• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump 44% approval and 55% disapproval on Rasmussen

Seems that Trump's approval rating in his favorite poll that him and his minions love to cite when he breaks a mediocre 50% is not so favorable to him, and hasn't been for going on a month now.

Trump Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports®

Must be the fault of "Fake News", "the Obama shadow movement", or "Hillary Clinton". Or you know what? Maybe Rasmussen now has a liberal bias;)

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/01/liberals-in-crisis-president-trump-gains-19-points-with-latino-voters-since-shutdown/
Trumps approval rating with latino voters raises 19 points since December
 
I've long become accustom to utterly vapid responses to reason. Unfortunately for people like you, that's all you have.

I gave you the response you deserved. Spouting Talk Radio and Fox News talking points like you regularly do is only going to warrant you "vapid responses".
 
How do you figure that?

You just said that because of Rasmussen's metodology, thst their poll numbers are automatically 5% lower than they're reporting. I posted Obama's polling history. Rasmussen has him in the low forties to high twenties. According to you, we need to shave off 5%.
 
You just said that because of Rasmussen's metodology, thst their poll numbers are automatically 5% lower than they're reporting. I posted Obama's polling history. Rasmussen has him in the low forties to high twenties. According to you, we need to shave off 5%.

"Rasmussen Reports polls make use of automated public opinion polling, involving 500 pre-recorded telephone inquiries to land lines for the daily report."

Do you see the hole in your theory?
 
Seems that Trump's approval rating in his favorite poll that him and his minions love to cite when he breaks a mediocre 50% is not so favorable to him, and hasn't been for going on a month now.

Trump Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports®

Must be the fault of "Fake News", "the Obama shadow movement", or "Hillary Clinton". Or you know what? Maybe Rasmussen now has a liberal bias;)

Actually, that's just about the approval enjoyed by Obama at this point in his presidency.

That's enough to re-elect an incumbent president.

When he runs, don't be surprised when you hear him ask this question: "Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?"
 
You just said that because of Rasmussen's metodology, thst their poll numbers are automatically 5% lower than they're reporting. I posted Obama's polling history. Rasmussen has him in the low forties to high twenties. According to you, we need to shave off 5%.

Why would a methodology favorable to Republicans as it only surveys LIKELY VOTERS and not the GENERAL PUBLIC like other polls do when asking this question about presidential support apply to a Democrat? That makes no sense since the methodology is designed by intention to produce higher numbers for Republicans in the first place and that is why the methodology is nearly universally rejected by other polling outfits.
 
Why would a methodology favorable to Republicans as it only surveys LIKELY VOTERS and not the GENERAL PUBLIC like other polls do when asking this question about presidential support apply to a Democrat? That makes no sense since the methodology is designed by intention to produce higher numbers for Republicans in the first place and that is why the methodology is nearly universally rejected by other polling outfits.

I know you realize the futility of the argument, considering the other argueee.....

I'm personally not that familliar with the particuars of Rasmussen go higher for Republicans, but I was under the impression that in addition to the "likely voter" thing, that they only survey long established land lines which over samples older white conservatives?
 
"Rasmussen Reports polls make use of automated public opinion polling, involving 500 pre-recorded telephone inquiries to land lines for the daily report."

Do you see the hole in your theory?

Long history with the poster, I doubt he'd be able to see a hole in his own head in front of a mirror. If it reflects negatively on anything TRump, it's just not something he's able to compute in any other way than as confirmation bias for his pro Trump delusions. It's fun to fling poo back and forth on occasion, but debate isn't what he came for IMO. :shrug:
 
I know you realize the futility of the argument, considering the other argueee.....

I'm personally not that familliar with the particuars of Rasmussen go higher for Republicans, but I was under the impression that in addition to the "likely voter" thing, that they only survey long established land lines which over samples older white conservatives?

That could very well be the case. I do know that the rest of the polling community rejects the RAS methodology as inaccurate in deterring an accurate number for Presidential approval ratings and considers it biased in favor of a Republican.
 
Why would a methodology favorable to Republicans as it only surveys LIKELY VOTERS and not the GENERAL PUBLIC like other polls do when asking this question about presidential support apply to a Democrat? That makes no sense since the methodology is designed by intention to produce higher numbers for Republicans in the first place and that is why the methodology is nearly universally rejected by other polling outfits.

You said that Rsmussen polls are 5% higher than they should be. That has to apply to Rasmussen's polling of Obama's performance. Can't have it both way, my friend.
 
"Rasmussen Reports polls make use of automated public opinion polling, involving 500 pre-recorded telephone inquiries to land lines for the daily report."

Do you see the hole in your theory?

It isn't my theory. Haymarket made the claim.
 
You said that Rsmussen polls are 5% higher than they should be. That has to apply to Rasmussen's polling of Obama's performance. Can't have it both way, my friend.

Are you mentally incapable of reading what was said to you?

The methodology of Rasmussen is favorable to Republicans since they do not use the general population and only use LIKELY VOTERS. This willful decision by them results in some five points give or take in favor of Republicans and against Democrats. No other polling organization that I know of uses LIKELY VOTERS to determine PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL numbers since by its very definition it is an attempt to evaluate the support of the AMERICAN PEOPLE for a sitting president and not which voters might support him in an election.

They are two very different things if you can comprehend that difference.

So when incumbent Democratic Presidents are surveyed for support - you do NOT have to deduct the five points that you would for incumbent Republican Presidents since the methodology favors Republicans and works against Democrats. And if you are not aware - Obama was a Democrat .

But then this has already been explained to you and it did not stop you from posting the nonsense you just did.
 
So 44 percent is still MOST MURICANS, dumm librul with yer facts!

Next thing you gonna tell us Trump ain't the most honest or effective president ever?

His poll number are BETTER THAN LINCOLN'S, ya dum librul sucker!

God you peeple! :roll:

Is a dum librul sucker someone who is a dum librul and a sucker, or is it someone who sucks dum libruls? Or are they someone dum who sucks non-dum libruls?
 
I gave you the response you deserved. Spouting Talk Radio and Fox News talking points like you regularly do is only going to warrant you "vapid responses".

I don't listen to talk radio or Fox News. I made a factual comment, I'm sorry you find that distressing. The reality is that there is a near monopoly by the left on almost all sources of dissemination of information. Silicon Valley is very liberal bias, education is very liberal bias (especially in the humanities), television is very liberal bias, most news media is liberal bias (Fox News is the only conservative bias MSM), Hollywood is very liberal bias, the music industry is very heavily liberal bias. The only area that seems to have a conservative bias is AM talk radio.

That's just reality. Whether you continue in denial and ignorance is your choice.
 
By the way, in the last elections 10 of the 12 candidates Trump actively campaigned for won, while none of the candidates Obama campaigned for won.

I don’t think that’s true. I know Obama at least campaigned for Rosen and Kaine. And Trump rallied with Schuette, Rosendale, Morrissey, Kobach, Young, Renacci, Laxalt, and Heller, all of whom lost.
 
Actually, that's just about the approval enjoyed by Obama at this point in his presidency.

That's enough to re-elect an incumbent president.

When he runs, don't be surprised when you hear him ask this question: "Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?"

except for the fact that when Obama won his re-election, his approval rating was over 50%. Your hero has never mustered above 45%, and that's on a good day. No recent incumbent president has been re-elected with an approval rating below 50%.
 
Last edited:
I don't listen to talk radio or Fox News. I made a factual comment, I'm sorry you find that distressing. The reality is that there is a near monopoly by the left on almost all sources of dissemination of information. Silicon Valley is very liberal bias, education is very liberal bias (especially in the humanities), television is very liberal bias, most news media is liberal bias (Fox News is the only conservative bias MSM), Hollywood is very liberal bias, the music industry is very heavily liberal bias. The only area that seems to have a conservative bias is AM talk radio.

That's just reality. Whether you continue in denial and ignorance is your choice.

Meh, that's all an excuse to try and justify criticisms of the garbage presidents you people put into office. You guys always complain about "bias", as an excuse to divert from your own failures, and the failure of your ideology.

Hell, the fact that you people chose Donald Trump of all people to be the leader of YOUR party, AND your ideology, speaks volumes to how far you guys have sunken into the gutter. And it isn't the "media's" fault, or any other drivel you're thoroughly convinced is "to the left". It's YOUR fault. And let me repeat this to you again...Trump was thoroughly convinced Fox News was "Fake News" during the GOP primaries. So essentially, anyone, including Fox News, who criticizes Trump is fake news in his eyes, and for that matter in all of the eyes of his idiot followers.
 
except for the fact that when Obama won his re-election, his approval rating was over 50%. Your hero has never mustered above 45%, and that's on a good day. No recent incumbent president has been re-elected with an approval rating below 50%.

That's interesting.

I wonder if it will hold true this time as well.

Trump seems to be quite popular in the fly-over states. He needn't get any votes at all from the big 5 liberal bastion states.

His polling is through the roof for Republicans and he is nibbling away at some of the traditionally reliable Democrat demographics.

As with most things Trump does, we are in uncharted territory.
 
Meh, that's all an excuse to try and justify criticisms of the garbage presidents you people put into office. You guys always complain about "bias", as an excuse to divert from your own failures, and the failure of your ideology.

See? The propaganda I s working. Look at pretty much any metric and we are doing very well, not failing. Look gas prices, an economy that is doing so well the Fed has raised interest rates 4 times, low unemployment across all demographics, less war, most progress with nuclear North Korea ever, better trade deals, ect. ect. ect.

But no, the Trump man says mean words and....EVERYTHING IS THE WORSE EVER AND WE ARE LITERALLY ALL DYING!!!!
 
That's interesting.

I wonder if it will hold true this time as well.

Trump seems to be quite popular in the fly-over states. He needn't get any votes at all from the big 5 liberal bastion states.

His polling is through the roof for Republicans and he is nibbling away at some of the traditionally reliable Democrat demographics.

As with most things Trump does, we are in uncharted territory.

See? The propaganda I s working. Look at pretty much any metric and we are doing very well, not failing. Look gas prices, an economy that is doing so well the Fed has raised interest rates 4 times, low unemployment across all demographics, less war, most progress with nuclear North Korea ever, better trade deals, ect. ect. ect.

But no, the Trump man says mean words and....EVERYTHING IS THE WORSE EVER AND WE ARE LITERALLY ALL DYING!!!!

Not all Republicans are believing that Trump is good for the party.

A Coming Young-Voter Storm for the GOPhttps://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...ing_young-voter_storm_for_the_gop_139216.html
COMMENTARY
. By John Brabender

Over the past several decades, I’ve consulted for hundreds of Republican candidates – House member, senators, governors, would-be-presidents. I’ve always thought of myself as someone who, despite the constant unpredictability of a typical political campaign, stays calm and never panics, even when provoked by having the officials in Iowa, for example, erroneously fail to declare my client the winner on caucus night.

For the first time, however, I am starting to panic. For months I’ve been analyzing the voting and political patterns of younger voters, and I think there is a storm, maybe even the perfect storm, headed Republicans’ way. And we seem oblivious.

It’s clear we are seeing an increased engagement and participation of younger voters and soon to be voters – so called millennials and Generation Z. In the past, Republicans could afford to ignore this voting segment because they were generally apathetic and participated in small numbers. We assumed we would gain their support once they began to pay taxes. This time it’s different.

John Brabender is chief strategic and creative officer at BrabenderCox, a Republican media consulting firm. His past clients include Vice President Mike Pence, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and a significant number of senators, governors, and House members.
 
Not all Republicans are believing that Trump is good for the party.

Never said hw was good for the party. I'm saying that by any rational metric he has been very successful. It's the irrational ones ("But he's mean!) that makes it not so.
 
Back
Top Bottom