Trump's Approval Rate

[homersapien 11,415]

On 1/29/2019 at 10:07 PM, TitanTiger said:

It's a standard tactic anytime a poll offers information that conflicts with the funhouse mirror reality inside their bubble.

Or any news source for that matter.

[japantiger 4,051]

Rasmussen at 52% approval today...showing steady increase since shutdown

[SaltyTiger 7,838]

6 hours ago, japantiger said:

Rasmussen at 52% approval today...showing steady increase since shutdown

https://nypost.com/2019/02/11/trumps-approval-rating-rises-to-52-percent-highest-since-2017/

[SaltyTiger 7,838]

On 2/1/2019 at 10:55 AM, homersapien said:

Or any news source for that matter.

Just can not see any of the numerous Dems in the mix ousting  President Trump in 2020. Can you Brother Homer? I hear Pocahontas Warren saying he may be in jail but that is not true. You have been inferring that for ages. It has not happened and you are a hell of lot smarter than her.

Who knows? This economy is great but you guys may be willing to hand those keys over to Casio just to get rid of President Trump.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

On 1/30/2019 at 8:15 AM, TitanTiger said:

At least here, I don't recall but one side doing that.  There's a side here that discusses polls like educated people - understanding modeling and margin of error and such, and then another side that immediately calls into question the reliability of any poll that doesn't say what they want it to.

There are no sides. AuFamily baby! 

[AU64 10,122]

On ‎1‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 6:41 PM, AUFAN78 said:

Whatever. Their bubble? Simply laughable and ridiculous. 

My opinion of polling has not changed. Likely never will. That the point flew over ones head is not my concern.

Yep...me too.  I'm called pretty frequently on political type polls....probably because I'm in a certain demographic...(old white guy who is easy to catch at home, still has a land line and always votes)  ... and I respond when they call.  

All I have to say about polls is you have to know what questions they are asking....the specific language because many of them are pretty leading which makes me wonder what the purpose is.   Just seems that some have an objective and sponsors just want to round up enough responses to back it. 

And in recent years the polls seem to be taken in order for the news media to have some news to discuss.  So whether DT's favorable rating is 42% or 52% I'm skeptical …since those are almost moment in time numbers, rarely with any durability. 

[homersapien 11,415]

15 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

Just can not see any of the numerous Dems in the mix ousting  President Trump in 2020. Can you Brother Homer? I hear Pocahontas Warren saying he may be in jail but that is not true. You have been inferring that for ages. It has not happened and you are a hell of lot smarter than her.

Who knows? This economy is great but you guys may be willing to hand those keys over to Casio just to get rid of President Trump.

Yes, I most certainly can.

In fact, most - if not all - of them can beat Trump.  By the time the election gets here, the entire country -  well except for the 30-40% constituting his base - will be fed up with him.

[DKW 86 7,437]

1 hour ago, AU64 said:

Yep...me too.  I'm called pretty frequently on political type polls....probably because I'm in a certain demographic...(old white guy who is easy to catch at home, still has a land line and always votes)  ... and I respond when they call.  

All I have to say about polls is you have to know what questions they are asking....the specific language because many of them are pretty leading which makes me wonder what the purpose is.   Just seems that some have an objective and sponsors just want to round up enough responses to back it. 

And in recent years the polls seem to be taken in order for the news media to have some news to discuss.  So whether DT's favorable rating is 42% or 52% I'm skeptical …since those are almost moment in time numbers, rarely with any durability. 

If you DO polling scientifically, correctly, with neutral questions, you get reliable results. 

Today, however, there are dozens of polling services that poll to get a result. This is nothing new and nothing revolutionary. 

I have recited the polling that happened during the Parker campaign in 1996 or 1998. If you are actually stupid enough to believe the polls, Southern Opinion Research, by two profs at Alabama, 10 days out Parker was down 28.5 points.to Bud Cramer. The campaign had no money left, only the ads we had already bought. Our own polling showed us down about 1.5 to 2 points. But the SOR poll went all over the news. The cash dried up, no money coming in.  Election night, Parker lost by .5% a few (700?) hundred votes. The poll was a campaign dirty trick to suppress the voting by Parker supporters and dry up the cash flow late in the campaign. Later on, WHNT and WVNN and few others found out that poll was supposedly conducted only on REGISTERED VOTING DEMOCRATS and released as a Generic Voter Poll. 

If you are stupid enough to not be able to see that polling is indeed done for effect then there are words for you. I wont use them here. Polling is in many instances used to replace robocalls. They do "polling" to push a story or talking point. Polling is far more well-received than cold calls. So, do a fake poll rather than a cold call. This is really not hard to see and done all the time. The majority of the national polls during the 2016 election make sense of you compare them to THEIR PREDICTIVE DATA. IOW the modeling holds for their model. When you compare them to the outcome, well there are some that are clearly not within MOE. Only two major national polls were WMOE as compared to ACTUAL RESULTS. Then add on the piling on by the media and celebrities that "90% chance that HRC would win" probably parked just enough butts at home to lose the election,. 70k over three states. 

Polling is great, if the poller is fair and non-biased, but too many lately are into polling for an outcome or polling for effect, to push a story or narrative. 

[AU64 10,122]

2 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Polling is great, if the poller is fair and non-biased, but too many lately are into polling for an outcome or polling for effect, to push a story or narrative. 

Can't disagree.....I studied statistics and such and know how that stuff works.    But I think you give the pollees  too much credit for understanding the nuances of those push polls. 

And there is barely a media organ out there that does not have an agenda of some kind and will treat push polls as legitimate news.   These internal polls you  hear about from within campaigns are likely pretty honest because, why lie to yourself.? ...but JMO, any poll that hits the airwaves should be viewed with caution.  Plus, they are just snapshots.....maybe a lot of them reveal a trend.  

Back in my working days I was involved with the Purchasing Management poll   We asked the same questions every time....are orders up or down, lead times longer or shorter prices up, down or stable. basically those questions and purpose was to see business trends early on …..and it was a good poll to the extent that the Commerce Department used our stats.   But it was the trend that mattered, not just any particular one time picture.  

[SaltyTiger 7,838]

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

In fact, most - if not all - of them can beat Trump.  By the time the election gets here, the entire country -  well except for the 30-40% constituting his base - will be fed up with him.

No Brother Homer. It is not a fact and you know it 

[homersapien 11,415]

6 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

No Brother Homer. It is not a fact and you know it 

Well, you have a point.  It's a prediction until it becomes a fact.

We shall see.