Obama's Job Approval among Independents down to 38% (1 Viewer)

[cpwill]

:roll: but i'm sure they're just frustrated because he hasn't gotten enough progressive policy shoved through, right? no doubt once that awesome health care boondoggle starts doing.... whatever it is that it will do (surprise!), we will see these numbers just boomerang.

Thirty-eight percent of independents approve of the job Barack Obama is doing as president, the first time independent approval of Obama has dropped below 40% in a Gallup Daily tracking weekly aggregate...

 

[Deuce]

Aren't a lot of the independents former Republicans anyway?

 

[VanceMack]

On the plus side his approval amongst the crippled and dependent pets is at an all time high.

Look...the democrat strategy is pretty clear and pretty simple. They WANT unemployment at around 14-16 % . They want the crippled and dependent pets out of work and they need to maintain a balance of middle to upper income folks that can pay for the pathetic dependent class.

 

[Deuce]

On the plus side his approval amongst the crippled and dependent pets is at an all time high.

Look...the democrat strategy is pretty clear and pretty simple. They WANT unemployment at around 14-16 % . They want the crippled and dependent pets out of work and they need to maintain a balance of middle to upper income folks that can pay for the pathetic dependent class.

What? A crappy economy never goes well for the incumbent. Hell, if unemployment were down to 6% that approval rating would probably double.

 

[VanceMack]

What? A crappy economy never goes well for the incumbent. Hell, if unemployment were down to 6% that approval rating would probably double.

He doesnt care about his approval rating. He cares about power. He is going to stay in power by keeping the muppets dependent on big government.

 

[Deuce]

He doesnt care about his approval rating. He cares about power. He is going to stay in power by keeping the muppets dependent on big government.

You don't think having his approval rating too low might also be related to his chances at re-election?

Also, define "crippled and dependent pets."

 

[Renae]

Also, define "crippled and dependent pets."

 

[Deuce]

Wow. Like two dumb people. Quite the following.
The second video, the lady didn't actually say Obama was going to pay for her mortgage. She said she wasn't going to have to worry about it. Less worry about such things if the economy improves, yes?

 

[teamosil]

Aren't a lot of the independents former Republicans anyway?

Yeah they are. Teabaggers and whatnot.

Currently 27.4% of the country identifies as Republican, 33.3% independent, and 33.5% as Democrat. So, the Republicans need to be beating the Democrats amongst independents just to tie in a national election. If you assumed that every Democrat and every Republican voted party line, and that everybody voted in equal proportions, using those numbers the GOP would need to get 57% of independent voters to tie.

 

[cpwill]

so if Obama only picks up the 38% who currently approve of him, then the Republicans win fairly handily in 2010, and then again in 2012.

but when you skip from general 'Americans' to voters, the picture gets quite a bit uglier. Voters are the ones who count in elections, not those who can't be bothered to come out.

just a question; but what are the other 5% of Americans? third party?

 

[teamosil]

so if Obama only picks up the 38% who currently approve of him, then the Republicans win fairly handily in 2010, and then again in 2012.

It's not really 38%. Rasmussen isn't a real pollster. It's around 45%. http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/jobapproval-obama.php

just a question; but what are the other 5% of Americans? third party?

Probably mostly people who say "I don't know" or something.

 

[Renae]

Rasmussen isn't a real pollster. .

You just added yourself to the "Don't take me seriously" list with that one.

 

[teamosil]

You just added yourself to the "Don't take me seriously" list with that one.

They aren't. They're pretty much always like 7-15% off from the rest of the pack. Scott Rasmussen actually gets paid, literally, by the RNC... Use one of the services that averages out all the polls- Pollster.com - Political Surveys and Election Polls, Trends, Charts and Analysis

 

[Renae]

They aren't. They're pretty much always like 7-15% off from the rest of the pack. Scott Rasmussen actually gets paid, literally, by the RNC... Use one of the services that averages out all the polls- Pollster.com - Political Surveys and Election Polls, Trends, Charts and Analysis

Again, you're out there in lala land.

New York Times:

The Huffington Post is venturing into the wonky but increasingly popular territory of opinion poll analysis, purchasing Pollster.com, a widely respected aggregator of poll data that has been a major draw for the Web site of The National Journal.

Huffington Post Buys Pollster.com
So YOUR source for serious polling is owned by Huffpo, but that's cool.

You hear some lies and misinformation about Rassmussen and you buy it hook, line and sinker.

There's a big, slow-news-weekend story over at Politico today over allegations made by certain Democrats and liberals that the prolific polling firm Rasmussen Reports is biased toward conservative and Republican causes. I have to catch a flight (weather permitting) in a couple of hours, so I don't have quite as much time to weigh in on this as I'd like, but let me present the Cliff's Notes version.

FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Is Rasmussen Reports Biased?

 

[teamosil]

So YOUR source for serious polling is owned by Huffpo, but that's cool.

No, you don't understand. pollster doesn't do the polls, they amalgamate the polls every polling agency does. Real clear politics does the same and gets pretty much the same numbers:

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - President Obama Job Approval

You hear some lies and misinformation about Rassmussen and you buy it hook, line and sinker.

Nope... You don't need to hear anything to figure out Rasmussen's deal.. It's all public record. Just look at how their poll results compare to the other polling agencies. Why do you think they're always like 7-15 pionts to the right of the numbers everybody else posts? Well, it's pretty obvious... It's because their founder and CEO is literally on the payroll of the RNC and has been for years. You can just look it up. Politicians and political parties are required by law to publish that info: Consultants - The Center for Public Integrity

 

[Renae]

No, you don't understand. pollster doesn't do the polls, they amalgamate the polls every polling agency does. Real clear politics does the same and gets pretty much the same numbers:

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - President Obama Job Approval



Nope... You don't need to hear anything to figure out Rasmussen's deal.. It's all public record. Just look at how their poll results compare to the other polling agencies. Why do you think they're always like 7-15 pionts to the right of the numbers everybody else posts? Well, it's pretty obvious... It's because their founder and CEO is literally on the payroll of the RNC and has been for years. You can just look it up. Politicians and political parties are required by law to publish that info: Consultants - The Center for Public Integrity

So you say that Huffpo's purchase means nothing, GOT IT!
Rassmussen uses likely voters, not registered voters.

 

[teamosil]

So you say that Huffpo's purchase means nothing, GOT IT!

If you're going to claim the numbers are innaccurate, that would certainly be easy to prove. You can click on the links to the source polls and average them yourself. Regardless though, if you don't want to look at pollster, look at real clear politics. Real clear politics actually says his approval is a little higher....

Rassmussen uses likely voters, not registered voters.

Yeah. That's a big part of how they tweak the numbers. Rasmussen uses a secret equation to calculate who are likely voters... He won't release it, but apparently it results in numbers radically to the right of what other pollsters get when they poll likely voters with their published formulas...

 

[cpwill]

It's not really 38%. Rasmussen isn't a real pollster.

:lol: Rasmussen is an excellent pollster who focuses in on voters because they are the ones who, you know, count. which makes him (as far as predicting elections is concerned) more accurate. for example:

For all the derision directed toward pre-election polling, the final poll estimates were not
far off from the actual nationwide voteshares for the two candidates. On average, preelection
polls from 23 public polling organizations projected a Democratic advantage of
7.52 percentage points on Election Day, which is only about 1.37 percentage points away
from the current estimate of a 6.15-point Obama margin in the national popular vote.
Following the procedures proposed by Martin, Traugott and Kennedy (see Public Opinion
Quarterly, Fall 2006, pp. 342-369) to assess poll accuracy, I analyze poll estimates from
these 23 polling organizations. Four of these polls appear to have overestimated McCain
support (indicated with a * below), while most polls (17) overestimated Obama strength.
Pre-election projections for two organizations’ final polls—Rasmussen and Pew—were
perfectly in agreement with the actual election result (**)...

which is why he is disliked; because conservatives are more likely to vote than liberals; and many don't like the implications of that.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

What's the news?

Every president's ratings DROP steadily throughout their presidency unless they're hte lucky bastard in place when things overall improve.

 

[cpwill]

well okay, what think you of James Carville's polling agency giving Republicans a 48-42% lead among likely voters, that 56% think of Obama as 'too liberal' and that 55% consider him a socialist?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

well okay, what think you of James Carville's polling agency giving Republicans a 48-42% lead among likely voters, that 56% think of Obama as 'too liberal' and that 55% consider him a socialist?

Here i'll interject that most people have no concept of what socialism is . . . and many think it's bad.

I think he's a socialist, yep.
But I don't jump to false conclusions about what that is - I don't say that with a negative connotation.

Socialism is a legitimate system of goverment/economics. It can be corrupt, abused or golden just like anything else.

 

[Alex]

Rasmussen uses "likely voters" while most other polling organizations use "registered voters" or "all adults". The "likely voters" number is more Conservative because the voting portion of our country is more Conservative than Liberal (as well as the country in general). It makes sense that a polling company would make adjustments to reflect that, they would be reflecting the country.

Rasmussen has a right lean because the country usually leans right, the "secret equation" is based on objective fact. To get a more accurate result, the polling organization needs to consider who is actually voting and make the adjustment in their numbers. That is what Rasmussen does and that is why they are usually so accurate.

 

[Renae]

Here i'll interject that most people have no concept of what socialism is . . . and many think it's bad.

I think he's a socialist, yep.
But I don't jump to false conclusions about what that is - I don't say that with a negative connotation.

Socialism is a legitimate system of goverment/economics. It can be corrupt, abused or golden just like anything else.

Socialism is inherently evil, and most freedom and liberty loving people realize this and reject it.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Socialism is inherently evil, and most freedom and liberty loving people realize this and reject it.

No - aside from when any system is abused Socialism is only evil when someone who *isn't* a socialist is looking at it.
If you were born into a socialist country you'd likely see our system as being evil and corrupt :shrug:\

I don't think it's *wrong* in general - I think it's *wrong* for us because we're not founded on socialist principles.

 

[Renae]

No - aside from when any system is abused Socialism is only evil when someone who *isn't* a socialist is looking at it.
If you were born into a socialist country you'd likely see our system as being evil and corrupt :shrug:\

I don't think it's *wrong* in general - I think it's *wrong* for us because we're not founded on socialist principles.

No, Soclialsm IS EVIL. It's meant well, good intentions and all that ****, but the underlying premise is that the average person is incapable of living their own life without Gov't direction and care. You aren't capable of making the "Right" choices, only a benign Gov't entity can do that for you.

The INTENT is to make life fair (which the very act of trying to make life "Fair" is unfair but that's a different debate) and make sure "everyone is cared for". The reality is that is an immpossible utopian dream that can only lead immoral, wrong and yes, EVIL ends.