African-Americans, who voted for Obama overwhelmingly, have shown a similar shift. In March 2009, 36 percent of African-Americans said they didn't know the president's religion. That number is now 46 percent. Self-described liberal Democrats who don't know what religion the president is shifted from 23 percent to 31 percent.

http://www.chris11962.com/blog/files/af0a148563ec88fc01ba4b921b0e9812-216.html

Did 10% of African-Americans and 8% of liberals suddenly forget? Or are they having their doubts, for whatever the reason.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/19/AR2010081905619_pf.html

Michale.....

It's only logical or natural that 60% say the media. How else do people get information about the President??

I mean, look at all the next 4 listings:

11 Obama's behaviors or his own words
7 Things heard or read (non-specific)
7 Internet
6 Things heard or read during presidential campaign

All of those are ALSO media driven, unless the respondent happens to have daily personal experience with the President...

The real question here is WHY did the percentage of people who think that Obama is a Muslim increase??

Did more Americans just get dumber??

Of course not...

It's because Obama's actions of late have been against the best interests of the country..

And more people assumed that meant he must be a Muslim..

Now, I grant you. Against the interests of the country = Muslim is a moronic stance to take.

But to blame the Media because they don't say over and over "Obama is a Christian, Obama is a Christian" is re-dicka-less.. :D

Let me put it this way..

Is it possible that the Media has done it's job and reported the actions of the President of late and that it was the people who formed their own opinions based on what they saw in the Media?

Or, put another way..

Has there been any reporting in the Media of late that has been unfair or inaccurate that would have contributed to the growth in people who believe Obama is a Muslim??

Far be it from me to actually defend the media... But let's not automagically make them scapegoats just because people formed opinions that are highly inaccurate...

I bet that if you polled people who STILL think that Obama is the second-coming and can walk on water, you would get the same sort of percentages regarding how that opinion was formed..

Or maybe I am just missing the whole point. :D

Michale.....

An interesting thing I've been hearing -- which nobody'll know is true or not until election day, of course -- is that there may be a "reverse Bradley" effect out here in polling on the Prop 19 question (legalizing marijuana). It's been posited pretty much exactly what you're talking about -- who the heck (after decades of War On Drugs hype) is going to say on the phone to some stranger "I support legalization!"?

Like I said, it'll be impossible to tell, even after the election (hard to prove any causal relation), but an interesting point.

-CW

I'll bet there are many, many more out there who do. When a social hot-button question is asked, a lot of people don't admit how they truly feel because they've learned from this "politically correct" society that it's simpler just to keep certain things under their hat. And if the research question is being asked by a human (vs. a recording), people are even more likely to just give the socially acceptable response: some, because they don't want to feel like they're being judged by the person on the other end of the phone; other people feel guilty to admit aloud that they hold what society deems as "intolerant" attitudes.

The speech police have been very effective in shutting people up. The down side of that, of course, is that you're not necessarily getting an accurate read on public sentiment re: a whole host of topics.