Discussion: The REPUBLICAN Party

[Paradyme]

Heres a link, or one of the better ones I can find. I may have misheard on the radio.

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

Rasmussen is 56% approval and 43% disapproval.

His disapproval ratings have climbed 11 points.

 

[The Overlord]

Heres a link, or one of the better ones I can find. I may have misheard on the radio.

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

Rasmussen is 56% approval and 43% disapproval.

His disapproval ratings have climbed 11 points.

Yeah, but Gallup poll says its 62%. Here's the question, do a majority disprove of the job Obama is doing?

 

[redfirebird2008]

It all depends on the party ID sampling. If you assume half the country is liberal and half is conservative, then that's a pretty large assumption to be making.

 

[Superman]

As I discussed last year, whoever wins the election is basically screwed. There is no way in theory or practice anyone can fix the economy in one term. They can at most decelerate or accelerate.

In economic terms, I personally saw that both candidates were going to accelerate the problem, albeit to varying speeds, but ultimately the same destination. In other words, the outcome would have been more or less the same with McCain or Obama. Obama has (as Matt puts it) inherited a poisoned chalice.

It is immaterial right now whether the American public thinks he is screwing up. I mean the public approved of Geithner, and he is full of fail and tax fraud. Give or take near the end of the term, and the economy does not pickup pace, it will be a different story. I can assure you, there has been zero to no improvement if you wade through the cooked number. Consumer confidence means nothing if the fundamentals are wrong to begin with.

The only solace for Obama fanboys is no electable Democrat or Republican would have been able to resolve it either. That make some of you feel better?

I don't think I've ever heard him say he can "Fix the economy in one term".

Got a link?

 

[Kelly]

Heres a link, or one of the better ones I can find. I may have misheard on the radio.

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

Rasmussen is 56% approval and 43% disapproval.

His disapproval ratings have climbed 11 points.

Yeah, but Gallup poll says its 62%. Here's the question, do a majority disprove of the job Obama is doing?

IMO, most of these types of polls simply say how "popular" Obama is, not necessarily how people feel about the job he is doing.

The actal polls that IMO are more telling are those that show specific demographics, namly the percentage of independents are not happy with his job at this point. Independents for the most part are Fiscally conservative and Socially liberal.....and their Fiscal conservatism usally pushes their vote. They (myself included) are not happy with what we see so far, especially since we thought we were going to get a "change" from the Bush economic tactics....

 

[souvlaki]

Heres a link, or one of the better ones I can find. I may have misheard on the radio.

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

Rasmussen is 56% approval and 43% disapproval.

His disapproval ratings have climbed 11 points.

Rasmussen is a Republican leaning poll. His numbers haven't been above 60% in a Rasmussen poll since February, despite the fact that they've been consistently above 60% when polled by Gallup, Associated Press, hell even Fox News since he was elected. The approval numbers have been consistantly significantly lower, and disapproval numbers have been significantly higher than any other poll out there. You are also completely ignoring the fact that his approval rating at this point in his presidency are actually better than any President since Reagan.

 

[souvlaki]

And actually, the funny thing about that is 56% is actually up from a poll earlier in the month done by Rasmussen where his numbers were at 54%.

 

[Paradyme]

Rasmussen is a Republican leaning poll. His numbers haven't been above 60% in a Rasmussen poll since February, despite the fact that they've been consistently above 60% when polled by Gallup, Associated Press, hell even Fox News since he was elected. The approval numbers have been consistantly significantly lower, and disapproval numbers have been significantly higher than any other poll out there. You are also completely ignoring the fact that his approval rating at this point in his presidency are actually better than any President since Reagan.

I'm not ignoring anything my friend. I just provided a link for someone to back up what I had heard earlier this morning.

 

[souvlaki]

I'm not ignoring anything my friend. I just provided a link for someone to back up what I had heard earlier this morning.

But you are using a poll which has had consistently lower than average approval ratings for Obama to prove your point. There is a reason Drudge always cites Rasmussen.

 

[VampElvis]

But you are using a poll which has had consistently lower than average approval ratings for Obama to prove your point. There is a reason Drudge always cites Rasmussen.

Because their polls consistently show fedoras are cool and Bert Sugar is truly a fashion icon?

 

[souvlaki]

Because their polls consistently show fedoras are cool and Bert Sugar is truly a fashion icon?

Exactly.

 

[Paradyme]

But you are using a poll which has had consistently lower than average approval ratings for Obama to prove your point. There is a reason Drudge always cites Rasmussen.

I'm not interested in arguing with you on whether or not this poll is 'valid' because frankly I don't trust any poll. Why? Because its a poll.

The man wanted a link that mirrored what I had told him I had heard earlier on the radio. I provided that link and you are trying to say I'm ignoring something when I never stated an opinion just a link.

 

[StorminNorman]

But does the American public think he is ****ing up? What is his current approval numbers?

Look at how Americans view the issues, not the man. People like Obama, they don't like his policies. When it comes down to an election and people start actually paying attention to what he is really doing, what he really stands for - his numbers will change.

You are hardly an unbiased individual to ask this question to and I don't care about your perosonal opinion on him.

Actually I am a very objective individual. I have to be. I work in politics. If I am not able to be objective, I wouldn't be good at my job.

The American public has almost always wanted a balance in the government, to prevent one party from having too much power, with a few exceptions. If the GOP gets the house in 2010, that would because the American public would want more balance, not because the GOP did anything to deserve it.

Again, this is simply wrong. Americans vote base on success, not maintaining a balance of power. If one party was doing a good job, they are going to remove their politicians because of some misguided idealism.

 

[souvlaki]

I'm not interested in arguing with you on whether or not this poll is 'valid' because frankly I don't trust any poll. Why? Because its a poll.

The man wanted a link that mirrored what I had told him I had heard earlier on the radio. I provided that link and you are trying to say I'm ignoring something when I never stated an opinion just a link.

I'm not arguing with you about providing proof to back up what you heard. I am simply saying the initial claim you heard on the radio is bull****. When Republicans try and say Democrats are losing popularity the first thing they run to is Rasmussen. Drudge has made an artform out of picking and choosing which polls he posts. Nothing more, nothing less. It just completely ignores the fact that Gallup, as well as several other polls have been relatively consistent since February.

 

[StorminNorman]

Presidential approval ratings less than a year into a Presidency are completely worthless.

That's why I am looking at the issues themselves.

 

[souvlaki]

Presidential approval ratings less than a year into a Presidency are completely worthless.

I don't disagree with that at all, but conversely I don't think using said polls to prove Obama is losing popularity is worthwhile either. No one is really going to know the effect of what Obama is doing for another year anyhow... for better or worse.

 

[StorminNorman]

I don't disagree with that at all, but conversely I don't think using said polls to prove Obama is losing popularity is worthwhile either. No one is really going to know the effect of what Obama is doing for another year anyhow... for better or worse.

I have never claimed that Obama is losing popularity.

 

[souvlaki]

I have never claimed that Obama is losing popularity.

I wasn't referring to you, StorminNorman.

 

[Paradyme]

I'm not arguing with you about providing proof to back up what you heard. I am simply saying the initial claim you heard on the radio is bull****. When Republicans try and say Democrats are losing popularity the first thing they run to is Rasmussen. Drudge has made an artform out of picking and choosing which polls he posts. Nothing more, nothing less. It just completely ignores the fact that Gallup, as well as several other polls have been relatively consistent since February.

I would agree with most of what you said since I read a few links before I provided the one that I had heard about earlier only to realize that they had inflated the numbers slightly. Most of the polls seem to have stayed pretty consistent.

Rasmussen seemed to go up and down up and down.

Still, my opinion stands that I don't trust any poll. The reasons should be fairly obvious.

 

[StorminNorman]

 

[The Overlord]

Look at how Americans view the issues, not the man. People like Obama, they don't like his policies. When it comes down to an election and people start actually paying attention to what he is really doing, what he really stands for - his numbers will change. .

Can you give me a link that breaks down the approval ratings on every issue and can it be source that's not obviously partisan?

Actually I am a very objective individual. I have to be. I work in politics. If I am not able to be objective, I wouldn't be good at my job. .

Yeah and I have a poli sci degree, big deal. Don't you consider Glen Beck a valid source of info, despite the fact he uses logically fallacies like Godwin's law. At least I an admit I have bias, everyone does, no one is truly objective.

Frankly I don't think your opinion is unbaised and I don't have any respect for it. I doubt you care, but I don't care about that.

Again, this is simply wrong. Americans vote base on success, not maintaining a balance of power. If one party was doing a good job, they are going to remove their politicians because of some misguided idealism.

Look at history though, whenever a party has the majority of power, barring a few exceptions (such as right after 9-11 and the anti GOP feelings that existed in 2008) the public often seeks to balance the party in the White House, by voting the opposite party into the House.

 

[souvlaki]

I would agree with most of what you said since I read a few links before I provided the one that I had heard about earlier only to realize that they had inflated the numbers slightly. Most of the polls seem to have stayed pretty consistent.

Rasmussen seemed to go up and down up and down.

Still, my opinion stands that I don't trust any poll. The reasons should be fairly obvious.

Polls don't really mean a damn thing until a week before an election anyhow. I'm of the opinion that all pollsters are biased in some way, and that they don't really reflect an accurate representation of the electorate until right before elections so they don't look like complete idiots. I only like referring to Gallup for approval ratings because of their history, but really their polls don't mean a damn thing either. The only fairly accurate numbers generally come from internal polls... because they have to be unbiased to give the politician realistic expectations going into a race.

 

[StorminNorman]

Can you give me a link?

Gitmo

Who do you trust more on the issues - Republicans or Democrats

What issues are important

*Note 4 of the 5 most important issues favor Republicans.

Middle East - Does the Middle East want good relations with America?

Should law be applied equally

*Obama favors empathetic judges that will take into account more than simply the law

Yeah and I have a poli sci degree, big deal.

There are few degrees more useless than a Poli Sci degree. And this comes from a fellow Poli Sci major.

Don't you consider Glen Beck a valid source of info, despite the fact he uses logically fallacy like Godwin's law.

Do I take everything Glenn says as law? No. Does he have some valid information? Certainly. His investigation on ACORN is great. The guy is crazy, but not idiotic.

Look at history though, whenever a party has the majority power, barring a few exceptions (such as right after 9-11 and the anti GOP feelings that existed in 2008) the public often seeks to balance the party in the White House, by voting the opposite party into the House.

The Republican Party had the White House, the Congress and the Supreme Court in 2002. What did they do? They elected more Republicans.

You are correct, that trend does occur in election history. That trend exists, though, due to the failings of the party - not American interest in balance.

 

[StorminNorman]

I don't think I've ever heard him say he can "Fix the economy in one term".

Got a link?

"I will be held accountable,'' the president said. "I've got four years and.... A year form now, I think people are going to see that we're starting to make some progress, but there's still going to be some pain out there.... If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition. ''

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/02/obama_oneterm_proposition_if_n.html

 

[Paradoxium]

I don't think I've ever heard him say he can "Fix the economy in one term".

Got a link?

Where did I say this? I just said no one can fix it in one term. Please don't put words in my mouth.

Although Norm seem to have provided a little quote, I think that quote implies he expects some recovery not a full on one. However, if the recovery is weighted on ******** cooked numbers (i.e. financial wizardry or GDP/CPI fallacies), than it is not a real recovery but people might buy into a perception. Of course everyday reality will be different (i.e. high unemployment)