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.
Obama V: For Vendetta
- Thread starter Red Cloud
- Start date
- Status
ScottM
**** it feels good to be a bankster
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
He's obviously "one of them" or, quite possibly, one of "those people".
He's obviously "one of them" or, quite possibly, one of "those people".
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
well... you could refer again to the title you just quoted, and then count the number of times "American" and "Americans" are used as descriptors of Obama's opponents (hint: more than 10)... or you could just run with the usual assumption that anyone who is critical of Obama's policy is a racist and should be shot. Your choice.
well... you could refer again to the title you just quoted, and then count the number of times "American" and "Americans" are used as descriptors of Obama's opponents (hint: more than 10)... or you could just run with the usual assumption that anyone who is critical of Obama's policy is a racist and should be shot. Your choice.
Foxton
Banned
Jon
Say, this is nice.
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
Another victory.
Go us!
To be fair, if you were going to have a Most Annoying People republic, the capital would have to be Boston.
Another victory.
Go us!
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
Jon
Say, this is nice.
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
Hollywood sucks. ( Kobe, mostly)
My evidence: 90% of the movies each year.
Hollywood sucks. ( Kobe, mostly)
My evidence: 90% of the movies each year.
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
Interesting (from politicalwire site)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a guest post, Del Ali of Research 2000 says reports of President Obama's declining approval rates are skewed due to the use of robo polls and other poor survey techniques.
The biggest problems with them is that you do not know if you have a voter on the telephone. The other problem is that not all of these firms who use robo calls tell you exactly what they asked in terms of the question and when they asked the question. In other words, the robo call could spend the first minute or so trashing a particular point of view or a candidate before they ask the respondent on how they would vote on an issue on a race.
This is why R2K uses live interviewers to take live respondents through a series of screeners in order to qualify or disqualify them as a likely voter. We also reveal our questions and we do not do push questions like many robo calls do. If the robo polls are not transparent in terms of whom they call, how they determine the likely voter and what they ask, then it is a junk poll in my view.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure which way R2K leans (if at all) but it might help explain that Rassmussen poll where 35% of the respondents thought Obama was a socialist, 15% a communist, and the remaining 50% chose Anti-Christ.
Interesting (from politicalwire site)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a guest post, Del Ali of Research 2000 says reports of President Obama's declining approval rates are skewed due to the use of robo polls and other poor survey techniques.
The biggest problems with them is that you do not know if you have a voter on the telephone. The other problem is that not all of these firms who use robo calls tell you exactly what they asked in terms of the question and when they asked the question. In other words, the robo call could spend the first minute or so trashing a particular point of view or a candidate before they ask the respondent on how they would vote on an issue on a race.
This is why R2K uses live interviewers to take live respondents through a series of screeners in order to qualify or disqualify them as a likely voter. We also reveal our questions and we do not do push questions like many robo calls do. If the robo polls are not transparent in terms of whom they call, how they determine the likely voter and what they ask, then it is a junk poll in my view.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure which way R2K leans (if at all) but it might help explain that Rassmussen poll where 35% of the respondents thought Obama was a socialist, 15% a communist, and the remaining 50% chose Anti-Christ.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
Comparing Approval Ratings From Different Polling Firms
An Analysis By Scott Rasmussen
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
A number of polling firms routinely measure the president’s job approval ratings. Generally, they all show a similar trend even when the specific numbers are different.
There are a number of reasons for this, including:
Likely Voters or Adults? - Some firms poll all adults while others, including Rasmussen Reports, base their results on likely voters. Generally speaking, polls of all adults will show a somewhat higher rating for President Obama than polls of likely voters.
Why is this? Primarily because some demographic groups such as young adults are less likely to vote than others. These same groups also happen to be segments of the population where the current president gets rave reviews. So if a poll of all adults shows the president’s approval rating at 60%, you’d expect a comparable poll of likely voters to show a rating of roughly 57%.
Question Wording - Rasmussen Reports offers survey participants a choice between Strongly Approve, Somewhat Approve, Somewhat Disapprove and Strongly Disapprove. Some firms offer simply Approve or Disapprove while others offer a scale that includes Excellent, Good, Fair or Poor. It is impossible to determine exactly what impact the different wording has on survey results.
However, it appears that the Somewhat Approve and Somewhat Disapprove categories may encourage some people to voice a minority opinion rather than saying they are not sure. In other words, when a president is popular, a segment of the population might say they Somewhat Disapprove. When a president is unpopular, some might say they Somewhat Approve.
Methodology - 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 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.
Regardless of the reason, Rasmussen Reports surveys tend to have lower levels of no opinions and higher levels of unfavorable opinions for political figures. But, as with the topline numbers, the trends all move in the same direction.
It is interesting to note that the number who Strongly Disapprove in a Rasmussen Reports survey is similar to the number who say they Disapprove in most operator-assisted surveys.
Other Factors - Timing, random variation and a variety of other factors could influence any particular survey. Every firm occasionally produces some surveys that are out of line with general trends.
Comparing Approval Ratings From Different Polling Firms
An Analysis By Scott Rasmussen
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
A number of polling firms routinely measure the president’s job approval ratings. Generally, they all show a similar trend even when the specific numbers are different.
There are a number of reasons for this, including:
Likely Voters or Adults? - Some firms poll all adults while others, including Rasmussen Reports, base their results on likely voters. Generally speaking, polls of all adults will show a somewhat higher rating for President Obama than polls of likely voters.
Why is this? Primarily because some demographic groups such as young adults are less likely to vote than others. These same groups also happen to be segments of the population where the current president gets rave reviews. So if a poll of all adults shows the president’s approval rating at 60%, you’d expect a comparable poll of likely voters to show a rating of roughly 57%.
Question Wording - Rasmussen Reports offers survey participants a choice between Strongly Approve, Somewhat Approve, Somewhat Disapprove and Strongly Disapprove. Some firms offer simply Approve or Disapprove while others offer a scale that includes Excellent, Good, Fair or Poor. It is impossible to determine exactly what impact the different wording has on survey results.
However, it appears that the Somewhat Approve and Somewhat Disapprove categories may encourage some people to voice a minority opinion rather than saying they are not sure. In other words, when a president is popular, a segment of the population might say they Somewhat Disapprove. When a president is unpopular, some might say they Somewhat Approve.
Methodology - 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 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.
Regardless of the reason, Rasmussen Reports surveys tend to have lower levels of no opinions and higher levels of unfavorable opinions for political figures. But, as with the topline numbers, the trends all move in the same direction.
It is interesting to note that the number who Strongly Disapprove in a Rasmussen Reports survey is similar to the number who say they Disapprove in most operator-assisted surveys.
Other Factors - Timing, random variation and a variety of other factors could influence any particular survey. Every firm occasionally produces some surveys that are out of line with general trends.
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
What specifically makes the robo-polls any more inaccurate now with regards to a declining approval rating than they were with regards to a previous high approval rating?
Logic Fail.
What specifically makes the robo-polls any more inaccurate now with regards to a declining approval rating than they were with regards to a previous high approval rating?
Logic Fail.
huskyfan
New member
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
well, 'cause they're negative about Obama. obviously inaccurate! 
well, 'cause they're negative about Obama. obviously inaccurate!
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
If you re-read the article, what its saying is that 1) you as the reader have no idea if the robo-calls a giving a few statements ahead of time to help skewer the results & 2) a robo call has trouble fleshing out if the person on the line actually plans on voting.
Polling is getting a lot trickier now, but you can usually sniff out the really bad ones (or just take a polling average of all of them). For me personally, regardless of who the results favor, I'm real skeptical of a poll that has a) very few undecideds in a race that's over a year away unless both candidates are real well known, b) a poll that has 3rd party candidates in the double digits, an extremely rare phenomenon, and c) a poll who's underlying results defy all logic (case in point - a state poll last year had McCain winning 20% of the black vote...vs Obama
- throw a poll like that in the trash). Oh and d) anything by Zogby (Obama winning North Dakota by double digits???)
If you re-read the article, what its saying is that 1) you as the reader have no idea if the robo-calls a giving a few statements ahead of time to help skewer the results & 2) a robo call has trouble fleshing out if the person on the line actually plans on voting.
Polling is getting a lot trickier now, but you can usually sniff out the really bad ones (or just take a polling average of all of them). For me personally, regardless of who the results favor, I'm real skeptical of a poll that has a) very few undecideds in a race that's over a year away unless both candidates are real well known, b) a poll that has 3rd party candidates in the double digits, an extremely rare phenomenon, and c) a poll who's underlying results defy all logic (case in point - a state poll last year had McCain winning 20% of the black vote...vs Obama
- throw a poll like that in the trash). Oh and d) anything by Zogby (Obama winning North Dakota by double digits???) Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
That's a relief...Scott likes his own polls.
But he does make a very important point...Rasmussen bases his surveys on 'likely voters'. This will instantly and radically skew his results. Polling likely voters is valuable for understanding the impact on potential elections...but it is a poor indicator of true national sentiment. Afterall, a president serves all US citizens whether they voted for him or not.
That's a relief...Scott likes his own polls.
But he does make a very important point...Rasmussen bases his surveys on 'likely voters'. This will instantly and radically skew his results. Polling likely voters is valuable for understanding the impact on potential elections...but it is a poor indicator of true national sentiment. Afterall, a president serves all US citizens whether they voted for him or not.
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
"If they attack you, they must fear you....."
Would the GOP have a better strategy by not criticizing the President directly, but pointing out what the GOP stands for.
The idea is let the Demoncrats step on the mines without any prodding from the GOP and then when 2010 and 2012 roll around say this is what we believe, and this is what they did. We'll be different, and if not, throw us out in the next election because we broke your trust.
"If they attack you, they must fear you....."
Would the GOP have a better strategy by not criticizing the President directly, but pointing out what the GOP stands for.
The idea is let the Demoncrats step on the mines without any prodding from the GOP and then when 2010 and 2012 roll around say this is what we believe, and this is what they did. We'll be different, and if not, throw us out in the next election because we broke your trust.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
do you think the WH staff is concerned with all citizens (or, ahem - non citizens residing in the US currently) and how they feel about him?? or the voters that Rasmussen is trying to identify
..and for what it's worth -- that big conservative Tim Russert (r.i.p.) always talked about rasmussen polls in his former jobs. people in the business like his stuff because he talks to likely voters.
do you think the WH staff is concerned with all citizens (or, ahem - non citizens residing in the US currently) and how they feel about him?? or the voters that Rasmussen is trying to identify
..and for what it's worth -- that big conservative Tim Russert (r.i.p.) always talked about rasmussen polls in his former jobs. people in the business like his stuff because he talks to likely voters.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: Obama V: For Vendetta
Sounds about right. The last six years or so have been pretty much a race to the bottom. The current situation is similar to 2004 - the Republicans were circling the bowl and the Democrats were simply too inept to do anything about it. Two years later the Republicans' ineptitude had simply surpassed that of the Democrats. Now the question is whether the GOP can get their act together or whether they can slow their stupidity to a rate lower than that of the Democrats, and see if they get passed again.
let me know when they get around to figuring that out
Sounds about right. The last six years or so have been pretty much a race to the bottom. The current situation is similar to 2004 - the Republicans were circling the bowl and the Democrats were simply too inept to do anything about it. Two years later the Republicans' ineptitude had simply surpassed that of the Democrats. Now the question is whether the GOP can get their act together or whether they can slow their stupidity to a rate lower than that of the Democrats, and see if they get passed again.
- Status