- Boards
- Current Events
- Trump's six-month approval rating hits historic low
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/16/trump-approval-rating-historic-low-240598
Rumble Roses. Someone enters the room. Them: O_O Me: What?! I always play games without my pants on!- Inmate 922335
#ImpeachTrump |
Can't stop the winning
|
polls don't mean s***, as we found out in da 2016 election lol
|
Iodine posted...
The Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. Trump to date has regressed on at least half of those, so they weren't ever going to get done under his watch.
When it is obvious that the goals cannot be reached, don't adjust the goals, adjust the action steps. - Confucius
|
Iodine posted...
The Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. Is it q surprise
Live to train. Train to fight. Fight to live. When you retire, think only on fighting.
Take me away, I don't mind, but you better promise I'll be back in time! |
Iodine posted...
The Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. I wonder why he lies about not voting for trump doe, i guess he still has regret/shame of doing it lol |
The Admiral posted...
Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. If Trump could pull that off, I'd build him a shrine in my living room like that DifferentialEquation guy. As it stands, he can't even get anything done with Congress stacked in his favor and has to resort to imperial writ.
"Sigs are for dorks."-- my wife
|
The Admiral posted...
Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. Another dumb statement The reason we dont like him is because he does the opposite of what you listed. Like do you think we don't like him based on character?
Whoever beats my score I will give them a $10 PSN or Live card:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpiorAx40GY |
meralonne posted...
The Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. Congress stacked in his favour? Please. He's never been on either party's side.
This is my signature.
|
The Admiral posted...
Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. Well he has done none of that so who gives a flying f***? |
I still approve of Trump!
"How come you can believe in God but not Bigfoot?" V-E-G-Y http://i.imgur.com/AqR3aeX.jpg http://i.imgur.com/vvuUXpp.jpg
|
hyperpowder posted...
The Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. The Admiral has stopped making much sense these days, it's a lot like when grandpa gets older and you still love him but know that anything resembling the good parts of him are long gone. A shame as I used to see him as a differing opinion that could offer a fresh perspective but s*** like "Dem liburls hate that Trump cause they sore losers" has become more and more his normal argument style.
Immanentize the eschaton
|
Beware of endeavouring to become a great man in a hurry. One such attempt in ten thousand may succeed: these are fearful odds. ~ Benjamin Disraeli
^ Hey now that's completely unfair.
https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg |
Unquestionable posted...
hyperpowder posted...The Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. I don't understand why anyone is acting like Admirial has changed, he's been doing this for years. In fact he used to be worse. I wonder sometimes if users just pretend he changed because they are embarrased that they used to defend him when he said stupid s***. It was hilarious when users like Error and Raptor go "Oh he was so different back when he was a mod. He's fallen so far" even if they are responding to a quote he said when he was a mod. Oh well at any rate he's derailed another topic.
^ Hey now that's completely unfair.
https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg |
well he is a historically bad president
|
Super Saiyan 3 Goku posted...
Still amazes me that Trump, who couldn't say enough about how well he did in polls during the campaign, has been noticeably silent about them since taking office. and literally every other issue he's failed to deliver on |
E32005 posted...
Super Saiyan 3 Goku posted...Still amazes me that Trump, who couldn't say enough about how well he did in polls during the campaign, has been noticeably silent about them since taking office. He's still talking about the wall.
^ Hey now that's completely unfair.
https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg |
UnfairRepresent posted...
E32005 posted...Super Saiyan 3 Goku posted...Still amazes me that Trump, who couldn't say enough about how well he did in polls during the campaign, has been noticeably silent about them since taking office. dude he wanted to slap solar panels on it. lol then he was like "Well we dont need a wall THE WHOLE WAY. you know? just a few spots where it needs to be yuuuuge" |
The Admiral posted...
Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. Trump is literally doing the opposite of all of that tho And how could he solve global warming when he believes it's a Chinese hoax and pulled out of the accords. "Liberals would hate Trump if he was a completely different person and had the opposite values he has now!" Mmm...I don't believe that. |
The Admiral posted...
Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. anyone who believes this is severely brain damaged
This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ |
Unquestionable posted...
hyperpowder posted...The Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him. Its a real shame; looks like he's going down the submissive route that Mal_Fet went down.
I make a topic in Final Fantasy 12 to ask if Tifa! They said no Tifa. Hardness gone!-gandob
|
Phantom_Nook posted...
EdwardoMario16 posted...Doing the right thing and being a leader isn't popular. He's doing the right thing for the country. People just can't appreciate it right now. It's kind of like parents who sets rules and responsibilities for their children instead of just letting them run wild. Sometimes their kids/teenagers won't like it and will fight against it, but later in life they appreciate it and realize what their parents did for them. The people criticizing Trump now are being childish. After Trump's second term is over, after America has been made great again, some of his haters will have matured and finally understand what a great leader Trump was. Trump is basically tough love in president form.
"If the day does not require an AK, it is good." The Great Warrior Poet, Ice Cube
|
DifferentialEquation posted...
*childish nonsense* You were a much better poster when everyone thought your deluded cultist act was just a shtick. After seeing your Sad waifu shrine to Trump though, I doubt anyone would buy all that garbage just to play a role on an online message board.
even if I were a woman, I would never want to be my girlfriend - Franklin
|
Bullet_Wing posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...*childish nonsense* A small collection of memorabilia is not a waifu shrine and having such a collection does not make you a cultist.
"If the day does not require an AK, it is good." The Great Warrior Poet, Ice Cube
|
Bullet_Wing posted...
ryone thought your deluded cultist act was just a shtick. After seeing your Sad waifu shrine to Trump though, Wait a min, DE posted a "shrine" to Trump? What the f***?
I don't have to insult you. I have proven that you are a hypocrite and a fool. That's not insulting you, that's exposing you.
PSN-Bishop9800 |
Bishop9800 posted...
Bullet_Wing posted...ryone thought your deluded cultist act was just a shtick. After seeing your Sad waifu shrine to Trump though, https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/400-current-events/75569509 Incredibly Sad!
even if I were a woman, I would never want to be my girlfriend - Franklin
|
- Boards
- Current Events
- Trump's six-month approval rating hits historic low
- Boards
- Current Events
- Trump's six-month approval rating hits historic low
Hexenherz posted...In regards to Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer aimed at getting information on Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election, 63 percent said his actions were inappropriate.
So people are either "on the fence" about, or entirely approve of, this. How the hell.
That's not surprising. A lot of people don't even realize that foreigners can't donate to political campaigns.Bullet_Wing posted...https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/400-current-events/75569509
Incredibly Sad!
That is some "grade A" p**** repellant right there.I don't have to insult you. I have proven that you are a hypocrite and a fool. That's not insulting you, that's exposing you.
PSN-Bishop9800Caution999 posted...Media spends every waking second throwing Trump under the bus.
"Guysh he's the lowest rated president ever!!!"
Yeah, his presidency has been sandbagged by msm, genius
Weak president can't even handle criticism from morning hosts, how's he going to handle Iran?kin to all that throbsMal_Fet posted...Our polling was off by 95% six months ago
Come on, I know you're desperate, but you're still capable of something a little better than thatUnholyMudcrab posted...Mal_Fet posted...
Our polling was off by 95% six months ago
Come on, I know you're desperate, but you're still capable of something a little better than that
No really, how has their approach to polling changed in the past few months that would account for how Trump supporters don't answer pollsters? Do you have an answer? If not, why should we expect this poll to be more accurate than the polls giving him 5% before the election?Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellMal_Fet posted...UnholyMudcrab posted...
Mal_Fet posted...
Our polling was off by 95% six months ago
Come on, I know you're desperate, but you're still capable of something a little better than that
No really, how has their approach to polling changed in the past few months that would account for how Trump supporters don't answer pollsters? Do you have an answer? If not, why should we expect this poll to be more accurate than the polls giving him 5% before the election?
Polls weren't giving him 5%. Pundits were, and you damn well know that. The last ABC/WashPo poll before the election was 47/43 in favor of Clinton. They were indeed slightly off, in that third-party candidates were over-represented as they typically are in pre-election polls, and the actual result of the popular vote was 48/46 in favor of Clinton. Now tell me how that equates to being off by 95%.UnholyMudcrab posted...Mal_Fet posted...
UnholyMudcrab posted...
Mal_Fet posted...
Our polling was off by 95% six months ago
Come on, I know you're desperate, but you're still capable of something a little better than that
No really, how has their approach to polling changed in the past few months that would account for how Trump supporters don't answer pollsters? Do you have an answer? If not, why should we expect this poll to be more accurate than the polls giving him 5% before the election?
Polls weren't giving him 5%. Pundits were, and you damn well know that. The last ABC/WashPo poll before the election was 47/43 in favor of Clinton. They were indeed slightly off, in that third-party candidates were over-represented as they typically are in pre-election polls, and the actual result of the popular vote was 48/46 in favor of Clinton. Now tell me how that equates to being off by 95%.
the difference margin was 2%. The predicted difference margin was more like 4%. if you increase 2 by 95%, it is just about 4. Therefore, the poll was inaccurate by ~95%. Checkmate, liberalsThis is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQOver half an hour and that's the best he could do.Mal_Fet posted...UnholyMudcrab posted...
Polls weren't giving him 5%.
Lol. The most conservative one talked about was 538 giving Hillary >70% HuffPo even gave her 98.2%. Are you kidding right now?
what are you looking at exactly?This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQImTheMacheteGuy posted...Mal_Fet posted...
UnholyMudcrab posted...
Polls weren't giving him 5%.
Lol. The most conservative one talked about was 538 giving Hillary >70% HuffPo even gave her 98.2%. Are you kidding right now?
what are you looking at exactly?
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellMal_Fet posted...ImTheMacheteGuy posted...
Mal_Fet posted...
UnholyMudcrab posted...
Polls weren't giving him 5%.
Lol. The most conservative one talked about was 538 giving Hillary >70% HuffPo even gave her 98.2%. Are you kidding right now?
what are you looking at exactly?
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
Here's the list of polls that 538 used. Do me a favor and point out the one (or ones) that give Clinton 95%.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/Mal just straight making s*** up again.
Wait, you do know the difference between polling and pundits analysis right?UnholyMudcrab posted...Here's the list of polls that 538 used. Do me a favor and point out the one (or ones) that give Clinton 95%.
Can you not read? Do you have no long-term memory? Can you honestly not recall the HuffPo poll? I need to direct you to it?
Ok, fine
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/polls-hillary-clinton-win_us_5821074ce4b0e80b02cc2a94Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellMal_Fet posted...UnholyMudcrab posted...
Here's the list of polls that 538 used. Do me a favor and point out the one (or ones) that give Clinton 95%.
Can you not read? Do you have no long-term memory? Can you honestly not recall the HuffPo poll? I need to direct you to it?
Ok, fine
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/polls-hillary-clinton-win_us_5821074ce4b0e80b02cc2a94
We'll try this again, with a little bit of emphasis this time. Point out to me a poll (not a model, if you couldn't tell the difference) that gives Clinton 95%.That Huff Po article and statement isn't a poll, it's an analysis of their model. You really don't know the difference, do you?The Great Muta 22 posted...That Huff Po article and statement isn't a poll, it's an analysis of their model. You really don't know the difference, do you?
Not a single person that continually cites these "polls" does. They seriously think saying someone has a high chance to win is the same thing as polls giving them 95% of the votes.TDF in full mothaf***in effect ittno guys, Mal has a point and he's actually not giving himself enough credit here. The thing gave hilary a 98% chance to win and she lost. They were 100% wrong about the winner and 98% wrong about the chance, so all and all, they were 198% wrong. Therefore, we need to look at the trump approval rating and adjust accordingly. They give him a 36% approval rating. It's 198% wrong, so we multiply 36% x 3 and subtract a tiny amount from that and we get ~107%. So trump's REAL approval rating is 107% and his REAL disapproval rating is -7%This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQImTheMacheteGuy posted...no guys, Mal has a point and he's actually not giving himself enough credit here. The thing gave hilary a 98% chance to win and she lost. They were 100% wrong about the winner and 98% wrong about the chance,
I like how you guys accuse me of being wrong by lying about my original statement.
They have Hillary a 98% chance of winning, and she didn't. That's a really s*** model based on really s*** polls.Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellMal_Fet posted...They have Hillary a 98% chance of winning, and she didn't. That's a really s*** model based on really s*** polls.
well it's better than suggesting that trump has a 107% approval rating lolThis is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQBroseph_Stalin posted...Mal_Fet posted...
They have Hillary a 98% chance of winning
you
do
not
know
what
a
poll
is
Do
You
Know
What
HuffPo
based
its
model
on
?
Let
Me
Help
You
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/forecast/presidentFreedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellBullet_Wing posted...Didn't Mal also think that NATO was established after 9/11?
Yes he did. We all know his intelligence level is up there with Trump' s approval ratings.I don't have to insult you. I have proven that you are a hypocrite and a fool. That's not insulting you, that's exposing you.
PSN-Bishop9800Mal_Fet posted...http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/forecast/president
That is a forecast.
You
Do
Not
Know
What
A
Poll
Isyou guys should meet Vlado from b8. He's a lot like this Mal guy. His view of reality is about 35% info wars and 65% JRPG storyline and he claims to be an expert on American politics and culture in spite of never having set foot in America.This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQBroseph_Stalin posted...Mal_Fet posted...
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/forecast/president
That is a forecast.
You
Do
Not
Know
What
A
Poll
Is
Ok, so you're a lost cause.
I'm still waiting for how these approval polls are supposed to be more trustworthy than the ones that gave Hillary a 70-98% chance of winning.Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellIf 95/100 polls gave you a one percent advantage, you'd be said to have a 95% chance to win.
Mal doubling down on his stupidity. Also, Hillary won the popular vote, so technically, saying she would win is right. Regardless, everyone was not 95% wrong.Oh so it's the same "They" because they used the same poll model. Saying that politico is just as bad? How are they the same "They" as huffpo
I'm asking as someone who sees huffpo as the left wing equivalent of World Net Daily aka complete bullcrap.when you stub your toes it's the SJWs fualt.Mal_Fet posted...Broseph_Stalin posted...
Mal_Fet posted...
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/forecast/president
That is a forecast.
You
Do
Not
Know
What
A
Poll
Is
Ok, so you're a lost cause.
I'm still waiting for how these approval polls are supposed to be more trustworthy than the ones that gave Hillary a 70-98% chance of winning.
Polls didn't give her a 98% chance of winning. Holy f***. A majority of polls gave her more votes than Trump, but by like 3-5 percentage points. Anyone worth their salt would see a bunch of polls giving one candidate an advantage and conclude that maybe that person has a good chance of winning. Not that they will win, but that a majority of polls suggest they could.
Trump winning proves no one wrong because no one ever said he could not win at all. But a even-headed not Trump supporter should know thatThe sad thing is that every time an issue comes up about Trump's egregious deficiencies and incompetence as President of the United States, someone has to turn it into a "well the original polls were wrong" discussion, which is entirely irrelevant. The elections are over, they have no bearing on the situation we're presently in, under an administration whose behavior is indefensible at nigh every turn of the way.Mal_Fet posted...hockeybub89 posted...
If 95/100 polls gave you a one percent advantage, you'd be said to have a 95% chance to win.
One might call such a poll misleading!
Just like these approval ratings likely are.
How is it misleading? You act like Trump destroyed everyone when he didn't even win the popular vote.Mal_Fet posted...Arte you really that dense.
I guess we can add irony along with NATO, polls, and corporations to the ever-growing list of things Mal doesn't understand.
You've been given a list of major polls right before the election:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/
Please point out which ones have Clinton anywhere near 70%.Mal_Fet posted...
Ok, so you're a lost cause.
I'm still waiting for how these approval polls are supposed to be more trustworthy than the ones that gave Hillary a 70-98% chance of winning.
Based on this and the Planned Parenthood video you linked, you very clearly do not understand how statistics work.
NYT, HuffPo, and 538 used state-polling based models to assign a % value to a candidate's likelihood of winning. 538's accounted for demographics better by assuming one polling error would likely snowball whereas HuffPo and NYT did not.
1: The 95% figure is deceptive because the models using it were clearly inferior to 538's since the latter used more data points.
2: State polling has little to do with national polling, which is what approval ratings are based on.
3: The polling errors in the 2016 election were not the 16-17+% we're seeing with Trump's disapproval ratings.
The last two are the most important factors here. You're arguing that the polling was wrong based on state-polling models when we're discussing national polling, and you're assuming that a 1-3% MoE is the same as a 15-20% MoE. The latter is objectively negative. Even if there's a high MoE Trump's approval ratings are terrible.
If you want any more evidence, here;
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
IBD/TIPP Presidential Approval: Trump -21
IBD/TIPP 2016 National Poll: Clinton +1 (MoE 1.1%)Enjoy movies and television? Check out my blog! I do reviews and analyses.
http://fictionrantreview.wordpress.com/ (The Force Awakens spoiler review up!)- Boards
- Current Events
- Trump's six-month approval rating hits historic low
- Boards
- Current Events
- Trump's six-month approval rating hits historic low
Mal_Fet posted...Models based on polling data did.
What does that 1 single model from huffington post have to do with approval rating polls now?This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQMal_Fet posted...hockeybub89 posted...
Polls didn't give her a 98% chance of winning. Holy f***.
Models based on polling data did. This isn't that difficult.
Trump derangement syndrome hit y'all hard, lmao
Jesus Christ, man. How do you tie your shoes?hockeybub89 posted...Mal_Fet posted...
hockeybub89 posted...
If 95/100 polls gave you a one percent advantage, you'd be said to have a 95% chance to win.
One might call such a poll misleading!
Just like these approval ratings likely are.
How is it misleading?
Because obviously there were way more people supporting Trump than any of the polls had shown.
I'm not seeing what's so hard to understand about this. We KNOW Trump's supporters don't answer pollsters.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-future-of-polling-may-depend-on-donald-trumps-fate/
So why is this approval rating poll any different?Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellZero_Destroyer posted...Mal_Fet posted...
Ok, so you're a lost cause.
I'm still waiting for how these approval polls are supposed to be more trustworthy than the ones that gave Hillary a 70-98% chance of winning.
Based on this and the Planned Parenthood video you linked, you very clearly do not understand how statistics work.
NYT, HuffPo, and 538 used state-polling based models to assign a % value to a candidate's likelihood of winning. 538's accounted for demographics better by assuming one polling error would likely snowball whereas HuffPo and NYT did not.
1: The 95% figure is deceptive because the models using it were clearly inferior to 538's since the latter used more data points.
2: State polling has little to do with national polling, which is what approval ratings are based on.
3: The polling errors in the 2016 election were not the 16-17+% we're seeing with Trump's disapproval ratings.
The last two are the most important factors here. You're arguing that the polling was wrong based on state-polling models when we're discussing national polling, and you're assuming that a 1-3% MoE is the same as a 15-20% MoE. The latter is objectively negative. Even if there's a high MoE Trump's approval ratings are terrible.
If you want any more evidence, here;
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
IBD/TIPP Presidential Approval: Trump -21
IBD/TIPP 2016 National Poll: Clinton +1 (MoE 1.1%)
quoted just to make sure mal doesn't miss itEnjoy movies and television? Check out my blog! I do reviews and analyses.
http://fictionrantreview.wordpress.com/ (The Force Awakens spoiler review up!)TheVipaGTS posted...Oh he saw it. He's just ignoring it because he can't dispute it. Ever notice how he selectively quotes small passages of posts and responds to them while ignoring the bulk of a post?
I noticed this because he intentionally left out the sarcasm and fake math section of my post, which can only mean 1 thing... he took it literally and agreed with it and thus literally thinks that 107% of Americans approve of donald trumpThis is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQMal_Fet posted...hockeybub89 posted...
Mal_Fet posted...
hockeybub89 posted...
If 95/100 polls gave you a one percent advantage, you'd be said to have a 95% chance to win.
One might call such a poll misleading!
Just like these approval ratings likely are.
How is it misleading?
Because obviously there were way more people supporting Trump than any of the polls had shown.
I'm not seeing what's so hard to understand about this. We KNOW Trump's supporters don't answer pollsters.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-future-of-polling-may-depend-on-donald-trumps-fate/
So why is this approval rating poll any different?
Trump didn't win the popular vote though. Those polls didn't ask who electors were voting for. They were state polls asking people who they'd vote for. And the majority gave Hillary an edge, but not a huge one, and margin of error is a thing. Plus, Trump was never said to have no chance of winning. Do you scream about fake news every time the biggest favorite loses a sporting event?
Also, did you just cite 538 after criticizing sites like 538 for bad polling?hockeybub89 posted...Also, did you just cite 538 after criticizing sites like 538 for bad polling?
yes he did. 538 was the 70-30 for hilary one. He linked it in response to me asking what he was looking at, prior to the huffington one.This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQYou're telling me a president who lies, who advocates policy that will increase the cost of living for the majority of Americans, who appoints unqualified cabinet members and not only hasn't filled numerous key positions but also had several officials resign because in their own words they are “unable to work for this man,” who fired the FBI director and AGs for not doing his bidding, who wants to kill the EPA and sell off our national parks, who spends almost as much time playing golf as he does in the White House, who sends his children to stand in for him during official events, who advocates violence against the media and has some of the most divisive rhetoric we've ever heard, who tweets things that I would scold a teenager for saying, who takes zero responsibility for his own words, only cares about ratings, insults women, is a cyber bully, how he insulted a POW and said he prefers soldiers who don't get caught, and then said having sex in the 80s was like being in Vietnam, ripped off thousands of people in business, had a fake university, had four bankruptcies, is intellectually lazy, likes ketchup on burnt steak, colluded with Russia against America, refuses to get daily briefings, pulled out of the Paris deal, has unqualified family members in high positions, hasn't released his taxes, insults minorities, the handicapped, war heroes, the pope, news outlets, private citizens, incites violence at rallies, profits off his private businesses while in office and lies, can't speak in complete sentences, unfit for the oval office, his administration seems to be incapable of handling the logistics of simple tasks, see: booking a hotel for G20, ordering eggs for the Easter Egg Hunt, replacing the Obama signature on the autopen, doesn't respect the oval office, insults a GOLD STAR family, claimed he sacrificed as much as that gold star family because he owns real estate and employs people (how that compares to a mother and father who buried their son after he was killed fighting for his country is beyond the scope of my abilities).
You're telling me that president is the least popular in history?
Gotta be fake news.There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD
http://error1355.com/ce/Hinakuluiau.htmlHinakuluiau posted...likes ketchup on burnt steak
does that REALLY need to be in there? >_>This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQMal_Fet posted...Hinakuluiau posted...
You're telling me a president who lies, who advocates policy that will increase the cost of living for the majority of Americans, who appoints unqualified cabinet members
Obama?
You're an independent who doesn't care for Republicans or Democrats. Why do you need to Butt Obama and conveniently ignore 99% of every single post that counters your totally-not-Trump-supporting pole smoking?Mal_Fet posted...
How can you possibly know this?
Because we have the polling from the 2016 and the results that directly show the MoEs. The worst ones are in the midwest with 6-7% underestimation of Trump.
But again, this is irrelevant, because approval ratings are national polls, not state polls.Enjoy movies and television? Check out my blog! I do reviews and analyses.
http://fictionrantreview.wordpress.com/ (The Force Awakens spoiler review up!)hockeybub89 posted...You're an independent who doesn't care for Republicans or Democrats.
I would really like to know where you keep hearing this lie.
How many times do I need to explain to you that I dislike Democrats way more than RpublicansFreedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellI don't understand. Even if you think that all polls suck, do you think how much a poll sucks tracks with how much it puts Trump down?
Since inauguration, Trump's (approval-disapproval) has dropped 15 points. So even if you think it started out in the wrong spot, the drop still exists.Mal_Fet posted...How does this change that the polls are underrepresenting Trump's support base?
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/ president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
^had to split it in two because of word limits
The overall MoE of the RCP aggregate was 1.1%+ and the worst MoE there are 4% MoE in Clinton's favor (Monmouth) and a 5% MoE in Trump's favor (LA/USC.) There's no evidence demonstrated here that 15-20% of Trump's base isn't accounted for in national polling.Enjoy movies and television? Check out my blog! I do reviews and analyses.
http://fictionrantreview.wordpress.com/ (The Force Awakens spoiler review up!)The Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him.
Personally, I would settle for helping, rather than hurting, the middle class.Take a lesson from parakeets. If you're ever feeling lonely, just eat in front of a mirror.Basically, even in cases where polling is inaccurate, there's no evidence of it being so inaccurate that we would see enormous margins of error in every single national approval rating polls, including ones that at one point had good numbers for Trump this year, like Rasmussen - a historically R-slanted polling firm.Enjoy movies and television? Check out my blog! I do reviews and analyses.
http://fictionrantreview.wordpress.com/ (The Force Awakens spoiler review up!)Axiom posted...I'm going to sum up this entire topic with out reading a single post
Something something fake news
PRetty much except instead of arguing that Trump's approval rating is fake news, they are arguing that the polls saying there was a 95% chance he would lose the presidential vote were fake news.
Which would be true if not the for the fact such polls don't exist.^ Hey now that's completely unfair.
https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpgZero_Destroyer posted...There's no evidence demonstrated here that 15-20% of Trump's base isn't accounted for in national polling.
"yeah but there's no evidence that it ISN'T either"This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQImTheMacheteGuy posted...does that REALLY need to be in there? >_>
It was an attempt at bringing levity into an otherwise negative post.There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD
http://error1355.com/ce/Hinakuluiau.htmlI'm gonna apply Occam's Razor here: Independents stopped supporting Trump, and most of Trump's support comes from his largely Republicans base.
What a novel idea.Enjoy movies and television? Check out my blog! I do reviews and analyses.
http://fictionrantreview.wordpress.com/ (The Force Awakens spoiler review up!)UnfairRepresent posted...Axiom posted...
I'm going to sum up this entire topic with out reading a single post
Something something fake news
PRetty much except instead of arguing that Trump's approval rating is fake news, they are arguing that the polls saying there was a 95% chance he would lose the presidential vote were fake news.
Which would be true if not the for the fact such polls don't exist.
Mal fails to understand the difference between pundits, polls, and forecasts. To think, this is a guy that the Trump supporters on this board hold up as an intelligent example of their kind.even if I were a woman, I would never want to be my girlfriend - FranklinMal_Fet posted...hockeybub89 posted...
You're an independent who doesn't care for Republicans or Democrats.
I would really like to know where you keep hearing this lie.
How many times do I need to explain to you that I dislike Democrats way more than Rpublicans
You still aren't a Republican and claim to be capable of criticizing them. Funny how you are constantly white knighting everything Trump & Co do. You don't know what polls are. You blatantly ignore posts that disagree with your narrative and you hypocritically hold your team (because you support the s*** American political dichotomy) to a different standard than the other team. Just do everyone a favor and admit you are a fall-in-line Republican and Trump supporter. You clearly aren't ashamed to believe what you believe, so take the label that goes with those beliefs.Anteaterking posted...I don't understand. Even if you think that all polls suck, do you think how much a poll sucks tracks with how much it puts Trump down?
Since inauguration, Trump's (approval-disapproval) has dropped 15 points. So even if you think it started out in the wrong spot, the drop still exists.
Clearly salty liberals are just getting more vocal because they hate how great Trump has made America and the leftist pollsters are making up numbers to push their anti-American, anti-Trump fascism.Bullet_Wing posted...To think, this is a guy that the Trump supporters on this board hold up as an intelligent example of their kind.
Woah! That's scary. Plus it says alot about them also!I don't have to insult you. I have proven that you are a hypocrite and a fool. That's not insulting you, that's exposing you.
PSN-Bishop9800Bullet_Wing posted...Mal fails to understand the difference between pundits, polls, and forecasts.
^ Projecting.
hockeybub89 posted...Funny how you are constantly white knighting everything Trump & Co do.
I don't though.Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
-George OrwellI never in a million years expected Mal_Fet to show up in a topic titled "Trump's six-month approval rating hits historic low", frothing at the mouth, desperately trying to defend Trump. After all he's a 'classic liberal'.Do you like the way the water tastes?
Like gunfireSteve Nick posted...Zero_Destroyer posted...
I'm gonna apply Occam's Razor here: Independents stopped supporting Trump, and most of Trump's support comes from his largely Republicans base.
What a novel idea.
Independents never supported Trump.
What about Mal_Fet?Gonna go out on a limb and guess that you are a trump supporter
-UnfairRepresentBelieve me, Mal knows polls. He has poll people and they tell him he knows the best polls.
Any classical liberal that isn't a Trump supporter knows none of the polls gave Trump a chance.Steve Nick posted...Zero_Destroyer posted...
I'm gonna apply Occam's Razor here: Independents stopped supporting Trump, and most of Trump's support comes from his largely Republicans base.
What a novel idea.
Independents never supported Trump.
They just voted for him.
I'm an Independant and I did not vote for himThis is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQMal_Fet posted...^ Projecting.
you should try using this argument when it actually makes sense to use it instead of just whenever someone says something, Pee Wee Herman.This is literally the answer to every argument or debate in the history of humankind...
http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQThe Admiral posted...Trump could personally find a cure for cancer, bring peace to the Middle East, solve global warming, and eliminate worldwide poverty and liberals would still hate him.
what an incredibly stupid post even by your embarrassing standardshttp://i.imgur.com/5UL2v5u.gif
"Does our ruin benefit the earth? Does it help the grass to grow, the sun to shine? Is this darkness in you, too?"Mal_Fet posted...Welp this topic has predictably devolved into ad hominem nonsense.
We'll see what the real approval ratings are when the midterm elections happen.
"Real approval ratings" lol
If-- sorry, when they continue to be low, you'll still claim it's 'fake news' like the election polls. Everything is fake news when you don't agree with it.Do you like the way the water tastes?
Like gunfireMal_Fet posted...We'll see what the real approval ratings are when the midterm elections happen.
Yeah, those will be a good gauge of what people though about him 16 months earlier.Most legitimate polls were at least close to within their margin of error. The problem is that the results were on the opposite side of that margin from what most people expected. Specifically, this poll was done by ABC. Last ABC poll before the 2016 election was 47:43 in favor of Hillary.
Hillary won 48:46. Seems like a decent poll and even if you add three points to Trumps current approval rating he would still have the worst ratings 6 months into his presidency in 70 years.
And forget that if you still think it's biased and FAKE NEWS like ol' Donnie says it is. Look at Rasmussen, the super conservative pollster that had him winning the 2016 election in their forecast.
He crows about a poll that has him a few points over the other pollsters, but when you follow the links, they show him with a negative Presidential Approval Index Rating that's only getting more negative as time goes by. Rasmussen's "strongly disapprove" is at 48%, same as the new ABC/Wapo poll that we're talking about and that has him all flustered. So basically he has run out of friendly polls, even those that are super biased towards him.
Rasmussen's terrible polling method is a double-edged sword. By not having a "not sure" or "undecided" category, they force people to take more strong positions...leaving Donald with a PAI of Negative 21.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history
Even his favorite pollster shows really bad news for him, not just compared to his former ratings but also to past presidents.
I approve of his handling of the economy because he hasn't DONE anything to effect the economy. We're coasting off Obamas good decisions. The guy is literally not touching some things Obama did just so he can not screw them up and take credit. I keep hearing the jobs created stuff come up, Trump didn't even pass anything to help jobs, it's still rolling off stuff Obama did.
Most of his "accomplishments" he has tweeted about were things already in motion long before he took office. For example, a steadily climbing stock market, or exporting US beef to China.
Now granted, the markets prefer Republican administrations (because they kill regulations and make everything easier for businesses, no matter how much damage that does to the environment/workers). So, there was a rather large post-election bump. Now, of course, Trump did nothing to earn that, other than being a Republican and supporting fascist, pro-business positions. But don't confuse the stock markets with the overall economy. While they do tend to follow one another, that is not always the case, especially in the short run of a few months.
Jobs growth/unemployment/GDP are the real things to look at.Mal_Fet posted...Welp this topic has predictably devolved into ad hominem nonsense.
We'll see what the real approval ratings are when the midterm elections happen.
I did not base my arguments on ad hominems. You've provided zero evidence for your assertions and now you're running like a coward like you always do.Enjoy movies and television? Check out my blog! I do reviews and analyses.
http://fictionrantreview.wordpress.com/ (The Force Awakens spoiler review up!)I'll just leave this here:
https://twitter.com/polNewsForever/status/886748856872046592"Impossible is just a word to let people feel good about themselves when they quit." - Vyse, Skies of ArcadiaIt was enough to get Trump upset, so I'd say the poll can be trusted. :o
Trump is already breaking records! Good for him.- Boards
- Current Events
- Trump's six-month approval rating hits historic low
No comments:
Post a Comment