Fixed it for ya. :sun:
The Washington Times is a right wingnut publication owned by Korean cult meister, Sun Yung Moon. Credibility = 0/10.
Fixed it for ya. :sun:
The Washington Times is a right wingnut publication owned by Korean cult meister, Sun Yung Moon. Credibility = 0/10.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: SirStev0
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
I agree that the editorial is misrepresenting the statistics, but it's an editorial. I don't exactly expect random newspaper editorials to be intelligent.
I don't agree with your comment about people not being "disenchanted". If one was never "enchanted" in the first place, it's impossible to become "disenchanted", but that doesn't mean that they approve. Without knowing exactly what each individual's expectations were, a poll asking whether someone has met or exceeded expectations is worthless. The baseline is different for each respondent which means that it's not possible to normalize the results.
To use an obviously absurd hyperbole, if people expected that the president would go on a killing spree and he didn't, they would be able to honestly say that the president exceeded their expectations. While if other people expected that the president would cure all disease and he didn't, these people would honestly be able to say that the president did not meet their expectations. Both sets of people could be rating the same president, but because of the variance in their baseline expectation, those who said the president exceeded expectations are not necessarily praising him while those who said that the president did not meet their expectations are not necessarily upset with him.
Granted, my example is intentionally ridiculous but it illustrates my point.
ZV
But your point is absurd. No Obama hater is going to sarcastically answer a question like that. You would never in a million years if surveyed answer that he is meeting your expectations because as much as you want to pretend that it is playing with wording, you know what they are asking. If anything they would try to answer the question in the most negative way possible, because otherwise they are the ones artificially raising his numbers. I would hope people aren't that stupid.
I'm sorry. I forgot that everyone who disagrees with Obama on matters of policy automatically hates him. And here I've simply been considering Obama to be an intelligent man with whom I happen to disagree. Guess I've been wrong. I really do apologize for so thoroughly failing to adhere to your stereotype of how I should behave.
Aside from a rather small but very vocal minority, most people who disagree with Obama do not "hate" him. It just plain doesn't work that way.
The question is not, "Has Obama done as you expect a president to do," the question is, "Has Obama done as you expect him to do," which makes the answer different. The answer to the first question is that I think he has made an admirable effort in good faith, which is all that can be asked of a person, but that I disagree with many of his policies. The answer to the second is that, overall, Obama's actions have been in line with the views he professed prior to taking office and have been consistent with my expectations.
I am not accusing them of trying to play with the wording in order to doctor the result, I am simply stating that the question itself has little worth in measuring approval. If a person has neutral expectations, it is easy to exceed them; if a person has fantastically positive expectations, it is easy to fall short. Because the question lacks a standard baseline it cannot be used to measure approval. However, as eskimospy very astutely pointed out, the question does an excellent job of measuring the integration of a politician's actions and his projected image during his campaign.
ZV
I was going to let you catch up... but you are just soooooooo slow. (just kidding friend).
I am interested if you think a "obama-phile" would be more inclined to answer that question that he exceed their expectations? I agree that there is some subtly wording in that question, but I really doubt a person who believes one way or another would not try to take the opportunity to play with the numbers.
Personally, so far he has underwhelmed me within my own expectations. I really wanted him to nail the bullshit practices that got us where we are by putting in some nasty regulations with the bailout (since the bailout, as much as I dislike, seemed pretty much set in stone). I would have also liked the warrentless wiretapping to be completely removed as well as full investigations into Libby, Rove, Cheney, Gonzales, and the rest of the cronies.
Now what I would have answered? Well, I think that depends on my mood, but I honestly think if it had been bookended by a bunch of questions about how I think he is doing overall, do I approve, so on and so forth, I would have answered that he is meeting my expectations.
I think any person, conservative or otherwise, who overall thinks he is doing a bad job would have also done the same as me and answered along the lines that he isn't meeting their expectations.
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
I'm far from immune to errors of fact, but I do hope that you'll call them out when they occur. Preaching to the choir has a disturbing tendency to turn a person into someone like Glenn Beck.
ZV
I'm sorry, I guess to some extent I am holding you accountable for the moronic actions of your ilk. That may or may not be because you were the only one willing to stick around once the facts came out.
Oh, Sorry, I guess one person proving all the bullshit wrong wasn't enough for you. You need every person in the thread to carbon copy it for you.
We keep hearing the same argument. Honestly the whole point of this thread was about how out of touch with the facts an editorial was... And that each time it seems more and more desperate. Then surprisingly the major argument in the thread was again dispelling the false information.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Look Einstein...you totally missed my point...surprise, surprise. But maybe it was a little too subtle for you...seeing that you have difficulty thinking in terms beyond your pea-brained, ignorant stereotypes.
Good post eskimospy, for once I agree with you.
Arguing that Obama's polling numbers are somehow "low" is absurd, you have to go through some crazy gyrations and contortions to get to that conclusion. Frankly, I'm surprised his numbers aren't much higher. Lets face it, the media is in love with him. He could do the most insane things and still get praised for them by the media at large. The public in general believes what the media feeds it, so I'm surprised he doesn't have a 90% approval rating at this point.
Thusfar, he's done pretty much what I expected. Some good things, some bad things, and he's brought an overall left-wing view to DC.
Arguing that Obama's polling numbers are somehow "low" is absurd, you have to go through some crazy gyrations and contortions to get to that conclusion. Frankly, I'm surprised his numbers aren't much higher. Lets face it, the media is in love with him. He could do the most insane things and still get praised for them by the media at large. The public in general believes what the media feeds it, so I'm surprised he doesn't have a 90% approval rating at this point.
Thusfar, he's done pretty much what I expected. Some good things, some bad things, and he's brought an overall left-wing view to DC.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
It depends on which poll you look at. If you actually read the article you linked, you would see they are not spinning an approval of over 60% - they are spinning an approval of 56%.
Now go on and debate what poll is the correct poll, but at least get your basis of argument correct :roll:
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
I honestly don't know whether someone who strongly supported Obama would be inclined to say that Obama has exceeded expectations or not. Some may say that because they want Obama's number to be good. Some may say that he hasn't lived up to everything they'd hoped for, and some may say he has met expectations even if they expected more (or less) simply because they think he's making an honest effort.
Essentially, I think it's a poorly-designed question (as far as measuring perception of performance) because there are too many ways for a rational person to interpret it. The total percentage saying that Obama is meeting or exceeding expectations is 86%, which doesn't match his approval rating at all. This would seem to indicate that a significant percentage of people being polled do not consider "meeting expectations" to be a positive thing. Certainly not a majority of people, but enough that the question obviously isn't a reliable indicator of approval or performance perception.
ZV
- Feb 7, 2005
- 13,918
- 20
- 81
Keep trying. His approval rating is over 60%. The op-ed performs jujitsu to get 56% and then says Obama is not doing well approval-wise. There's no need to debate which is the "correct" poll, because one gives you all the numbers, and one finds a pov and picks its own numbers to back up its pov.
And the only way they got 56% was by dishonestly using statistics in a Gallup poll, and ignoring Gallup's actual measure of approval that was stated in the exact same poll that our good friend the editor was getting his data from.
They were just betting that nobody would go and actually check up on their data so that their lie would go through unchallenged.
Presidential Approval Rating at 100 Days
Dwight D. Eisenhower . . . . . 73%
John Kennedy . . . . . . . . . . . 83%
Richard Nixon . . . . . . . . . . . .62%
Jimmy Carter . . . . . . . . . . . .63%
Ronald Reagan . . . . . . . . . . .68%
George Bush . . . . . . . . . . . . 56%
William J. Clinton . . . . . . . . . 55%
George W. Bush. . . . . . . . . . 62%
Ooops --- Linkage
Dwight D. Eisenhower . . . . . 73%
John Kennedy . . . . . . . . . . . 83%
Richard Nixon . . . . . . . . . . . .62%
Jimmy Carter . . . . . . . . . . . .63%
Ronald Reagan . . . . . . . . . . .68%
George Bush . . . . . . . . . . . . 56%
William J. Clinton . . . . . . . . . 55%
George W. Bush. . . . . . . . . . 62%
Ooops --- Linkage
You don't know what the word "liberal" even means. Your entire post was nothing but verbal (or textual in this case) diarrhea.
rbV5
Lifer
- Dec 10, 2000
- 12,632
- 0
- 0
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter