Or at least the article by Dan Balz and John Cohen puts such a negative spin on the results for Obama in the lates Washington Post/ABC News poll that it is impossible to see how they could possibly have reached the conclusions they reach in good faith.
Here's the first paragraph from the article:
Public confidence in President Obama has hit a new low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll. Four months before midterm elections that will define the second half of his term, nearly six in 10 voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country, and a clear majority once again disapproves of how he is dealing with the economy.
Read down a 15 paragraphs into the article and you find this:
On the question of Obama's leadership, 42 percent of registered voters now say they have confidence that he will make the right decisions for the country, with 58 saying they do not. At the start of his presidency, about six in 10 expressed confidence in his decision-making.
Wow nearly six in 10 say they "lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country?"
Well, not exactly.
If you look over at the sidebar you discover that the claim that "nearly six in 10 voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country" is based upon the fact that 58% of registered voters responded to the question "How much confidence do you have in President Obama to make the right decisions for the future?" 58% responded "just some" or "none."
Okay, now I'm not sure about you, but to me the response "just some" to the question do you have in President Obama to make the right decisions for the future is not at all equivalent to the statement "I lack faith in the President to make the right decisions for the country" or "I do not have confidence in the President to make the right decisions for the country."
And what purpose does the word "just" before "some" serve in the response anyway except to put a slightly more pessimistic spin on the response.
If you open the raw data link in the article you will discover that the break down on the question was actually: 24% said they had a "great deal" of confidence, 19% said they had a "good amount," 28% said "just some," and 29% said "none at all."
Frankly, I think given the nature of the challenges he faces, the fact that 71% of registered have from "some" to "a great deal" of confidence in Obama's abilities to make the right decisions is a pretty strong result.
Based on the foregoing, I think its clear that the articles writers put the worst possible spin on the results to that question. But based on that alone, I wouldn't call them liars.
What pushes them over into the pants on fire category is the fact that in the very same same poll they found that 50% of the voters said they approve of how Obama is handling his job! A fact you'll find about in a brief paragraph about 30 paragraphs into the article.
How the hell can an honest, impartial person claim that a poll where 50% of the respondents say they approve of how President Obama is handling his job actually shows that 60% lack faith in him to make the right decisions for the future?
I don't think an honest impartial person could come to that conclusion. So I call it a lie.