|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 29, 2020, 12:50:23 pm
News: Don't miss the first US presidential debate at 9:00 pm EST!

Discussion thread link: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=400306.0

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 97 98 99 100 101 [102] 103 104 105 106 107 ... 410
Author Topic: The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread  (Read 1044312 times)
Alexander Hamilton
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2525 on: September 20, 2009, 05:48:28 am »

Change your avatar. It would be for the best. Just ask Rowanbrandon how free he feels now.

Lol RowanBrandon is a joke. He's not a real Republican
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,155
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2526 on: September 20, 2009, 07:00:54 am »

Virginia (Washington Post):

53% Approve
47% Disapprove

Iowa (Des Moines Register):

53% Approve
41% Disapprove

Map revised:



Consider the Virginia result an average.
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2527 on: September 20, 2009, 08:25:51 am »

Hahaha, so you include the VA poll when it's positive but dismiss the NJ poll when it's negative. You sir are not just a moron, but a HACK.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,346
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2528 on: September 20, 2009, 09:28:43 am »


Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2529 on: September 20, 2009, 09:50:45 am »


Uhh what? Where have I ever suggested that Obama is going to lose no matter what?
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2530 on: September 20, 2009, 09:56:57 am »

Change your avatar. It would be for the best. Just ask Rowanbrandon how free he feels now.

No, this is for Iran.
Logged
Chocolate Thunder
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,138
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2531 on: September 20, 2009, 10:21:51 am »

Change your avatar. It would be for the best. Just ask Rowanbrandon how free he feels now.

No, this is for Iran.
That's reasonable...for a while at least. I wonder where that Iran thing is going, anyway. I wounder how the first few months of the last revolution were reported. Is this thing eventually going to go away? Maybe if the rebellion gets put down/ the protesters get boreda nd Iran isn't developing nukes after all, maybe we should just go back to ignoring them if they are neither a threat or opportunity.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,155
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2532 on: September 20, 2009, 11:53:36 am »

Hahaha, so you include the VA poll when it's positive but dismiss the NJ poll when it's negative. You sir are not just a moron, but a HACK.

The Virginia result comes from an average between a 49-50 and a 53-47 poll.

I maintain that an odd-year election has a significantly-different electorate than an even-year election. The NJ result that some ballyhoo won't likely hold. Show one after the gubernatorial election -- or show that the participation in the election is essentially the same as in 2008 in New Jersey, and I will "unfreeze"  the result.

I recognized recent polls in Wisconsin and Iowa that did not look good for Obama.  Those polls were valid. (So was the one that negated the Iowa poll that showed Obama in trouble there.

I see no difference between rejecting the recent poll in New Jersey and rejecting a poll commissioned by the NAACP or the NRA. Neither does polls, but you can just imagine what bias either would show.
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2533 on: September 20, 2009, 11:54:36 am »

Then why are you including ANY VA polls? Those are from a 2009 electorate. You are brain dead.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,155
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2534 on: September 20, 2009, 12:17:14 pm »

Then why are you including ANY VA polls? Those are from a 2009 electorate. You are brain dead.

Because they are consistent with 2008 and not with an incumbent trying to save a failing governorship.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,870
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.97, S: -1.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2535 on: September 20, 2009, 12:28:19 pm »


The New Jersey poll relates to a gubernatorial race in 2010.  NH is a 50-50 tie; a lesser tie (let us say 49-49) would be white.

I'll ignore the fact that you posted that the governor race is in 2010...
So basically, from what I understand from how you determine this with the `09 Governor race states, if Obama's negative is higher than positive, it doesn't count because it refers to the 2009 election. BUT, if Obama has a positive rating, the poll is consistant with 2008.

Then why are you including ANY VA polls? Those are from a 2009 electorate. You are brain dead.

Because they are consistent with 2008 and not with an incumbent trying to save a failing governorship.
Are you seriously out of your mind? You are saying the New Jersey poll shouldn't count because they have a bad Governor. That is extremely ignorant. A lot of states have bad Democratic governors, so lets ignore those states too, since Obama will probably have bad approvals there.
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,705
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2536 on: September 20, 2009, 12:42:43 pm »

Virginia (Washington Post):

53% Approve
47% Disapprove

Iowa (Des Moines Register):

53% Approve
41% Disapprove

Not bad.
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2537 on: September 20, 2009, 01:12:44 pm »

Then why are you including ANY VA polls? Those are from a 2009 electorate. You are brain dead.

Because they are consistent with 2008 and not with an incumbent trying to save a failing governorship.

LOL hack.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,780


Political Matrix
E: -0.84, S: -3.04

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2538 on: September 20, 2009, 02:06:14 pm »

p2bower is now spinning himself in circles. None of what he is doing is making a lick of sense.
Logged
Chocolate Thunder
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,138
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2539 on: September 20, 2009, 02:37:20 pm »

Basically, if we take everything at face value, and adjust Rasmussen numbers to comply with the field, this is what we get:

RCP Average: 53%
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,908
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2540 on: September 20, 2009, 02:51:22 pm »

Hahaha, so you include the VA poll when it's positive but dismiss the NJ poll when it's negative. You sir are not just a moron, but a HACK.

For the third time, why are you advocating for the inclusion of a poll of likely 2009 voters?

Is the Virginia poll likely 2009 voters, too?  If not, why shouldn't it be inclusion?
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2541 on: September 20, 2009, 03:39:03 pm »

Hahaha, so you include the VA poll when it's positive but dismiss the NJ poll when it's negative. You sir are not just a moron, but a HACK.

For the third time, why are you advocating for the inclusion of a poll of likely 2009 voters?

Is the Virginia poll likely 2009 voters, too?  If not, why shouldn't it be inclusion?

I just want consistency. You either include both VA and NJ polls, or neither. You can't include the VA simply because it's positive and exclude the NJ because it's negative.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2542 on: September 20, 2009, 03:44:22 pm »

Hahaha, so you include the VA poll when it's positive but dismiss the NJ poll when it's negative. You sir are not just a moron, but a HACK.

For the third time, why are you advocating for the inclusion of a poll of likely 2009 voters?

Is the Virginia poll likely 2009 voters, too?  If not, why shouldn't it be inclusion?

I just want consistency. You either include both VA and NJ polls, or neither. You can't include the VA simply because it's positive and exclude the NJ because it's negative.

Pot calling the kettle black, hack. You are the blue avatar pbrower2
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,870
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.97, S: -1.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2543 on: September 20, 2009, 03:45:14 pm »

Hahaha, so you include the VA poll when it's positive but dismiss the NJ poll when it's negative. You sir are not just a moron, but a HACK.

For the third time, why are you advocating for the inclusion of a poll of likely 2009 voters?

Is the Virginia poll likely 2009 voters, too?  If not, why shouldn't it be inclusion?

I just want consistency. You either include both VA and NJ polls, or neither. You can't include the VA simply because it's positive and exclude the NJ because it's negative.

Pot calling the kettle black, hack. You are the blue avatar pbrower2
How is Rowan a hack? Because he is conservative and wants a good map on here?
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,705
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2544 on: September 20, 2009, 03:47:51 pm »

Hahaha, so you include the VA poll when it's positive but dismiss the NJ poll when it's negative. You sir are not just a moron, but a HACK.

For the third time, why are you advocating for the inclusion of a poll of likely 2009 voters?

Is the Virginia poll likely 2009 voters, too?  If not, why shouldn't it be inclusion?

I just want consistency. You either include both VA and NJ polls, or neither. You can't include the VA simply because it's positive and exclude the NJ because it's negative.

Pot calling the kettle black, hack. You are the blue avatar pbrower2
How is Rowan a hack? Because he is conservative and wants a good map on here?

Try reading the point that Alcon made.
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2545 on: September 20, 2009, 03:51:47 pm »

Hahaha, so you include the VA poll when it's positive but dismiss the NJ poll when it's negative. You sir are not just a moron, but a HACK.

For the third time, why are you advocating for the inclusion of a poll of likely 2009 voters?

Is the Virginia poll likely 2009 voters, too?  If not, why shouldn't it be inclusion?

I just want consistency. You either include both VA and NJ polls, or neither. You can't include the VA simply because it's positive and exclude the NJ because it's negative.

Pot calling the kettle black, hack. You are the blue avatar pbrower2
How is Rowan a hack? Because he is conservative and wants a good map on here?

Try reading the point that Alcon made.

Try reading my response.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,908
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2546 on: September 20, 2009, 05:28:19 pm »

Brandon is right.  The WaPo poll is of likely 2009 voters.  You should be consistent if you're going to dismiss the NJ poll for the same reason.
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,705
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2547 on: September 20, 2009, 05:56:30 pm »
« Edited: September 20, 2009, 06:00:32 pm by No Reply »

Neither of the polls should be used then, not both.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2548 on: September 20, 2009, 06:01:18 pm »

Neither of the polls should be used then, not both.

Exactly
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2549 on: September 20, 2009, 06:16:05 pm »

Neither of the polls should be used then, not both.

Which is the point I've been trying to make. It's about consistency. Smiley
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 97 98 99 100 101 [102] 103 104 105 106 107 ... 410  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.097 seconds with 14 queries.