PDA

View Full Version : Fox ratings



brandywinelabs
06-18-2009, 05:02 PM
What I don't understand is why Fox News Network programs such as O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck (when he ws on) always show up on DirectTV as one of the most watched program when they are on. Many time nationally the most watched.

How did we get O'BAMA? Do people not believe what these guys say?

subroc
06-18-2009, 05:18 PM
NBC, CBS and ABC far and away exceed cable viewership. So those networks coupled with the other left wing right hating cable networks exceed Fox viewership handily.

BonMallari
06-18-2009, 05:26 PM
What I don't understand is why Fox News Network programs such as O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck (when he ws on) always show up on DirectTV as one of the most watched program when they are on. Many time nationally the most watched.

How did we get O'BAMA? Do people not believe what these guys say?


Look at this map, it will really get you steamed, BHO won the states with the most electoral votes, the election for all intents and purposes was decided on both coasts

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t319/bonmallari/countyvoting.jpg

Franco
06-19-2009, 01:50 PM
Look at this map, it will really get you steamed, BHO won the states with the most electoral votes, the election for all intents and purposes was decided on both coasts

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t319/bonmallari/countyvoting.jpg

Voters were divided up along racial/ethnic lines. So Cal and the border areas as well as the heavy Asian and Hispanic areas in Michigan, Minnesota and little Havanna, Dade County, Fl. Also look at the Mississippi delta from Memphis to Jackson and the Atlanta, Ga to Selma, Al. areas. Obama also got the heavy Asian vote in the northeast along with the feeling guilty non-ethnic liberals.

Fox News could do better if they had better host on during Prime Time.

badbullgator
06-19-2009, 06:30 PM
What I don't understand is why Fox News Network programs such as O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck (when he ws on) always show up on DirectTV as one of the most watched program when they are on. Many time nationally the most watched.

How did we get O'BAMA? Do people not believe what these guys say?

Last I knew Beck was still on......did I miss something? I don't watch him but I swear I saw him just last week on Fox

Bob Gutermuth
06-19-2009, 06:58 PM
Fox shows are highly rated because they are not in the tank for the looney left and Osama like the government run major media.

Thomas D
06-19-2009, 07:08 PM
He moved to Fox from CNN didn't he?

Steve
06-20-2009, 06:30 AM
Most people who vote democrat are really just apathetic. They are not committed to the democrats, they just fall for the class warfare arguments. That is one of the reasons that no one listens to Air Amerika.

road kill
06-20-2009, 07:10 AM
I am afraid (and have been convinced) that this is what the majority of the population wants.

MARXISM!!

In the late 70's, the 25 to 45 demographic was raised by self reliant survivors ( parents who endured the depression & WW II).
Along came RR who spoke to our vision.

We raised our children to want for nothing!
It was all provided!!

We are now 55-75 years old.

The 25 to 45 year old demographic (that WE raised) is used to having every thing done for them.
Along comes "The Obama,"(or "The Big Bamboozle" if you will) who speaks to their vision!!
"I'll (Gov't) will take care of everything for you!")
(nutshell version)

End of story.
End of MY America.

just sayin'

zeus3925
06-20-2009, 09:59 AM
There are many ways to interpret that map. It looks like rural vs. urban/suburban, primarily, with some ethnic overtones. It also looks like some rust belt influences as well. Anyway it is a done deal and Obama has the contract the next three and a half years.

The Republican Party needs to get its act together if it is going to change things. So far it has chosen a totally inept chairman and let Limbaugh define its ideology. Its hardcore can't decide if they are true republicans or libertarians. The Republican Party isn't going to win many adherents that way

BonMallari
06-20-2009, 10:55 AM
There are many ways to interpret that map. It looks like rural vs. urban/suburban, primarily, with some ethnic overtones. It also looks like some rust belt influences as well. Anyway it is a done deal and Obama has the contract the next three and a half years.

The Republican Party needs to get its act together if it is going to change things. So far it has chosen a totally inept chairman and let Limbaugh define its ideology. Its hardcore can't decide if they are true republicans or libertarians. The Republican Party isn't going to win many adherents that way

that pretty much sums up the way I feel and the direction I am headed,leaning more each day to a libertarian view. still too early to tell about Michael Steele, but I feel that the Republican party need to move away from the "old guard" and needs some fresh new faces with new fresher ideas

Matt McKenzie
06-20-2009, 03:42 PM
I keep hearing the term, "fresh ideas" tossed around. I don't want any fresh ideas. I want SOMEBODY to use some good old ideas, like low taxes, limited spending, limited pork, low national debt, strong defense, self-sufficiency, individual liberty, border security, and a free-market economy.
Here's a some fresh ideas to apply to our elected leaders: honesty, integrity, honor, accountability, and statesmanship. If somebody in any party embodied those values and espoused the "ideas" in the first list, we would have a leader. But until then, we have a battle between Republican crooks and Democrat crooks. Pick your poison.

BonMallari
06-21-2009, 02:12 PM
Matt, I hear what you are saying and I agree, but when was the last time you saw a politician give us a straight answer, unfortunately they all speak with forked tongues,cliches, and the same catch phrases...as for the integrity part you are spot on, I was very disappointed in the actions and admissions of Sen. John Ensign ( Nev. R), I actively campaigned for the man, met him , supported him,but after his marital transgressions came out I dont think I could ever trust him again. I am just so fed up with politicians pandering for our votes but then doing whatever they or the special interest group that is funding them want them to do

road kill
06-21-2009, 02:18 PM
I must be on ignore, becuase I explained precisely what is going on.

Face it, too many want thier handout!!

It will not change no matter who the chairman of the Republican party is!

There are just too many of them getting thier entitlements.

In fact, our President is a product of entitlements.
This is the new America.

BonMallari
06-21-2009, 02:42 PM
I must be on ignore, becuase I explained precisely what is going on.

Face it, too many want thier handout!!

It will not change no matter who the chairman of the Republican party is!

There are just too many of them getting thier entitlements.

In fact, our President is a product of entitlements.
This is the new America.

you are preaching to the choir...BHO is a product of entitlements, how do you think he got into college, same with his choice for SCOTUS..unfortunately he has the lazy, unemployed, uneducated masses thinking they just hit the lotto

preach on brother..I am listening

road kill
06-21-2009, 03:43 PM
you are preaching to the choir...BHO is a product of entitlements, how do you think he got into college, same with his choice for SCOTUS..unfortunately he has the lazy, unemployed, uneducated masses thinking they just hit the lotto

preach on brother..I am listening

What do you think Nationalized Health Care is about?

Handouts for VOTES!!

badbullgator
06-21-2009, 04:02 PM
I must be on ignore, becuase I explained precisely what is going on.

Face it, too many want thier handout!!

It will not change no matter who the chairman of the Republican party is!

There are just too many of them getting thier entitlements.

In fact, our President is a product of entitlements.
This is the new America.


After being in NYC last week I agree with that even more. So many there are doing nothing more than looking for a handout and don’t even care about trying to get ahead. My daughter told me as were driving in Brooklyn to watch as we went past the housing projects for all the luxury cars. They call is Escalade land because there are so many parked on the street out side the subsidized housing. She was right, Lexus, Cadillac, Acura….a lot of really nice cars. We rode the subway and there was a group of women that got off where we did and walked to the housing projects carrying 3-5 big shopping bags each with big names on them…. They had way more money to spend shopping that I did. Seems to me if you live in government funded housing shopping a Macy’s, Guess and Hugo Boss should not really be on you list, but they had bags stuffed full from those places. I am very sure that IF they vote they vote democrat because it is the gravy train party for them.

Uncle Bill
06-22-2009, 10:19 AM
Look at this map, it will really get you steamed, BHO won the states with the most electoral votes, the election for all intents and purposes was decided on both coasts

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t319/bonmallari/countyvoting.jpg


One has to love this map, not especially for the voting tabulation, but for the story it tells about the home of the "something-for-nothing-crowd" that resides in this nation.

Not unlike the racist fable of the 4 story building that burned down that killed all the blacks on the first floor, all the Mexicans on the 2nd floor, and all the Puerta Ricans on the third floor, but spared the three white couple living on the 4th floor. When Jesse and Al showed up full of rage asking how this could not be a crime against race, wondering how those whites were spared???? The answer of course was they were at work.

The two Dakotas are a good example, since I know their geography the best. Every blue county on that map in those states is on an Indian reservation, or encompasses the 'big' cities of those states, the exception being Rapid City. Not sure what the Democrats have done for the Indian, but they have been made to believe their life in squalor is being helped by that party, as they continue to remain 'kept'.

BTW, ACORN has nothing on the American Indian Movement when it comes to corruption, especially at the polling places. When Johnson was re-elected as Senator of SD in 2000, he had more votes from Pine Ridge reservation than there were registered voters...a clean sweep. Chicago has nothing on that 'machine'.

When Thune beat out Dashole, his organization was fully aware of his previous defeat, and how it was accomplished, and they didn't let that happen again. What a surprise when the highest ranked Democrat in the Senate, and the state of South Dakota went down in a 'fair fight'. Even The Casino $$$ didn't save him.:rolleyes:

UB

Buzz
06-22-2009, 10:47 AM
Look at this map, it will really get you steamed, BHO won the states with the most electoral votes, the election for all intents and purposes was decided on both coasts

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t319/bonmallari/countyvoting.jpg

This map tells me that we don't elect our leaders on land area, but votes of actual people.

badbullgator
06-22-2009, 11:03 AM
This map tells me that we don't elect our leaders on land area, but votes of actual people.


Or at least actual people wanting hand outs;-)

Henry V
06-22-2009, 11:27 AM
Yep, you gotta love that map.

Maybe, as the facts suggest, those blue areas are generally in state and counties where comparatively more federal tax dollars are collected....see http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr150.pdf and http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/2229.html.

road kill
06-22-2009, 12:13 PM
Yep, you gotta love that map.

Maybe, as the facts suggest, those blue areas are generally in state and counties where comparatively more federal tax dollars are collected....see http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr150.pdf and http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/2229.html.

Not sure if more are "collected" there, but I can guaruntee you more are "spent" there!!

YardleyLabs
06-22-2009, 12:36 PM
Of course another way to look at it is that Obama is supported by every major demographic except white males. Maybe that's who is out of step. Based on current polls, Obama approval is at more than 50% in states representing 445 electoral votes;

http://www.538host.com/o50state3.PNG

Democrats are preferred over republicans in every age group, although the differences are least for those people born while Reagan was President and while Eisenhower was President. They are also preferred by every income group earning less than $150k and by almost half of those earning over $150k. The continued assumption that Obama/Democrat supporters are limited to socialists and those looking to get a government handout is inaccurate. The focus of conservatives on this type of rhetoric is part of what will drive more people away from the republican party.

Franco
06-22-2009, 01:00 PM
MCCain won Louisiana by a big margin so, I can't believe we are now blue. That is unless a bunch of illegals have moved here.

One just can't believe any of the polls because we don't know which way they are paid to be slanted.

YardleyLabs
06-22-2009, 01:28 PM
MCCain won Louisiana by a big margin so, I can't believe we are now blue. That is unless a bunch of illegals have moved here.

One just can't believe any of the polls because we don't know which way they are paid to be slanted.

The map doesn't say how people would vote. It only indicates approval ratings. A high percentage of republicans (including almost a third of conservatives) approves of Obama's performance. The map actually comes from fivethirtyeight.com, which has a somewhat liberal bias in its politics but very rigorous and non-partisan approach approach to polling and poll interpretation (They would probably say something like you can't win by kidding yourself.).

Matt McKenzie
06-22-2009, 01:46 PM
This paints a different picture. I guess it's all in how you crunch the numbers. Remember what Sam Clemens said about statistics.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Martin
06-22-2009, 02:29 PM
I must be on ignore, becuase I explained precisely what is going on.

Face it, too many want thier handout!!

It will not change no matter who the chairman of the Republican party is!

There are just too many of them getting thier entitlements.

In fact, our President is a product of entitlements.
This is the new America.

AMEN! AMEN!

YardleyLabs
06-22-2009, 02:38 PM
Rasmussen is actually the most negative poll by far in its findings over time as compared with all other major pollsters. More than anything else, this appears to be linked to their wording of questions, not to inherent problems with their polling methodologies. Rasmussen is actually one of the primary sources of polling data for fivethirtyeight.com. However, on the issue of whether or not to include a public option in a national health program, Rasmussen evidences dramatically different results from other pollsters. This is shown in this link: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/public-support-for-public-option.html.

With respect to Presidential approval ratings, the fundamental difference in Rasmussen's approach is that he is not measuring overall approval. Instead he measures the difference between strong positives and strong negatives, ignoring all in between. Howev er, it is this middle group that actually decides elections while the exteme groups are more likely to drive primaries and financing. The actual fluctuations in Obama's positive ratings have changed little although he is currently at a new low with 58% approval (comparable to Reagan at a similar point in his presidency). The difference comes from the steady growth in strong negative feelings from conservatives and some softening in support from the far left as Obama has governed more from the center than they would prefer.

Bayou Magic
06-22-2009, 03:53 PM
Rasmussen is actually the most negative poll by far in its findings over time as compared with all other major pollsters. More than anything else, this appears to be linked to their wording of questions, not to inherent problems with their polling methodologies. Rasmussen is actually one of the primary sources of polling data for fivethirtyeight.com. However, on the issue of whether or not to include a public option in a national health program, Rasmussen evidences dramatically different results from other pollsters. This is shown in this link: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/public-support-for-public-option.html.

With respect to Presidential approval ratings, the fundamental difference in Rasmussen's approach is that he is not measuring overall approval. Instead he measures the difference between strong positives and strong negatives, ignoring all in between. Howev er, it is this middle group that actually decides elections while the exteme groups are more likely to drive primaries and financing. The actual fluctuations in Obama's positive ratings have changed little although he is currently at a new low with 58% approval (comparable to Reagan at a similar point in his presidency). The difference comes from the steady growth in strong negative feelings from conservatives and some softening in support from the far left as Obama has governed more from the center than they would prefer.


Please post evidence of the print bolded by me.

Regardless of the numbers, this president is a disaster on the fast track. Even if his approval rating by a truly representative cross-section of the population indicates that he is everything the media wants us to believe and exceeding his most ambitious promises, he is still dead wrong on the key issues.

Hopefully America will wake up... soon.

fp

YardleyLabs
06-22-2009, 04:20 PM
Please post evidence of the print bolded by me.

Regardless of the numbers, this president is a disaster on the fast track. Even if his approval rating by a truly representative cross-section of the population indicates that he is everything the media wants us to believe and exceeding his most ambitious promises, he is still dead wrong on the key issues.

Hopefully America will wake up... soon.

fp
Simply click on the link provided before at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll and read Rasmussen's own description of the poll. Specifically it states:

"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 33% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-four percent (34%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -1." [emphasis added]

I assumed that everyone knew that was how Rasmussen did his index since he states it in every poll. To see his full results, which show a 54% approval rating, go to http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history. Note that Rasmussen consistently shows a lower approval rating than other major polls by 3-5% which is presumably associated with methodological differences.

road kill
06-22-2009, 04:22 PM
Simply click on the link provided before at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll and read Rasmussen's own description of the poll. Specifically it states:

"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 33% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-four percent (34%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -1." [emphasis added]

I assumed that everyone knew that was how Rasmussen did his index since he states it in every poll. To see his full results, which show a 54% approval rating, go to http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history. Note that Rasmussen consistently shows a lower approval rating than other major polls by 3-5% which is presumably associated with methodological differences.

What?

Honesty??

YardleyLabs
06-22-2009, 04:31 PM
What?

Honesty??
Once again, if you review Rasmussen's own statements, he provides details on sampling methodology and approaches used for manipulating data to improve projection value. He also provides details of a rating of polls done by a Fordham professor showing that Rasmussen is tied with Pew in predicting the outcome of the 2008 election. The index that Rasmussen uses (i.e. comparing strong approvals to strong disapprovals) is unique to Rasmussen and interesting. If you read my original comments you will find that I said nothing negative about Rasmussen, but only pointed out the facts in a manner that he would accept.

road kill
06-22-2009, 04:47 PM
Once again, if you review Rasmussen's own statements, he provides details on sampling methodology and approaches used for manipulating data to improve projection value. He also provides details of a rating of polls done by a Fordham professor showing that Rasmussen is tied with Pew in predicting the outcome of the 2008 election. The index that Rasmussen uses (i.e. comparing strong approvals to strong disapprovals) is unique to Rasmussen and interesting. If you read my original comments you will find that I said nothing negative about Rasmussen, but only pointed out the facts in a manner that he would accept.


Al be it brief, my post questions the methodology of many of the other polls findings, steeped heavily in a slanted agenda and a fervent media bias for "The Obama."

It is what it is.......tingly feeling up your leg regards!!

YardleyLabs
06-22-2009, 05:32 PM
Al be it brief, my post questions the methodology of many of the other polls findings, steeped heavily in a slanted agenda and a fervent media bias for "The Obama."

It is what it is.......tingly feeling up your leg regards!!
To question would imply that you actually care enough investigate those methodologies and the predictive track records of the major pollsters (I am not discussing the myriad firms that do push and pull polling in an effort to change opinions.). It's obvious from your comments that you have made no such effort. Rasmussen is an openly conservative republican pollster. In the same manner, there are openly liberal democratic pollsters. Most, however, are still legitimately trying to measure opinion. They do not always have equal resources and that can affect polling accuracy since good polls are very expensive to produce. For their clients, the legitimate pollsters are very open about the strengths and weaknesses of their methods and any biases that are likely to arise. The reason is tat their customers pay them to be right. Rasmussen is a legitimate pollster. Pew is a legitimate pollster. Gallup is a legitimate pollster. There are many others.

You can read more about the methodology used in Rasmussen's daily presidential approval poll at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_scott_rasmussen/comparing_approval_ratings_from_different_polling_ firms. On the website, Rasmussen notes that their poll uses automated polling machines to conduct polls. They state: "Rasmussen Reports uses an automated polling methodology while some firms use operator-assisted techniques. Generally, these different methodologies generate about the same level of approval for different political figures, but the automated technology (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_scott_rasmussen/comparing_approval_ratings_from_different_polling_ firms#) generally registers a higher level of disapproval. There’s no way to be sure why this happens, but it may simply be that some people are reluctant to offer a negative opinion about another human being to a live operator." They then go on to state that the trends in opinion are virtually identical across all the major polls.

Fivethirtyeight.com, the site I referenced before, tracks what they believe is the degree of bias introduced by each of the different political polling firms. I believe that Rasmussen is either third or fourth lowest in their ratings (that is good), scoring worse than Pew and better than Gallup. By the way, I am not implying that those biases are partisan. I believe they are methodological and hinge on technicalities of the type noted on Rasmussen's site. Fivethirtyeight.com uses its modeling of pollster "bias" to adjust each set of polls in an effort to make them more comparable to each other. That method has proven to be extraordinarily accurate in predicting electoral outcomes, making it a fun site to follow during an election.

Julie R.
06-22-2009, 05:48 PM
This map tells me that we don't elect our leaders on land area, but votes of actual people.


And this graphically shows that those who live off handouts, WIC, Section 8s and various other entitlement programs paid for by the working stiffs, now outnumber those poor working stiffs and can now outvote those that actually work and pay real estate and income taxes. Scary....

Lisa S.
06-22-2009, 06:15 PM
Received this by email and was asked to pass it along. It seems to belong here in this thread:


Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law , St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning our recent Presidential election:


* Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29

* Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000

* Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million

* Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1


Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republicans won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase..

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years. If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message.

If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

YardleyLabs
06-22-2009, 06:43 PM
Received this by email and was asked to pass it along. It seems to belong here in this thread:


Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law , St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning our recent Presidential election:
....

It actually belongs in the garbage since it is both wrong and not written by the alleged author who is a professor at Hamline University, not "Hemline" according to the professor himself. The email started after the 2000 election (the one where Gore won the majority of votes and Bush was awarded the presidency by the Supreme Court). It was grossly inaccurate then and remains wrong today.

[See, for example,http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/whats_the_deal_with_prof_joseph_olsons.html]

road kill
06-22-2009, 06:47 PM
To question would imply that you actually care enough investigate those methodologies and the predictive track records of the major pollsters (I am not discussing the myriad firms that do push and pull polling in an effort to change opinions.). It's obvious from your comments that you have made no such effort. Rasmussen is an openly conservative republican pollster. In the same manner, there are openly liberal democratic pollsters. Most, however, are still legitimately trying to measure opinion. They do not always have equal resources and that can affect polling accuracy since good polls are very expensive to produce. For their clients, the legitimate pollsters are very open about the strengths and weaknesses of their methods and any biases that are likely to arise. The reason is tat their customers pay them to be right. Rasmussen is a legitimate pollster. Pew is a legitimate pollster. Gallup is a legitimate pollster. There are many others.

You can read more about the methodology used in Rasmussen's daily presidential approval poll at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_scott_rasmussen/comparing_approval_ratings_from_different_polling_ firms. On the website, Rasmussen notes that their poll uses automated polling machines to conduct polls. They state: "Rasmussen Reports uses an automated polling methodology while some firms use operator-assisted techniques. Generally, these different methodologies generate about the same level of approval for different political figures, but the automated technology (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_scott_rasmussen/comparing_approval_ratings_from_different_polling_ firms#) generally registers a higher level of disapproval. There’s no way to be sure why this happens, but it may simply be that some people are reluctant to offer a negative opinion about another human being to a live operator." They then go on to state that the trends in opinion are virtually identical across all the major polls.

Fivethirtyeight.com, the site I referenced before, tracks what they believe is the degree of bias introduced by each of the different political polling firms. I believe that Rasmussen is either third or fourth lowest in their ratings (that is good), scoring worse than Pew and better than Gallup. By the way, I am not implying that those biases are partisan. I believe they are methodological and hinge on technicalities of the type noted on Rasmussen's site. Fivethirtyeight.com uses its modeling of pollster "bias" to adjust each set of polls in an effort to make them more comparable to each other. That method has proven to be extraordinarily accurate in predicting electoral outcomes, making it a fun site to follow during an election.


Again, I am more interested in the "methodology" the main stream media uses.
Now, go back to the 2-step and answer me with another question.

If words were gas some people would be humvees!!

Brevity, clarity & relevance reign supreme!!

Matt McKenzie
06-22-2009, 07:05 PM
Rasmussen is actually the most negative poll by far in its findings over time as compared with all other major pollsters. More than anything else, this appears to be linked to their wording of questions, not to inherent problems with their polling methodologies. Rasmussen is actually one of the primary sources of polling data for fivethirtyeight.com. However, on the issue of whether or not to include a public option in a national health program, Rasmussen evidences dramatically different results from other pollsters. This is shown in this link: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/public-support-for-public-option.html.

With respect to Presidential approval ratings, the fundamental difference in Rasmussen's approach is that he is not measuring overall approval. Instead he measures the difference between strong positives and strong negatives, ignoring all in between. Howev er, it is this middle group that actually decides elections while the exteme groups are more likely to drive primaries and financing. The actual fluctuations in Obama's positive ratings have changed little although he is currently at a new low with 58% approval (comparable to Reagan at a similar point in his presidency). The difference comes from the steady growth in strong negative feelings from conservatives and some softening in support from the far left as Obama has governed more from the center than they would prefer.

Jeff,
You are absolutely correct in that this poll only measures strong positives and strong negatives. I interpret that to mean that about a third of voters strongly disapprove and roughly the same number strongly approve. The other third are disinterested and uninformed. The only real information to take away from this is the trend. We'll see if it continues.

YardleyLabs
06-22-2009, 07:46 PM
Jeff,
You are absolutely correct in that this poll only measures strong positives and strong negatives. I interpret that to mean that about a third of voters strongly disapprove and roughly the same number strongly approve. The other third are disinterested and uninformed. The only real information to take away from this is the trend. We'll see if it continues.
It sounds like you are saying that one must either be an extremist or ill informed. Having been called by one of the Rasmussen surveys, I can tell you that I said I somewhat approved of Obama's presidency.

tpaschal30
06-22-2009, 09:37 PM
It sounds like you are saying that one must either be an extremist or ill informed. Having been called by one of the Rasmussen surveys, I can tell you that I said I somewhat approved of Obama's presidency.

Are you saying 70% are extremist or ill informed? What are the other 30%, road kill?
I think the important part is the shift in the #s who strongly feel either way. Strongly disagreed moved 20% points and strongly agreed moved about 10%. That is nearly a 1/3 of likely voters who have changed their view some in 4 months. You could also view it as 20% who doubted have had those doubts confirmed and 10% who were sure, are now not so sure.

Raymond Little
06-22-2009, 10:04 PM
It sounds like you are saying that one must either be an extremist or ill informed. Having been called by one of the Rasmussen surveys, I can tell you that I said I somewhat approved of Obama's presidency.

Well imagine that!:rolleyes:

Henry V
06-22-2009, 10:45 PM
Not sure if more are "collected" there, but I can guaruntee you more are "spent" there!!

Sorry to inform you that your conclusion is not supported by the facts presented in the linked documents.
Most of those red counties get more federal tax money back than what they pay and most of blue counties pay more than they get back. If you want to present some actual data to present your point of view, please, do.

road kill
06-23-2009, 06:19 AM
Sorry to inform you that your conclusion is not supported by the facts presented in the linked documents.
Most of those red counties get more federal tax money back than what they pay and most of blue counties pay more than they get back. If you want to present some actual data to present your point of view, please, do.
No, I don't, just like you didn't.
I know in WI, the counties that vote for Obama have the highest unemployment rates, the lowest per capita income, the highest crime rate, the highest state and federal spending and are also the most densely populated areas.

That would be Kenosha, Racine, Madison, LaCrosse & Milwaukee.

It's too hot to search and put it up.
(OK, I am too lazy to search it, wouldn't matter anyway, I understand that this is what most of the people want)

So you can pretend otherwise if you wish.
But, it's kinda hard to collect taxes from people with NO jobs!!

Matt McKenzie
06-23-2009, 07:24 AM
It sounds like you are saying that one must either be an extremist or ill informed. Having been called by one of the Rasmussen surveys, I can tell you that I said I somewhat approved of Obama's presidency.

Of course I don't mean that at all. What I mean is that a huge portion of our population is either disinterested and simply parrots what they are told in the few soundbites they get from TV news. Many who approve of president Obama disapprove of most of his policies, but aren't informed enough to understand that. Many who disapprove of Obama can't articulate why, either.
The fact is that (like every President), his approval numbers are slipping. I think the disapproval numbers from conservatives have mostly remained constant and the real decline is from either those on the FAR left who are disappointed that he isn't more liberal or those who actually thought they would financially benefit from his election (the "now I don't have to worry about my car payment" crowd). And of course there are folks like you who lean to the left who maybe aren't completely satisfied with the job he's doing, just like there are those of us who lean to the right that were disappointed in many of George Bush's policies.

YardleyLabs
06-23-2009, 07:43 AM
Are you saying 70% are extremist or ill informed? What are the other 30%, road kill?
I think the important part is the shift in the #s who strongly feel either way. Strongly disagreed moved 20% points and strongly agreed moved about 10%. That is nearly a 1/3 of likely voters who have changed their view some in 4 months. You could also view it as 20% who doubted have had those doubts confirmed and 10% who were sure, are now not so sure.
Actually, I tend to think that strongly approving, approving, disapproving, and strongly disapproving are all potentially thoughtful opinions. In addition, each opinion may reflect no more than a knee jerk reaction. It depends on the person. However, I do believe that those who condemn persons with opposing viewpoints as idiots and cheats are telling us more about their own lack of judgment than they are about those "idiots and cheats."

Or am I misunderstanding. By "road kill" were you referring to the individual to whom I was responding? I don't think anywhere near 30% of the people would agree with his positions.;-)

Bayou Magic
06-23-2009, 07:48 AM
Simply click on the link provided before at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll and read Rasmussen's own description of the poll. Specifically it states:

"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 33% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-four percent (34%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -1." [emphasis added]

I assumed that everyone knew that was how Rasmussen did his index since he states it in every poll. To see his full results, which show a 54% approval rating, go to http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history. Note that Rasmussen consistently shows a lower approval rating than other major polls by 3-5% which is presumably associated with methodological differences.




Jeff,
You are absolutely correct in that this poll only measures strong positives and strong negatives. I interpret that to mean that about a third of voters strongly disapprove and roughly the same number strongly approve. The other third are disinterested and uninformed. The only real information to take away from this is the trend. We'll see if it continues.

Jeff and Hook,

Ya'll are not correct when you state that this poll measures only strong positives and strong negatives, and that the ratings ignore everything in between. That simply is not correct.

The index is a trend indicator that is the sum of strongly approve and strongly disapprove. The ratings do take into account responses other than strongly approve and strongly disapprove.

Anyway, all of this is nothing but a smoke screen for the real issues.

I would like to see an unbiased measure of how media bias influences poll outcomes. If impartial journalism existed in the media, what would be the perception of the masses regarding the current president's policies and performance?

fp

Jacob Hawkes
06-23-2009, 08:38 AM
MCCain won Louisiana by a big margin so, I can't believe we are now blue. That is unless a bunch of illegals have moved here.

One just can't believe any of the polls because we don't know which way they are paid to be slanted.

LOL. I was calling BS on that too.

It's simple people. Bobby Jingle is the answer. Best republican politician since Reagan, if not longer. He more or less has to shape the party. He's the next president regards.

tpaschal30
06-23-2009, 09:21 AM
Actually, I tend to think that strongly approving, approving, disapproving, and strongly disapproving are all potentially thoughtful opinions. In addition, each opinion may reflect no more than a knee jerk reaction. It depends on the person. However, I do believe that those who condemn persons with opposing viewpoints as idiots and cheats are telling us more about their own lack of judgment than they are about those "idiots and cheats."

Or am I misunderstanding. By "road kill" were you referring to the individual to whom I was responding? I don't think anywhere near 30% of the people would agree with his positions.;-)

I think I misunderstood. I'm with you, I think those with strong opinions tend to be that way based on info or misinfo. At least I hope so. By Road Kill I was making a joke about middle of the roaders. A politician once said"the only thing in the middle of the road is yellow stripes and road kill" or dead possums. Something like thay anyway.

BonMallari
06-23-2009, 09:49 AM
LOL. I was calling BS on that too.

It's simple people. Bobby Jingle is the answer. Best republican politician since Reagan, if not longer. He more or less has to shape the party. He's the next president regards.

Its actually JINDAL......and you cant be serious....

road kill
06-23-2009, 09:52 AM
I think I misunderstood. I'm with you, I think those with strong opinions tend to be that way based on info or misinfo. At least I hope so. By Road Kill I was making a joke about middle of the roaders. A politician once said"the only thing in the middle of the road is yellow stripes and road kill" or dead possums. Something like thay anyway.

I have never called anyone here any names or made fun of the "handles."
I do not dismiss other points of veiw.
I fully understand that the USA is changing, I don't have to like it.
And, until it changes, I am almost certain I am entitled to my opinions as I have lived through enough to have formed them myself.



And, even though road kill my be middle of the road to some, I am anything but that.

Thanks for understanding that!!

Jacob Hawkes
06-23-2009, 10:12 AM
Its actually JINDAL......and you cant be serious....

I know his real name. It's a Louisiana thing.

Yes, I'm serious as serious can be. There's nobody who has anything on him in either party. There's a reason why he was interviewed right after the election by CBS. He is the future of the party and country.

BonMallari
06-23-2009, 10:34 AM
I actually like former OK congressman JC Watts, he may take a shot at the governor seat in OK..he is very articulate and has legislative experience in Congress and can obviously appeal to minorites too

Marvin S
06-23-2009, 11:08 AM
This thread is interesting to say the least, other than Jeff's very predictable responses. Jeff needs to crawl out of his box & see how normal people think & prosper.;)

Jindal, Watts, Flake are all up & comers with technocratic tendencies. How they do on a national stage remains to be seen, should they ever go there.

Funny thing, when David Broder is questioning the rationality of the O person's plan the O person is in trouble.

But I'll ask those of you with children if you practice what you preach. Are you going to pay for your children's higher education? Do you buy the best for your children without expecting they earn the upgrade? If you answer yes to both those questions, you are contributing to the "I am owed" mentality. ;)

Have a nice day, I'm busy putting together a campaign for City Council. The Mayor & the incumbent in the position aren't going to be very happy when I finish telling the truth. Our little city is a prime example of what is wrong in government today. But I aim to fix that, called the power of one person persevering where they are not welcome.

tpaschal30
06-23-2009, 11:10 AM
I have never called anyone here any names or made fun of the "handles."
I do not dismiss other points of veiw.
I fully understand that the USA is changing, I don't have to like it.
And, until it changes, I am almost certain I am entitled to my opinions as I have lived through enough to have formed them myself.



And, even though road kill my be middle of the road to some, I am anything but that.

Thanks for understanding that!!

I had not even noticed your handle. No reference was meant to be directed at you. I thought the middle of the road quote was more well known. It was like a Letterman joke. Missed the mark!!!!!

Franco
06-23-2009, 12:47 PM
Its actually JINDAL......and you cant be serious....



I agree, I don't think Jindal is electable either. Not enough Hindu voters to get him elected. Besides, he needs to finish the job he started here is Loosiana.

His major shortcoming is that he doesn't follow LSU Athletics.

Jacob Hawkes
06-23-2009, 12:59 PM
That's not entirely true. He was @ the LSU/gayturd game last year doing a republican rally. He's not Foster, but he's not oblivious either.

He's got a following throughout the country on both sides. He's very well recognized and thought of highly.

Hew
06-23-2009, 01:28 PM
That's not entirely true. He was @ the LSU/gayturd game last year doing a republican rally. He's not Foster, but he's not oblivious either.
He's not that big of a fan, though. Unlike all the other LSU fans, his facepaint wasn't smudged by tear streaks after Florida hung fitty on you. Now that you're posting here, can we expect frequent RTF updates on Jindal like the fascinating college baseball thread? You know...

0845:
"Jindal is walking to his office this morning."

0857:
"Jindal had his morning coffee. He drinks it black. What a stud!"

1007:
"Bobby's running some smack on the dems in the legislature at the moment. I'll update soon."

etc....

BTW, Bobby's about the best thing to come out of LA since Professor Longhair and Buckwheat Zydeco. I likes me some Bobby, too.

Jacob Hawkes
06-23-2009, 01:45 PM
You can only comment on what politicians do. I know where he will be in the not too distant future, but tis pretty much classified. Why it's like that makes no sense considering the place.

Being that said, watching a baseball game and commenting is differently. Furthermore, atleast Fearing Thy Zooker meant LSU could actually lose to the gayturds in BR. Poor urban legend, the only thing to be feared about him is the recruiting violations and his lack of discipline.

Hew
06-23-2009, 02:13 PM
FYI, a recent email exchange




To: Corrine Brown (cwbrown@ushouse.gov)
From: Hew
CC: RTF POTUS PLACE

Congresswoman Brown,

Although I am not a constituent of yours, I was hoping you'd extend to me the courtesy of translating/transcribing the following internet message board post as I think you might be the only other living human who can understand what he's saying:


You can only comment on what politicians do. I know where he will be in the not too distant future, but tis pretty much classified. Why it's like that makes no sense considering the place.

Being that said, watching a baseball game and commenting is differently. Furthermore, atleast Fearing Thy Zooker meant LSU could actually lose to the gayturds in BR. Poor urban legend, the only thing to be feared about him is the recruiting violations and his lack of discipline.

Thank you and good luck. And if I see Corch Meyaaaahs I will extend him your best.

Thanks,
Hew


Her reply:



To: Hew (gatorpower@aol.com)
From: Honorable Corrine Brown

Dear Hew,

I don't be knowin' what the hell that dude done said. Axe him to clarify and recidify his thoughts and send it too me again. I do think he trying to step to Florida fans with some LSU smack but it hard to tell.

The Best,
Corrine Brown

Jacob Hawkes
06-23-2009, 02:56 PM
LMFAO. Well played. Well played.