ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
That's why I didn't vote for him.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
- Thread starter moe24
- Start date
- Status
dropthatpuck
In Vino Veritas
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
IOW, "I have no rebuttal to those facts, so let me post more rubbish so I don't appear as intellectually impotent as I am".
IOW, "I have no rebuttal to those facts, so let me post more rubbish so I don't appear as intellectually impotent as I am".
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
I don't buy that. We would have a depression now even if Gore had won the 2000 election and stayed for two terms. Our economic troubles were caused largely by greed and stupidity. We've become addicted to debt, both the people and the government. Banks gave people loans they had no business giving them. A lot of the people receiving loans had no business requesting them to begin with, not having the ability to repay them. People have also used their home equity as their ATM. The government encouraged all this. Wall Street came up with all kinds of new financial instruments to try and hedge and leverage and spread risk; derivatives, credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations, etc., and the government has done a poor job of regulating them. Banks made bad loans and then packaged them up and passed the risk to someone else. Public schools fail to provide financial education. This didn't all happen overnight. It's been going on during both Republican and Democratic administrations and the problem grew until it reached a breaking point. It may have finally unraveled late under Bush's watch, but the right didn't cause it. It's both sides fault. We all wanted a free lunch.
I don't buy that. We would have a depression now even if Gore had won the 2000 election and stayed for two terms. Our economic troubles were caused largely by greed and stupidity. We've become addicted to debt, both the people and the government. Banks gave people loans they had no business giving them. A lot of the people receiving loans had no business requesting them to begin with, not having the ability to repay them. People have also used their home equity as their ATM. The government encouraged all this. Wall Street came up with all kinds of new financial instruments to try and hedge and leverage and spread risk; derivatives, credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations, etc., and the government has done a poor job of regulating them. Banks made bad loans and then packaged them up and passed the risk to someone else. Public schools fail to provide financial education. This didn't all happen overnight. It's been going on during both Republican and Democratic administrations and the problem grew until it reached a breaking point. It may have finally unraveled late under Bush's watch, but the right didn't cause it. It's both sides fault. We all wanted a free lunch.
leswp1
New member
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
Back on topic (sorry if I am not into wasting time trying to tell everyone what the big O isn't doing or what the republicans aren't doing)
Frist had a really neat interview on NPR the other day. He did not endorse any plan that is currently proposed. He did say that he thought that they were getting close and that the parties needed to work together when it comes to making sure everyone had access to health care. He did not think the way right was acting in an intelligent manner but had some issues with public option. Can't remember all of what he said but it was well thought out and on point. Didn't agree with all he said but it was nice to hear someone saying someting that did not sound like a rant. He - shocker- has a book out on the subject.
Also on that interview was Howard Dean sounding equally measured and thoughtful. He also has a book out.
Back on topic (sorry if I am not into wasting time trying to tell everyone what the big O isn't doing or what the republicans aren't doing)
Frist had a really neat interview on NPR the other day. He did not endorse any plan that is currently proposed. He did say that he thought that they were getting close and that the parties needed to work together when it comes to making sure everyone had access to health care. He did not think the way right was acting in an intelligent manner but had some issues with public option. Can't remember all of what he said but it was well thought out and on point. Didn't agree with all he said but it was nice to hear someone saying someting that did not sound like a rant. He - shocker- has a book out on the subject.
Also on that interview was Howard Dean sounding equally measured and thoughtful. He also has a book out.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
Nice to see the public still siding with Obama...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091006/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_ap_poll
Nice to see the public still siding with Obama...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091006/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_ap_poll
dropthatpuck
In Vino Veritas
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
Keep dreaming. When the AP starts vetting those 1,000 peeps to make sure they're registered voters and not illegals suckling off the system, come back and talk to us.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ministration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Nice to see the public still siding with Obama...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091006/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_ap_poll
Keep dreaming. When the AP starts vetting those 1,000 peeps to make sure they're registered voters and not illegals suckling off the system, come back and talk to us.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ministration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
It's only appropriate to report polls when they drop.
It's only appropriate to report polls when they drop.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
Not at all. I like being alerted for the minuscule shifts in either direction. I'd hate to miss out on a crucial 2 percentage point swing! Thankfully, I know I can count on Rover and dtp for that, so I don't have to bother watching the polls myself....
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
It would be interesting to see comparative approval from beginning of term (the way they've done those graphs comparing recessions) for, say, the last 10 terms. A rolling average would be even better, since it would flatten out artificial spikes like war fever, assassination attempt sympathy, etc.
Not at all. I like being alerted for the minuscule shifts in either direction. I'd hate to miss out on a crucial 2 percentage point swing! Thankfully, I know I can count on Rover and dtp for that, so I don't have to bother watching the polls myself....
It would be interesting to see comparative approval from beginning of term (the way they've done those graphs comparing recessions) for, say, the last 10 terms. A rolling average would be even better, since it would flatten out artificial spikes like war fever, assassination attempt sympathy, etc.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
Do you mean something like this?
Obama has second lowest approval during first 100 days going back to 1960
Do you mean something like this?
Obama has second lowest approval during first 100 days going back to 1960
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
That's a good snapshot, but I'd really like to see the whole picture -- trending lines, etc. Velocity and acceleration, not just position.
That's a good snapshot, but I'd really like to see the whole picture -- trending lines, etc. Velocity and acceleration, not just position.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
The environment has certainly changed, too, though - I wonder how Nixon would have fared in a blogosphere? Not that they wouldn't be interesting data, but I'd wonder about any strong conclusions that someone tried to draw from them.
The environment has certainly changed, too, though - I wonder how Nixon would have fared in a blogosphere? Not that they wouldn't be interesting data, but I'd wonder about any strong conclusions that someone tried to draw from them.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
I saw a something like that from Rasmussen (I think) a few weeks ago graphing out each administration since Nixon, but I can't find it right now.
I saw a something like that from Rasmussen (I think) a few weeks ago graphing out each administration since Nixon, but I can't find it right now.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
It may be opinions have hardened, or the fringes have drawn more people from the center (which is saying the same thing). If that were the case, it would be incrementally harder to pick up points as you rose well above 50. But it would also be incrementally harder to lose points as you dropped well below 50, making Bush's 29% mark virtually impossible.
It may also be a general rise of negativity -- perhaps the "baseline" for a president used to be 50 and now it's 40.
That re-baselining could also be explained not by negativity but by a "compared to what?" effect. A modern president might poll 45% against "the field" -- the set of all unspecified alternatives -- while still rolling up a convincing majority against any one alternative.
So, as interesting as "do you approve of Obama's health care plan" would be the question, "if offered the choice, which would you choose: (A) the Obama Plan or (B) the Republican Plan." The former might garner 45% while the latter might well be a 60-40 split.
I don't really get the impression that anybody has changed their mind about Obama either way. The people who hated him in January still hate him. The people who loved him still love him. The people who were on the fence and gave him the chance seem not to have decided -- eventually they'll be the ones who decide whether he deserves another term. That vote, of course, will be against one specific alternative -- not the field.
It may be opinions have hardened, or the fringes have drawn more people from the center (which is saying the same thing). If that were the case, it would be incrementally harder to pick up points as you rose well above 50. But it would also be incrementally harder to lose points as you dropped well below 50, making Bush's 29% mark virtually impossible.
It may also be a general rise of negativity -- perhaps the "baseline" for a president used to be 50 and now it's 40.
That re-baselining could also be explained not by negativity but by a "compared to what?" effect. A modern president might poll 45% against "the field" -- the set of all unspecified alternatives -- while still rolling up a convincing majority against any one alternative.
So, as interesting as "do you approve of Obama's health care plan" would be the question, "if offered the choice, which would you choose: (A) the Obama Plan or (B) the Republican Plan." The former might garner 45% while the latter might well be a 60-40 split.
I don't really get the impression that anybody has changed their mind about Obama either way. The people who hated him in January still hate him. The people who loved him still love him. The people who were on the fence and gave him the chance seem not to have decided -- eventually they'll be the ones who decide whether he deserves another term. That vote, of course, will be against one specific alternative -- not the field.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
That would be cool.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
edit: This is the graph I was thinking of. However, Obama isn't on it.
Not sure of the accuracy of the source, but your best bet may to be lay out Obama's approval graph over this as it only gives data for his first 30 days.
edit: This is the graph I was thinking of. However, Obama isn't on it.
Not sure of the accuracy of the source, but your best bet may to be lay out Obama's approval graph over this as it only gives data for his first 30 days.
Last edited:
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
Wow - I guess the takeaway there is "don't promise gays in the military after only 90 days in office"...unfortunately.
Wow - I guess the takeaway there is "don't promise gays in the military after only 90 days in office"...unfortunately.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
Anyone else see a trend? As we draw closer to the present, overall ratings on average are lower across the board. I realize it only goes back roughly 50 years, but I find that interesting nonetheless. Does the increase in media saturation play a large part?
edit: This is the graph I was thinking of. However, Obama isn't on it.
Not sure of the accuracy of the source, but your best bet may to be lay out Obama's approval graph over this as it only gives data for his first 30 days.
Anyone else see a trend? As we draw closer to the present, overall ratings on average are lower across the board. I realize it only goes back roughly 50 years, but I find that interesting nonetheless. Does the increase in media saturation play a large part?
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
Also interesting that Reagan started terribly and Clinton dropped like a rock the first 6 months... and both won reelection handily.
Wow - I guess the takeaway there is "don't promise gays in the military after only 90 days in office"...unfortunately.
Also interesting that Reagan started terribly and Clinton dropped like a rock the first 6 months... and both won reelection handily.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies
good eye - that is interesting. Maybe there's something to this "increasingly bitter polarization" stuff we've been hearing. Were the WWII gen and boomers more patriotic to the point of increased presidential support across the board?
good eye - that is interesting. Maybe there's something to this "increasingly bitter polarization" stuff we've been hearing. Were the WWII gen and boomers more patriotic to the point of increased presidential support across the board?
- Status