The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 04, 2021, 12:18:17 AM
News: EV Calculator updated with new apportionment numbers, custom labels, orange party color and more. Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 122 123 124 125 126 [127] 128 129 130 131 132 ... 410
Author Topic: The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread  (Read 1082774 times)
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 #3150 on: December 10, 2009, 02:21:19 PM »

Civitas, isn't a very good polling company.. Just look at there 2008 polls... Just wait until the new PPP NC numbers come out.

Nevermind the fact that favorables and approval aren't the same thing. But apparently hacks don't care about things like that.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,115
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3151 on: December 10, 2009, 04:14:31 PM »

Civitas, isn't a very good polling company.. Just look at there 2008 polls... Just wait until the new PPP NC numbers come out.

Nevermind the fact that favorables and approval aren't the same thing. But apparently hacks don't care about things like that.

Civitas looks far more reliable than does SurveyUSA.

In case you think that I am a hack:

1. I have no idea of which is more reliable: favorability or approval. I know that there is a difference, and when I see a poll that has both favorability and approval I average them.

2. Polls are estimates; elections are the definitive reality.

3. Precision is impossible in an estimate. 

4. I have let some of the polls that I have thought suspect stand -- like the SUSA polls of last month. 

5. I recognize that we have 35 months until Election 2012, by which time much will change, including the prospects of victory and loss of the President.

6. I offer analysis -- and I use numbers.

7. This map can show where Obama is doing well and where he isn't doing so well.  This map is intended to compare current reality to that of November 4, 2008.
 
8. President Obama will win or lose in 2012 almost entirely on his record. 
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 #3152 on: December 10, 2009, 04:19:23 PM »

Civitas, isn't a very good polling company.. Just look at there 2008 polls... Just wait until the new PPP NC numbers come out.

Nevermind the fact that favorables and approval aren't the same thing. But apparently hacks don't care about things like that.

Civitas looks far more reliable than does SurveyUSA.

In case you think that I am a hack:

1. I have no idea of which is more reliable: favorability or approval. I know that there is a difference, and when I see a poll that has both favorability and approval I average them.

2. Polls are estimates; elections are the definitive reality.

3. Precision is impossible in an estimate. 

4. I have let some of the polls that I have thought suspect stand -- like the SUSA polls of last month. 

5. I recognize that we have 35 months until Election 2012, by which time much will change, including the prospects of victory and loss of the President.

6. I offer analysis -- and I use numbers.

7. This map can show where Obama is doing well and where he isn't doing so well.  This map is intended to compare current reality to that of November 4, 2008.
 
8. President Obama will win or lose in 2012 almost entirely on his record. 

Civitas better than SurveyUSA? Do you know which pollster NAILED the 2009 results?

And this thread is called "The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread". I think you have an answer.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,115
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3153 on: December 10, 2009, 04:37:23 PM »


Civitas better than SurveyUSA? Do you know which pollster NAILED the 2009 results?

And this thread is called "The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread". I think you have an answer.

2009 has little bearing on 2012. Odd-year elections are very different from even-year elections.

Approval and favorability differ by little -- 1-2%, which is less than the usual differences between pollsters and certain criteria of selecting "voters" -- adults, registered voters, or "likely voters". A 1-2% difference is within the usual margin of error. The difference between approval and favorability is slight enough for me.

Do you concur that last month's SUSA poll for Virginia has been shown far out of line in contrast to other polls in Virginia?     
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 #3154 on: December 10, 2009, 04:43:19 PM »


Civitas better than SurveyUSA? Do you know which pollster NAILED the 2009 results?

And this thread is called "The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread". I think you have an answer.

Approval and favorability differ by little -- 1-2%, which is less than the usual differences between pollsters and certain criteria of selecting "voters" -- adults, registered voters, or "likely voters". A 1-2% difference is within the usual margin of error. The difference between approval and favorability is slight enough for me.     

Proof?

Also, SUSA was the most accurate in 2008 as well.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,164
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3155 on: December 10, 2009, 05:24:12 PM »

Approval and favorability differ by little -- 1-2%, which is less than the usual differences between pollsters and certain criteria of selecting "voters" -- adults, registered voters, or "likely voters". A 1-2% difference is within the usual margin of error. The difference between approval and favorability is slight enough for me.

Pollster.com trendline on Obama favorability = 53.7%:

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/fav-obama.php

Pollster.com trendline on Obama job approval rating = 48.3%:

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/jobapproval-obama.php

Granted, it's a slightly different mix of polls, with more recent job approval polls included, which could aggravate the gap, but if you look at individual poll-by-poll comparisons, you find that, within the same poll, Obama's current favorability does indeed run something like 4-5% above his job approval rating.  Heck, for the most recent Marist poll, the gap is as large as 9 points.

Personal favorability ratings and opinion of how Obama is doing as president are totally different things.  It's ridiculous to average them together or put them up on the same map side by side.  Especially when both numbers are so close to 50%, so that the choice of which one to use has a significant impact on which direction each state swings.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,115
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3156 on: December 10, 2009, 09:50:43 PM »


Civitas better than SurveyUSA? Do you know which pollster NAILED the 2009 results?

And this thread is called "The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread". I think you have an answer.

Approval and favorability differ by little -- 1-2%, which is less than the usual differences between pollsters and certain criteria of selecting "voters" -- adults, registered voters, or "likely voters". A 1-2% difference is within the usual margin of error. The difference between approval and favorability is slight enough for me.     

Proof?

Also, SUSA was the most accurate in 2008 as well.

I saw some for Wisconsin a couple months ago -- same pollster -- approval and favorability -- and they differed by 2%.

The November batch of SurveyUSA polls was... strange. Sometimes one gets a bad batch. Note that I have removed only one of them, and that because of a later poll. 

Its the general pattern that matters most.  Had such a map been present between 1976 and 1980 it could have shown that Jimmy Carter was sinking throughout his administration. In the next four years it would have shown that Ronald Reagan created much discontent through deflationary policies only to recover in time for a landslide.

The most partisan hacks on the Right would like to believe that Barack Obama is the "new Jimmy Carter", doomed to failure because he is "too liberal" and generally inept. So far this map does not show that. Partisan hacks on the Left would like to see Obama holding strong in the core states of his support and becoming competitive in some ogf the states that he lost by substantial margins -- the first part is true (if one disregards SUSA's reports of ties in Oregon and Washington) but the second one has yet to show since the honeymoon period and might never happen. If either happened, then it would show.   There are enough timely  polls if I record both approval and favorability polls.

The alternative is either to pick and choose (which is unacceptable as unrepresentative) or to have so few polls that one has grossly-inadequate data because it is no longer timely or otherwise spotty in coverage.

OK. Let's suppose that we get favorability polls from North Dakota and Mississippi. Do you want those to be  rejected? If I reject those we have nothing.

Whether we get approval or favorability polls is itself random. Nobody is consistently feeding us favorability polls from states likely on the political margin (let's say Ohio) and approval polls from states not likely to vote as they haven't voted for years (Rhode Island, Utah).
 

Logged
Smid
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,152
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3157 on: December 10, 2009, 09:55:06 PM »

The debate about the use of Approval vs Favourability polls is a valid one.

I can see that, as pbrower has stated, Favourability needs to be used in some instances due to the underpolling of some states (for example Indiana). It also, however, tends to be higher than Approval polls.

Rather than attempting some arbitrary estimated calculation to adjust for this, perhaps the best thing to do would be to not include Favourability polls except where the last poll for a state was more than, say, a month or two months old? Where there is an Approval poll that was more recent than that, don't adjust that state's figures. If the last poll was a Favourability poll, use the more recent Favourability poll instead. Perhaps that would be overly complex, but maybe a note at the bottom of the map listing states showing Favourability rather than Approvals may simplify things?
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,987
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3158 on: December 11, 2009, 12:22:02 AM »

Just because Obama is running higher the avg approval ratings in SC doesn't mean crap. SC has a high black population, so his approval ratings would be high.

I really don't get what this is supposed to mean. Pollsters generally know how to properly account for these things, certainly Rasmussen and PPP would.

I think his point(or at least mine) is that white Democrats are willing to disapprove of Obama while Black Democrats are not willing to do that. This makes his numbers here higher than in other southern states. Just a theory.

Yea, that is what I was trying to say. I have talk to alot of black folks and most of them just approve of Obama because he is black.

In depth discussions with both blacks you know, I'm sure.

Do you think most white people who disapprove of Obama do so because he's black?
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,115
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3159 on: December 11, 2009, 01:22:03 AM »

Pennsylvania (Rasmussen)Sad

50% Approve
48% Disapprove

This telephone survey of 1,200 Likely Voters in Pennsylvania was conducted by Rasmussen Reports December 8, 2009. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_state_toplines/pennsylvania/toplines_2010_pennsylvania_senate_election_december_8_2009
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,164
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3160 on: December 11, 2009, 09:29:53 AM »

OK. Let's suppose that we get favorability polls from North Dakota and Mississippi. Do you want those to be  rejected? If I reject those we have nothing.

So what?  There will inevitably be some states without any polling.  I'm not sure why that's a problem.  We can easily do the mental extrapolation to guess at where things stand in MS and ND, based on what results are showing up in other states.  That would be preferable to making a map that's a mish-mash of polling on two completely different questions.  Combining data from polling on two different questions (approval of the job Obama is doing as president vs. what you think of Obama as a person) makes the map harder to interpret, not easier.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,115
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3161 on: December 11, 2009, 10:02:49 AM »

OK. Let's suppose that we get favorability polls from North Dakota and Mississippi. Do you want those to be  rejected? If I reject those we have nothing.

So what?  There will inevitably be some states without any polling.  I'm not sure why that's a problem.  We can easily do the mental extrapolation to guess at where things stand in MS and ND, based on what results are showing up in other states.  That would be preferable to making a map that's a mish-mash of polling on two completely different questions.  Combining data from polling on two different questions (approval of the job Obama is doing as president vs. what you think of Obama as a person) makes the map harder to interpret, not easier.


Extrapolation is completely unreliable except with very close analogues over a very short range.

I spoke of Mississippi and North Dakota because those states have not been polled. There's no reliable poll in South Dakota (the last one was in the spring) or any other state with similar voting characteristics to North Dakota. For the simple reason that such states as Vermont and Wyoming are unpolled, those states offer no mystery about themselves.

Mississippi has its own uniqueness as a state in electoral politics -- most notably that among the 50 states it has the largest percentage of African-American voters. Mississippi elections have typically been extremely polarized on race -- polarized enough that a racist like Trent Lott could win a Senate seat in the state while alienating the African-American vote by getting 80% of the white vote. White voting patterns in Mississippi are very different from those in, for example, Kentucky, where Obama got about 42% of the white vote. (Kentucky has few blacks). Mississippi has race-based machine party politics.

Should Obama get 35% of the white vote in Mississippi in 2012 he wins the state. That is about what Obama got in the white electorate in neighboring Arkansas in 2008, so such is far from impossible. I don't say that he can, but in the absence of polls from Mississippi I can say nothing except some vapid generality.  He could conceivably get 35% of the white vote if he is seen as very different from the black machine politicians that white Mississippians know too well (white machine politicians are no better) and safely distant from Mississippi. Obama is of course President of the United States and not some county commissioner.

Logged
Devilman88
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,498


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3162 on: December 11, 2009, 12:44:42 PM »

Colorado

Approve: 50%
Disapprove: 49%

Link

Nevada]

Approve: 46%
Disapprove: 54%
Link

Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,941
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3163 on: December 11, 2009, 03:35:05 PM »

Has the Rass IL poll been added yet? :S

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/illinois/toplines/toplines_2010_illinois_senate_december_9_2009


58%/42%
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,115
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3164 on: December 11, 2009, 03:40:12 PM »


Rasmussen updates in Colorado, Illinois,  and Nevada -- and they are approval instead of favorability:




Harry Reid is in political trouble, and he could be pulling Obama down in Nevada.

Colorado as favorable to Obama (not by much, mind you), as is Pennsylvania? That's weird, but we have the same sources, and we will see strange phenomena.  If Nate Silver is right, then the Colorado and Pennsylvania polls translate to about 54-46 votes in both places, and Nevada is about even.

Speaking of Nevada -- how often does one see the two incumbent Senators, both of different Parties, both in danger of losing their seats?
Logged
DariusNJ
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 414


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3165 on: December 11, 2009, 05:44:51 PM »


Should Obama get 35% of the white vote in Mississippi in 2012 he wins the state. That is about what Obama got in the white electorate in neighboring Arkansas in 2008, so such is far from impossible. I don't say that he can, but in the absence of polls from Mississippi I can say nothing except some vapid generality.  He could conceivably get 35% of the white vote if he is seen as very different from the black machine politicians that white Mississippians know too well (white machine politicians are no better) and safely distant from Mississippi. Obama is of course President of the United States and not some county commissioner.



Come on, how do you expect people to take you seriously? 35% of the white vote in MS?! Obama could have 90% approvals the day before the election, he still would not get near 35% of white voters in MS.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,115
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3166 on: December 11, 2009, 07:29:57 PM »
« Edited: December 11, 2009, 07:34:10 PM by pbrower2a »


Should Obama get 35% of the white vote in Mississippi in 2012 he wins the state. That is about what Obama got in the white electorate in neighboring Arkansas in 2008, so such is far from impossible. I don't say that he can, but in the absence of polls from Mississippi I can say nothing except some vapid generality.  He could conceivably get 35% of the white vote if he is seen as very different from the black machine politicians that white Mississippians know too well (white machine politicians are no better) and safely distant from Mississippi. Obama is of course President of the United States and not some county commissioner.



Come on, how do you expect people to take you seriously? 35% of the white vote in MS?! Obama could have 90% approvals the day before the election, he still would not get near 35% of white voters in MS.

That's a mathematical model that I can offer only in the absence of a poll. There has been no poll of Mississippi.  It's highly unlikely, of course, but not yet impossible. If some pollster gets a Mississippi poll, then such a poll can repudiate the possibility very fast. 
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 #3167 on: December 11, 2009, 07:38:00 PM »

I think Obama is at 35% approval in Vermont. There hasn't been a poll there, so no one can dispute my possiblity.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,302
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3168 on: December 11, 2009, 08:11:35 PM »

I think that Obama is a joke of a President but he is good.


Regards,

Sarah Palin.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,949
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3169 on: December 11, 2009, 08:17:36 PM »

Gallup: 50/44

Economic Confidence, Getting Better/Worse: 38/55
Logged
Vepres
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3170 on: December 11, 2009, 08:40:46 PM »

Just because Obama is running higher the avg approval ratings in SC doesn't mean crap. SC has a high black population, so his approval ratings would be high.

I really don't get what this is supposed to mean. Pollsters generally know how to properly account for these things, certainly Rasmussen and PPP would.

I think his point(or at least mine) is that white Democrats are willing to disapprove of Obama while Black Democrats are not willing to do that. This makes his numbers here higher than in other southern states. Just a theory.

Yea, that is what I was trying to say. I have talk to alot of black folks and most of them just approve of Obama because he is black.

In depth discussions with both blacks you know, I'm sure.

Do you think most white people who disapprove of Obama do so because he's black?

You're kidding yourself if you think that any less than at least 1/4 of blacks don't approve of Obama solely because of his race.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,302
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3171 on: December 11, 2009, 09:18:13 PM »

Just because Obama is running higher the avg approval ratings in SC doesn't mean crap. SC has a high black population, so his approval ratings would be high.

I really don't get what this is supposed to mean. Pollsters generally know how to properly account for these things, certainly Rasmussen and PPP would.

I think his point(or at least mine) is that white Democrats are willing to disapprove of Obama while Black Democrats are not willing to do that. This makes his numbers here higher than in other southern states. Just a theory.

Yea, that is what I was trying to say. I have talk to alot of black folks and most of them just approve of Obama because he is black.

In depth discussions with both blacks you know, I'm sure.

Do you think most white people who disapprove of Obama do so because he's black?

You're kidding yourself if you think that any less than at least 1/4 of blacks don't approve of Obama solely because of his race.

John Kerry, a white man, won about 90% of the black vote in 2004.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,900
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3172 on: December 11, 2009, 09:21:32 PM »

Just because Obama is running higher the avg approval ratings in SC doesn't mean crap. SC has a high black population, so his approval ratings would be high.

I really don't get what this is supposed to mean. Pollsters generally know how to properly account for these things, certainly Rasmussen and PPP would.

I think his point(or at least mine) is that white Democrats are willing to disapprove of Obama while Black Democrats are not willing to do that. This makes his numbers here higher than in other southern states. Just a theory.

Yea, that is what I was trying to say. I have talk to alot of black folks and most of them just approve of Obama because he is black.

In depth discussions with both blacks you know, I'm sure.

Do you think most white people who disapprove of Obama do so because he's black?

You're kidding yourself if you think that any less than at least 1/4 of blacks don't approve of Obama solely because of his race.

And what would the results have been if it had been Kerry vs Obama?
John Kerry, a white man, won about 90% of the black vote in 2004.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,302
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3173 on: December 11, 2009, 09:50:25 PM »

Just because Obama is running higher the avg approval ratings in SC doesn't mean crap. SC has a high black population, so his approval ratings would be high.

I really don't get what this is supposed to mean. Pollsters generally know how to properly account for these things, certainly Rasmussen and PPP would.

I think his point(or at least mine) is that white Democrats are willing to disapprove of Obama while Black Democrats are not willing to do that. This makes his numbers here higher than in other southern states. Just a theory.

Yea, that is what I was trying to say. I have talk to alot of black folks and most of them just approve of Obama because he is black.

In depth discussions with both blacks you know, I'm sure.

Do you think most white people who disapprove of Obama do so because he's black?

You're kidding yourself if you think that any less than at least 1/4 of blacks don't approve of Obama solely because of his race.

And what would the results have been if it had been Kerry vs Obama?
John Kerry, a white man, won about 90% of the black vote in 2004.

You answered your own question with my previous post. Very unique.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,900
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3174 on: December 11, 2009, 10:13:33 PM »

Just because Obama is running higher the avg approval ratings in SC doesn't mean crap. SC has a high black population, so his approval ratings would be high.

I really don't get what this is supposed to mean. Pollsters generally know how to properly account for these things, certainly Rasmussen and PPP would.

I think his point(or at least mine) is that white Democrats are willing to disapprove of Obama while Black Democrats are not willing to do that. This makes his numbers here higher than in other southern states. Just a theory.

Yea, that is what I was trying to say. I have talk to alot of black folks and most of them just approve of Obama because he is black.

In depth discussions with both blacks you know, I'm sure.

Do you think most white people who disapprove of Obama do so because he's black?

You're kidding yourself if you think that any less than at least 1/4 of blacks don't approve of Obama solely because of his race.

And what would the results have been if it had been Kerry vs Obama?
John Kerry, a white man, won about 90% of the black vote in 2004.

You answered your own question with my previous post. Very unique.

Uh, so you are arguing that John Kerry would have taken 90% of the black vote against Obama?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 122 123 124 125 126 [127] 128 129 130 131 132 ... 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 0.078 seconds with 12 queries.