Custom Search

Thursday, May 05, 2011

Preliminary Results From Obama's Bungling PR Of bin Laden's Death Are In

The preliminary results to the question I asked in yesterday's post, "What Will The White House's Bungling Narratives About bin Laden Death Do To Obama's Poll Numbers?", are in and it doesn't look good for Obama.

While we see headlines such using words like "big rise", spike", "bounce" and "bump" in regards to Barack Obama's poll numbers in light of his Sunday announcement that Osama bin Laden was killed, what those headlines as well as the media outlets blaring those headlines, are not reporting is how large those rises, bumps, spikes and bounces should have been in comparison to what they are.

Day One: Public Opinion Strategies wisely produced and published a chart showing polling spikes for presidents after major new events and victories, then they excluded the outlier which was Bush after 9/11, and determined the average rise in polling for a president following up on a major victorious event to be 13 percentage points lasting an average of 22 weeks.

That gives a basis for comparison using historical data.

How is Obama doing in comparison to what he should have rightly expected?

Not well according to polling done from the day after the announcement of bin Laden's death until this morning.

Quinnipiac before announcement: 46 approval

Quinnipiac after announcement: 52 approval

Newsweek/Daily Beast, before the announcement: 48 approval

Newsweek/Daily Beast, after the announcement: 48 approval

Rasmussen before announcement: 44 approval

Rasmussen after announcement: 49 approval

The examples go on and on and even the one poll that continues to more favorable toward Obama than all the rest of the polling organizations consistently, the CBS News/NY Times, doesn't even put Obama at the top of the average in comparison and gives Obama the "big rise" of 11 points.

[Update] Gallup just published their findings as well and only a six point difference there.

Obama averaged 46% approval in Gallup Daily tracking in the three days leading up to the military operation and has averaged 52% across the three days since.

[End Update]

Special Note- "The increase in Obama's approval rating in recent days has come exclusively among Republicans and independents, with a 12-point increase among Republicans and a 9-point rise among independents". (Via The Hill)

The American public credits the military and the CIA more than the Obama administration for the success and death of Osama bin Laden, but that is to expected because everyone knows Obama wasn't there and simply gave the go-ahead.

That is also true of every event for every president listed above in the chart showing how their polling numbers rose after each specific victorious event though.

The President in command at the time of major events such as this always gets a rise in polling ratings, so what explains Obama's lessened rise than what should have been expected?

Simple answer: Obama and his administration's handling of public relations after the event.

It has been a disaster.

Story after story from White House officials each contradicting the other. Changing stories completely. Refusal to show transparency.

The best list I have seen so far of updated changes comes from Bookworm Room: (Listed in order from the day after bin Laden's death until today, there are 26 points)

1) There was a firefight.
2) There was no firefight.
3) Bin Laden was “resisting.”
4) Bin Laden wasn’t armed. (Makes the concept of “resisting” interesting.)
[4.a) And the newest one: the SEALS thought bin Laden was reaching for a weapon.]
5) He used his wife as a shield.
6) His wife was killed too.
7) He didn’t use his wife as a shield. She ran at a SEAL who shot her in the leg, but she’s fine.
8 ) Some other woman — the maid? — was used as a shield. By somebody. Downstairs.
9) That other woman — downstairs — was killed.
10) Maybe not. She was killed unless she wasn’t — and who was she, anyway?
11) Bin Laden’s son was killed.
12) Unless it was some other guy.
13) Bin Laden’s daughter saw him get killed. She’s undoubtedly traumatized, poor dear.
14) They were going to capture Bin Laden until the problem with the helicopter, which was:

A) It had mechanical trouble
B) It did a hard landing
C) It crashed
D) It clipped a wall with a tail rotor, effectively a crash

15.) They were never going to try to capture him; it was always a kill mission.
16.) No, it wasn’t.
17) The chopper blew up.
18) The SEALs blew it up.
19.) Panetta said yesterday the world needed proof and the photo would be released.
20.) Obama said today in an interview he taped with Steve Kroft for “60 Minutes” to be broadcast Sunday that it won’t be released. It’s too gruesome, would offend Muslim sensibilities (something he worries about a lot — I personally do not give a warm fart on a wet Wednesday about Muslim sensibilities), and how would Americans feel if Muslims released pictures of dead Americans?
21.) Kroft — who’s not a total idiot — pointed out that ever since “Black Hawk Down” days, Muslims have been doing precisely that, filming American bodies being dragged through the streets, filming Daniel Pearl’s head being cut off, filming any and everything.
22) Obama gets pissed at CBS, the tape gets cleaned up, that question disappears. (Inside info.)
23.) We got a “treasure trove” of stuff from hard drives, etc.
24.) There were no phone lines, and no internet access at the “mansion,” they didn’t even have TV — what “treasure trove?”
25.) There is obviously in the pictures of the place a large satellite dish. I guess they used it for making salads.
26.) And now, just today: apparently the idea was to capture him, but only if he was naked. There was a suspicion he might be wearing a suicide bomber type explosive vest, or belt. So if he’s not naked and you can’t see if he has a vest on or not – shoot him.

Gateway Pundit has one more to add to the list, bringing it to 27:

27.) Good Grief… Now the CIA Admits There Was “No Live Video Feed” During Osama Raid

Members of the left will scream and moan all day long about how the "right" is somehow at fault for daring to notice and highlight all the discrepancies in the Obama administration official's stories.

I will give to the left the point that yes, we on the right are highlighting them, we are noticing, but we are not the ones that have changed our story time and time again, that would be the Obama administration.

Unfortunately for America it isn't just U.S. citizens that are being critical of Obama's bungling in the aftermath of an event that should have been his crowning glory, across the globe they are highlighting the bumbling of the Obama administration's handling of the whole affair.

PJM points to one example of how those across the globe are seeing this:

In Britain, the left-wing Guardian newspaper ran a story titled “Osama bin Laden: U.S. Changes Account of al-Qaida Leader’s Death” which says:

The U.S. has backed away from its initial account of the killing of Osama bin Laden, which claimed that the al-Qaeda leader was carrying a weapon and fired at U.S. troops before he was shot dead.

* * *

[Q]uestions [are] being raised as to why Bin Laden was shot dead, and whether he was executed, rather than taken into custody.

Add to that, we have Obama's insistence on his reasoning for not showing photo proof of a dead Osama bin Laden.

“It’s important for us to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence or as a propaganda tool,” Obama said in an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes.” “That’s not who we are. We don’t trot out this stuff as trophies.”

Ummmmmmmmmmmm... too late, Reuter's screwed the hooch for Obama there by publishing photos of the bodies our military didn't take as they took bin Laden's.

More at Reuters.

In regards to the release of the photo proof and Obama's trip to Ground Zero today, a couple families members of those lost on 9/11 are not impressed with Obama at all nor his victory lap.

The Vigiano family respectfully declined the invitation calling it a "photo op" for Obama.

"I'm honored the President of the United States is coming to New York," he said. "[But] to me its just going to be a photo op."

Another, Jeannie Evans, who lost a brother, wasn't even invited and she would have liked to ask Obama a question:

"Why not show us proof, that Bin Laden was killed? I would like to see that," wondered Evans.

Obama is so busy worrying about how people outside the country will view his actions, how they will respond, not inflaming those that are perpetually inflamed anyway, that he still doesn't understand he works for Americans.

Add it all together it is clear that the mission itself was a success, Osama bin Laden is dead, gone, the figurehead that symbolized al-Qaeada in the eyes of many, is no more.

The handling of the whole thing from Obama's announcement until now where stories by government officials are still being changed, is most probably why Obama's expected rise in the polls is nowhere near what it should have been and it is doubtful that the slight bump will last anywhere near what it was projected to last.

Obama has managed to somehow turn a complete victory into a show of incompetent bumbling and once again embarrassed America in the process.

(Golf clap for Obama)

[Update #2]- Father Of 9/11 Victim: Obama "Putting Too Much Spotlight On Himself"

David Beamer, father of 9/11 victim Todd Beamer on FOX News: "I feel some chagrin now, though, about how the rest of it has been handle. And frankly it started May Day, 2011 when the president announced what had happened. The excessive use of the personal pronoun that he used in his remarks, I really felt that was the beginning of the Commander-in-Chief putting too much spotlight on himself, taking too much credit for what the remarkable Americans had done. And of course it's only now accelerated to a greater degree in the media. "

See more of Mr. Beamer's remarks, via video at RCP.

[Update #3] Telegraph:

White House’s handling of the media in the aftermath of Sunday’s events has been breathtakingly amateurish, planting seeds of doubt about the legality of the operation and about Osama bin Laden’s death that would not otherwise be there. The constantly changing narrative – or “fact pattern”, as one White House official described it – suggests that the president and his advisers have been caught on the hop and have no clear strategy for dealing with the fallout from bin Laden’s death. This is epitomised by the halting, timid delivery of Jay – “How’m I doin’?” – Carney, who must bear some of the responsibility for this communications failure.

(Changes have been made to this post int he form of updates and incoming information)