Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » President's Approval Rating (Rush)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: President's Approval Rating (Rush)
KE
Member
Member # 6535

 - posted      Profile for KE   Email KE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
President Barack Obama is being greeted warmly in China, but back in the U.S. his overall approval rating has slipped to 53 percent, according to a new CBS News poll.

Approval for Mr. Obama's handling of the situation in Afghanistan has dropped as well as more Americans now disapprove than approve.

However, a majority of Americans still approve of the way Mr. Obama is handling his job as president, but this percentage is down three points. Fifty-three percent of Americans approve of how he's handling his job, down from 56 percent last month.

The president's approval rating has dropped seven points among independents. Forty-five percent of independents now approve of how the president is handling his job. Last month, a majority of 52 percent approved

Rush is freaking out right now because the world is about to end, he guarantees it if healthcare passes, and about the "fact" that Obama's approval rating is below 50%.

I don't know where he gets that? The above quote says 53% and The Gallup Poll shows exactly 50. (The Gallup web-page makes it ridiculously hard to find the damn thing. Here's the link: Gallup Poll Presidential Approval Rating .

Not that a few points matter one way or the other and I'm sure he can find a dozen right-wing blogs and websites that will tell him whatever he wants to repeat about Obama, just as he pulled that bogus "Thesis Paper" off the web and ran with it, but the majority of the reason Obama has lost points is because of Afghanistan and that mostly among Independents. I have to agree with them there. All-in or all-out.

However, the main thing I take away from this is I wouldn't trust Rush if he said the sky was blue or water is wet. He is so biased and his rich fat-ass viewpoint is so opposite from mine that I'd feel safe voting against his opinion in the dark all day long.

I don't expect this thread to go anywhere. Nothing new here. Statistics can say whatever we want them to say. In fact, studies show that 99% of statistics are completely made-up. [Smile] And I hate Rush. Just felt like venting instead of putting my fist through my radio. My brain says that would be "counter-productive". Stupid brain!

(Personal note: Driving to work this morning I was at a light behind a jeep or something that had a "1-20-09 Bush's Last Day" sticker on it. I think that was the date it was old and faded. The windows were tinted and when we pulled up even at the next light I rolled down my window and she rolled down hers (very pretty 30-something hippie-ish chick, gotta love'em), I ask her where she got the sticker and she said "She ordered it online". I told her that date should be a national holiday, and she laughed, and then I said but she was brave putting it on her car here in Texas. To which she replied "There are more of us here than you'd think." Which I hope is true but I still don't think that will keep some drunk redneck from defiling her car. Of course, she was in Clear Lake (where I live are a lot of NASA people and plant engineers and a lot of them are from all over the country, which has been really good for my kids) and maybe she stays away from places with drunk rednecks? I know I do. Haven't been to the Pasadena Rodeo in two decades for that very reason. Since I'm happily married to a good liberal that was the end of our encounter. Good start to the day though.

KE

[ November 20, 2009, 12:50 PM: Message edited by: KE ]

Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KE
Member
Member # 6535

 - posted      Profile for KE   Email KE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He is now blathering about how "Oprah" or "The Oprah" as he uses as a derogatory name for her, has a "big-head, bigger than Obama's" (god he is witty [LOL] ) because she is surrounded by a staff that treats her like God and fans that never disagree with her! OMFG! And he is serious! Hey, if I looked like him I'd never look in the mirror either.

KE

Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mariner
Member
Member # 1618

 - posted      Profile for Mariner   Email Mariner       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rasmussen has him at 47% approval.
Public Policy Polling has him at 49% approval
Quinnipiac University has him at 48% approval
Fox News/Opinion Dynamics (at which point we all scream that this entire post is irrelevent since it mentions Fox News...) has him at 46% approval.

You should know better than to take two polls as fact and then accuse someone else of making up data. Normally when Rush is attacked here on this forum I respond by pointing out something a lefty media celebrity did that's similar, but there's no point here. Rush did nothing wrong.

Oh, by the way, PPP is one of the two polling firms I trust the most (the other is SUSA). They're usually very accurate, with only one awful poll under their belt in recent memory. Oh, and they're also a Democrat-leaning firm. So don't play the bias card.

Posts: 538 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KE
Member
Member # 6535

 - posted      Profile for KE   Email KE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think I said that polls don't matter because you can find one to backup any position and give you any number you want.

I don't have a radio talk show listened to by millions of sheep, so it doesn't matter what I say.

Besides, my whole point is that Rush is freaking out about something that is insignificant, not based on reality, and ALL I need to prove that point is One poll, not the first two I pulled up.

Of course you don't think Rush did anything 'wrong'. There is no right or wrong it's just which ****ed up survey you want to believe. Would Rush's sheep hate Obama so much without his constant finding of the right fuel to throw on the fire? Maybe. Maybe not. Doesn't change the fact that he's an ******* and nothing he says should be taken at face value.

KE

Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KE
Member
Member # 6535

 - posted      Profile for KE   Email KE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The more I read your post the more ridiculous it sounds. I didn't take ANY poll as fact. In fact, that is the exact opposite of what I said.

Here, since you obviously didn't read past the first two sentences.

quote:
Not that a few points matter one way or the other and I'm sure he (or Mariner) can find a dozen right-wing blogs and websites that will tell him whatever he wants to repeat about Obama, just as he pulled that bogus "Thesis Paper" off the web and ran with it, but the majority of the reason Obama has lost points is because of Afghanistan and that mostly among Independents. I have to agree with them there. All-in or all-out.

....

I don't expect this thread to go anywhere. Nothing new here. Statistics can say whatever we want them to say. In fact, studies show that 99% of statistics are completely made-up. And I hate Rush. Just felt like venting instead of putting my fist through my radio. My brain says that would be "counter-productive". Stupid brain!

That first bold part would be where I say polls mean nothing and anybody can find a poll to support their position. Which you so aptly proved for me.

The second bold part is where I point out that there is "nothing new here" meaning that indeed you can't 'believe' any polls. Which puts the lie to my "taking two polls as fact and then accusing others of making up data".

Frustrating to have that many mistakes made in that short a post. Especially one that so blatantly addressed the errors made by the responder.

I really didn't expect to have to defend it since I didn't say anything new or controversial. Shows to go ya.

KE

[ November 20, 2009, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: KE ]

Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/its-still-economy-dumbass.html

Has a much better recent look at opinion polls. In general though, looking at any one poll is useless, you need to look at a good average across all polls as they come out to even begin to get an idea of what the real trends are.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KE
Member
Member # 6535

 - posted      Profile for KE   Email KE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pyr,

Really? Personally, I never use any poll to prove any point because I don't trust any of them.

IMO they are just too easy to manipulate based on the questions and how they are asked. And I am lazy and haven't found any poll ever worth the time and effort of researching their methodology and the questions they asked.

Are you saying that is not always the case? Or that they can be read or collated in such a way the the information they present is "true"?

All,

Which is why this thread was NOT about one poll versus another but rather Rush getting so "het up" [Smile] about it is self-serving bs.

KE

Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well that's Rush for you.

But in general if you take a wide sampling of (reputable) polls, and average them out you can find something closer to reality- but more than that,, you can see general trends, even if there is an overall bias.

For example- from the graphs I posted you can see that, despite some small fluctuations, Obama's approval rating has been fairly steady for a few months now. Some are biased higher, some lower, but they're not really moving that far.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Obama is polling at about the same approval rating as Reagan was at this point in his presidency.

[ November 20, 2009, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: MattP ]

Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Don't get mad at the messenger. Rush is just reporting that a lot of polls indicate Obama is slipping in popularity. This may be tough to get a grip on for those who have invested so much hope and emotion into the man, but for others who look for results, it shouldn't be surprising that after all this time and not seeing something to show for it, in fact watching many things getting worse because of blunder after predictable blunder, the patience is going to wear out as the shine wears off.

> However, the main thing I take away from this is I wouldn't trust Rush if he said the sky was blue or water is wet.

I hope I never get to this point. Things are what they are regardless of who says what. If Obama's declining in popularity because of the failure to reform the finance industry to prevent what just happened, because of bailing out the fat cats while the rest of us get slim pickings, because of the weird decision to try KSM in NYC, and throw in for his base the failure to close Gitmo on time and a possible escalation in Afghanistan because of the deteriorating situation there, it shouldn't be surprising if his poll numbers fall, and it really doesn't matter what the source is that points it out.

One thing I can observe is that this phenomenon of hating the messenger seems to be gaining a lot of traction nowadays with Obama's continuing failures. People don't know. They're not going to know. They don't want to know.

The sources they trust won't tell them the whole, unvarnished truth, and they won't listen to anyone who won't spin things their way.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0Megabyte
Member
Member # 1217

 - posted      Profile for 0Megabyte   Email 0Megabyte       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Incidentally, were you complaining when it was Bush who was bailing out the fat cats? I'd like to see it, because I honestly don't precisely remember. Was there a post of you doing so?

---

And if MattP's statement is right, there's really very little to be afraid of anyway. Besides, hovering around 50ish percent doesn't surprise too much, even if it dipped a bit. After all, what percentage voted for him? Not more than 53% or so.

Posts: 2668 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm pretty sure Cherry complained about it. Pretty much everyone was in some form or another.
Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The sources they trust won't tell them the whole, unvarnished truth, and they won't listen to anyone who won't spin things their way.
Are you talking about conservatives or liberals here, cherry? Because this applies to Dittoheads as much (if not more) than Obama-lovers. [Smile]

This is why KE cautioned against believing anything that Rush says. Not that Rush cannot tell the truth, but because of his overbearing bias, he never tells "whole, unvarnished truth." He always varnishes it the way he thinks it ought to be, not the way it is.

Sometimes he actually tells it like it is. But life is full of coincidences. [Smile]

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
> NobleHunter

> I'm pretty sure Cherry complained about it. Pretty much everyone was in some form or another.

That's true. In fact, I think there was a thread where it was mentioned that this might finally be something we can all agree on. No bailouts without reform, and the companies who get bailed out shouldn't be able to reward the people who caused the mess.

I went further than most though and actually opposed all of the bailouts. I even rubbed my evil grubby hands together with glee at the prospect of the crash and burn of our whole financial system that we were promised without the bailouts. In truth, I didn't buy the hype for a minute.

I'll admit I could have been wrong though. I doubt we'll ever know. And things do seem to have stabilized, but I'm not sure if that's because of the bailouts or because now that a new group is in power with the media behind them, we're still being played.

> Are you talking about conservatives or liberals here, cherry? Because this applies to Dittoheads as much (if not more) than Obama-lovers.

I agree that it can cut both ways. But when I listen to Pacifica I don't just disagree with everything they say just because of the person saying it. I do mostly end up disagreeing with them, but not in the knee-jerk fashion they'd like to dismissively attribute that disagreement to.

In fact, I was actually a little bit impressed with Obama recently in his comments about Carter's accusation that a lot or even most of the opposition to Obama such as on healthcare reform was because of racism. Obama said no, not really, it's got a lot more to do with differences of opinion on matters of substance. People can be well informed on the issues and still disagree.

But dismissing everything from anyone who disagrees with you just because they disagree with you... that's just something else.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0Megabyte
Member
Member # 1217

 - posted      Profile for 0Megabyte   Email 0Megabyte       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
cherry: Oh yeah. I wasn't trying to make a rhetorical point, mind, I was just trying to remember because I thought you might have. Just checking. [Big Grin]
Posts: 2668 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by KE:
He is now blathering about how "Oprah" or "The Oprah" as he uses as a derogatory name for her, has a "big-head, bigger than Obama's" (god he is witty [LOL] ) because she is surrounded by a staff that treats her like God and fans that never disagree with her! OMFG! And he is serious! Hey, if I looked like him I'd never look in the mirror either.

KE

He's just jealous of The Oprah because she makes more money peddling ignorant anti-intellectual twaddle than he does, but for some reason he's the one always getting called out on it [Smile]
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KE
Member
Member # 6535

 - posted      Profile for KE   Email KE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Uh, not just because he disagrees with me. Because he has consistently lied and or misrepresented the truth for so long, that he has lost all credibility.

Somethings happening here but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones?

Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh.My. The Prez is losing approval ratings. What to do?!?
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mariner
Member
Member # 1618

 - posted      Profile for Mariner   Email Mariner       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sorry if I misinterpreted you KE, but the way you phrased it (particularly when comparing it to the hoax Rush fell for) made it seem like you believed Rush was using illegitimate data. That clearly wasn't the case. And while you may find polls to be completely worthless, there are many, many people who believe otherwise.

(The problem is you need to look at a sustained period, not just a snapshot. Obama's polling collapse happened over the summer, but was mostly stable since then. His recent tumbling may be a blip or may be a start of a new trend. There are reasons to believe both, but there's no way to know until a month or so from now.)

Posts: 538 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KE
Member
Member # 6535

 - posted      Profile for KE   Email KE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No prob.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1