger picture, people in general all over America, are bitter over high gas prices, increased food prices, loss of jobs and hope, high education costs, increased mortgage costs and foreclosure, loss of jobs that leave the country and move to India and/or China, and as hard as it is to say, some people are bitter over immigration and the loss of jobs due to companies hiring immigrants for a much lower wage than Americans would go for -- in an America that does not resemble the one we used to know and believe in. We have even lost the respect and admiration of other countries around the world due to the demise of the America we love and believe in. As Barack points out, we should not blame the Immigrants but the policies that have caused this chaos.

America, we have to ask ourselves, which is more eggrecious, a politician telling us the hard truth, the things we may not want to hear but need to hear OR a politician telling us a Fantasy/Lie, like the Bosnia Sniper Fire fabrication and PERFORMANCE, things we did not need to hear because not Truth, and which is a betrayal of the public trust and a deeply flawed Character Issue. There was a time that politicians was the most Honest Game in town -- George Washington, Honest Abe, Thomas Jefferson these are just a few examples, but they were men of high ethics and moral character who would not dare to tell the public a bold face ... for their own personal gain, it just was not done. And to say that Obama is an elitist, is like coloring Sen. Kerry a deserter, which they tried and was somewhat successful at, and look where it got us, into a war that should never have been waged and a host of other woes that only True Change from the bottom-up can Transform. I hope the people will see through Clinton and McCain's politicking, Distorting and twisting his words and Message for their own political gain and rally to Obama's aide who in all honesty is trying to Change Washington from a Power Broker to Power People, because in the end it will be the people's voice and votes that matter. Barack Obama in his attempt to speak the clear-cold truth to America has produced a crisis effect, can we handle the truth, seeing things as they are -- the good and the bad, because that is the only way we can change things for the better in America to look at the hard facts and stop trying to sweep them under the rug or have politicians tell us that things are Great, when they are terribly wrong. They are not right and people are bitter, but we have a chance for Hope now; We have a Chance to Change, that hope -- that change is in the body of Barack Obama! Let no one fool you because if you do, you are saying you rather hear a lying politican than one who speaks Truth!

That poll is almost all bad news for Obama. The only really good news for him is that it says he was shrewd to try to "switch the subject" away from his elitist attitude to whether or not people are bitter. I love that line because that is exactly what I have been saying he was trying to do. I love the fact that Rasmussen comes right out and says Obama is trying to switch the subject. But the poll also shows that only 25% of voters have been following the story closely so far, and those who have been following the story closely overwhelmingly react negatively. So this proves that Clinton is right to press the issue, as I'm sure she will continue to do.

ah, thank you!

I was starting to get very bitter. Frequent polls make me bitter anyway.

Rasmussen's poll description essentially points out that 45% of the respondents had little or no knowledge of what Obama said, or in what context.
Therefore that 45% plus arguably an ADDITIONAL 30% (for an arguable but whopping 75%) of the respondents are basing their opinion largely on the wording claim of the question which was:
"Obama said that in small towns in Pennsylvania, people “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.""

Is that what Obama said? Is that the context? Also I don't remember the word antipathy in any direct quotes, but I could be wrong...
This poll is only an indicator of how effective a "smear" style issues MIGHT be against non-informed respondents. Seriously, we know smear campaigns CAN be effective, the questions are 1) should they be and 2) should they be ALLOWED to be...

[Kinda like doing a poll that states:"Barrack Obama has been rumored by some to be concealing the fact that he is really a Muslim, if this were true, would it affect your opinion of him..."
Pseudo-push polling crap.
Here's one: "John McCain has been called John McSame because some believe his election would represent 4 more years of George W Bush, if that is true, would you vote for John McCain?"

Here's a simple, non-push poll wording that could be used to get at some fundamental issues:

Will you be voting for a candidate who represents status quo in the Presidential election?
Will you be voting for a candidate who represents a departure from the status quo in the Presidential election?
Will you be voting for a candidate who represents a radical departure from the status quo in the Presidential election?

When thinking about the full spectrum of the American political system/process over the last 10 years are you:
Delighted
Completely satisfied
Somewhat satisfied
Indifferent
Unsatisfied
Completely unsatisfied
Bitter
[With appropriate demographics for age, race, socioeconomic, geographic]

Why don't you call this poll what it is? A push poll, have you read the questions? Jesus Christ. If you told me Rasmussen consulted Hillary and McCain on the wording I wouldn't be surprised.

If bitter means you have a hard time talking about something without a negative edge to your tone then I plead guilty. Every time I comment on anything to do with the conditions/situations created by this administration I am unable to do so in a completely civil tone of voice and I'm not even unemployed, disenfranchised, or repossessed. And I don't own a gun and I don't go to church. I think there are lots of us bitter folks and I, for one, am happy to have a candidate speak about my real feelings.

Of course the comments were elitist! Obama is a graduate of Harvard Law School, the most elite university in the country!

It may not have been the wisest thing to say, but that doesn't make it untrue.

Hell, the GOP has been playing this card for 30+ years. They have been using these wedge issues, and even generating them for years. They have been playing the guns, religon, "those damn eastern elitists" issues since Reagan (maybe longer), even though they themselves are the wanna-be aristocrats.

I don't know about you, but I want the smart people running the country for a change.