Obama's approval numbers slip back to the low 40's

Funny how that every other poll as it at 48% or higher.

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - President Obama Job Approval

But the Right Wing Report has at the end of the daily tracking:

MAD AS HELL: How the Tea Party Movement is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System, by Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen, can be ordered at Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble, Borders and other outlets. It's also available in bookstores everywhere.

Boy I wonder how he would skew results to produce a profitable result for his book sales. Funny he used Only 21% strongly approve and 44% strongly disapprove. Hmm... Why would that matter for his book sales? Because then it makes the crazies (ie. OP) believe all of America hates Obama.
 
I do not understand why so many, especially on the left, think that Rasmussen is so bad?


"In 2008, Obama won 53%-46% and our final poll showed Obama winning 52% to 46%. While we were pleased with the final result, Rasmussen Reports was especially pleased with the stability of our results. On every single day for the last six weeks of the campaign, our daily tracking showed Obama with a stable and solid lead attracting more than 50% of the vote.

In 2004 George W. Bush received 50.7% of the vote while John Kerry earned 48.3%. Rasmussen Reports polling projected that Bush would win 50.2% to 48.5%. We were the only firm to project both candidates' totals within half a percentage point by (see our 2004 results). "

Seems like honest and accurate results to me.

Rasmussen has earned the reputation of being the ones closest to the actual results. Watch and see how the others start to inch their Obama approval numbers downward if Rasmussen's numbers hold steady. It happens every time. I mean every time!
 
I'll hold out for the MSNBC poll that will show him at a gazillion percent approval.

fer sure, and he and the Democrats didn't just get a Historical ass kicking this last election either.

Funny how the liberals, all full of self-righteous superiority forget that just a few short months ago only, they got their collective tails kicked so hard they still haven't hit the ground yet.
 
I'll hold out for the MSNBC poll that will show him at a gazillion percent approval.

fer sure, and he and the Democrats didn't just get a Historical ass kicking this last election either.

Funny how the liberals, all full of self-righteous superiority forget that just a few short months ago only, they got their collective tails kicked so hard they still haven't hit the ground yet.

Well basically that occurred for several reasons. Economy did fire up enough to add any jobs. There was a 500 Billion dollar cut in Medicare. And the Tea Party movement picked up some voters. Add in the Chamber of Commerce doling out the moula on a record level and a good many Democrats trying to make a "point" by staying home or going Republican and you have the makings of the perfect storm.

I don't think it's going to hold. The Republicans ran on cutting the deficit and producing jobs. However, they have come in attacking abortion and unions. That ain't what they ran on..and if they shut down government again..that will be the icing on the cake for 2012.
 
I do not understand why so many, especially on the left, think that Rasmussen is so bad?


"In 2008, Obama won 53%-46% and our final poll showed Obama winning 52% to 46%. While we were pleased with the final result, Rasmussen Reports was especially pleased with the stability of our results. On every single day for the last six weeks of the campaign, our daily tracking showed Obama with a stable and solid lead attracting more than 50% of the vote.

In 2004 George W. Bush received 50.7% of the vote while John Kerry earned 48.3%. Rasmussen Reports polling projected that Bush would win 50.2% to 48.5%. We were the only firm to project both candidates' totals within half a percentage point by (see our 2004 results). "

Seems like honest and accurate results to me.

Rasmussen has earned the reputation of being the ones closest to the actual results. Watch and see how the others start to inch their Obama approval numbers downward if Rasmussen's numbers hold steady. It happens every time. I mean every time!

Yeah, that's not true.

Oops.

Rasmussen uses different poliing methodology, and it's almost always an outlier. Because it doesn't give a neutral option (only "strongly approve", "approve", "disapprove" and "strongly disapprove"), their polling always shows more disapproval than any other poll, whether it's for a Republican or Democrat. Their accuracy, according to last polls before an election, is middle of the road - no better than any other polling companies. The often repeated claim that they are the "most accurate" is bullshit.

What you don't seem to understand is that NONE of the polling companies are biased. They're companies, in it to make a profit, and that profitability relies on accuracy. Candidates and media sources don't hire pollsters that aren't accurate.

To claim a poll is "biased" simply because you don't like it's results is pretty petty.
 
I do not understand why so many, especially on the left, think that Rasmussen is so bad?


"In 2008, Obama won 53%-46% and our final poll showed Obama winning 52% to 46%. While we were pleased with the final result, Rasmussen Reports was especially pleased with the stability of our results. On every single day for the last six weeks of the campaign, our daily tracking showed Obama with a stable and solid lead attracting more than 50% of the vote.

In 2004 George W. Bush received 50.7% of the vote while John Kerry earned 48.3%. Rasmussen Reports polling projected that Bush would win 50.2% to 48.5%. We were the only firm to project both candidates' totals within half a percentage point by (see our 2004 results). "

Seems like honest and accurate results to me.

They're not bad at all. I don't think they have a "bias".

They use different methodology, that's all. They're no more or less accurate than any other major pollster.
 
I do not understand why so many, especially on the left, think that Rasmussen is so bad?


"In 2008, Obama won 53%-46% and our final poll showed Obama winning 52% to 46%. While we were pleased with the final result, Rasmussen Reports was especially pleased with the stability of our results. On every single day for the last six weeks of the campaign, our daily tracking showed Obama with a stable and solid lead attracting more than 50% of the vote.

In 2004 George W. Bush received 50.7% of the vote while John Kerry earned 48.3%. Rasmussen Reports polling projected that Bush would win 50.2% to 48.5%. We were the only firm to project both candidates' totals within half a percentage point by (see our 2004 results). "

Seems like honest and accurate results to me.

Rasmussen is generally seen as a pollster aligned with the Republican party. That doesn't mean they are wrong, however. But they were off in the last election, over-estimating Republican support.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/140326-rasmussen-polls-biased.html
 
Over here In Naples,Fla. Ubama's Approval is around 25%,,,all you have to do is look at what he did to small business here in 2009. We are finally starting to come back to life here as small business owners seem to be moving or coming back here,and Hundreds of new homes are already in the planning,,this is all thanks to the George Bush Tax Cut Extension !!!:clap2:
 
Over here In Naples,Fla. Ubama's Approval is around 25%,,,all you have to do is look at what he did to small business here in 2009. We are finally starting to come back to life here as small business owners seem to be moving or coming back here,and Hundreds of new homes are already in the planning,,this is all thanks to the George Bush Tax Cut Extension !!!:clap2:

Yeah, I looked at buying a $400k house in Naples that was sold for $1.5 million in 2006. Well done Bush Tax Cuts. Pump that Bubble! :thup:
 
Over here In Naples,Fla. Ubama's Approval is around 25%,,,all you have to do is look at what he did to small business here in 2009. We are finally starting to come back to life here as small business owners seem to be moving or coming back here,and Hundreds of new homes are already in the planning,,this is all thanks to the George Bush Tax Cut Extension !!!:clap2:

Yeah, I looked at buying a $400k house in Naples that was sold for $1.5 million in 2006. Well done Bush Tax Cuts. Pump that Bubble! :thup:

I was here in 2006/2005 when people actually paid around $350-$450K for an average 2000/2500 sq.foot home. How could of anyone have fallen for that? Now those homes are back around $180,000. That was part of the mess that slowed the city down financially, I cant believe a neighbor actually wanted $300K for a condo in my complex! as far as I know,its still for sale,,,maybe $150K???
 
I'm not surprised, He TRIED to pretend he was a centrist for about a minute, then he went right back to being the Radical he is.

Apparently, you wouldn't know a radical if it bit you on the ass. Hate to break it to you, but he's unpopular with his base because he's acting too much like a Republican. As far as dopey wackaloons like you... Well you're going to hate him no matter what, so long as that (D) is next to his name. The disapproval of such people really doesn't influence the polls then, now does it?
 
fer sure, and he and the Democrats didn't just get a Historical ass kicking this last election either.

Funny how the liberals, all full of self-righteous superiority forget that just a few short months ago only, they got their collective tails kicked so hard they still haven't hit the ground yet.

Well basically that occurred for several reasons. Economy did fire up enough to add any jobs. There was a 500 Billion dollar cut in Medicare. And the Tea Party movement picked up some voters. Add in the Chamber of Commerce doling out the moula on a record level and a good many Democrats trying to make a "point" by staying home or going Republican and you have the makings of the perfect storm.

I don't think it's going to hold. The Republicans ran on cutting the deficit and producing jobs. However, they have come in attacking abortion and unions. That ain't what they ran on..and if they shut down government again..that will be the icing on the cake for 2012.

I think it was great that they won in big numbers in 2010.

Now they share some of the responsibility. They are going after unions and abortions. They campaigned on jobs yet in cutting 200,000 jobs, "so be it." How do we know you care about job creation when you are actually cutting jobs.

I think with the fact they have no legitimate challenger to Obama in 2012, and their lies be exposed, will see them become the minority once again in 2012.
 
I think with the fact they have no legitimate challenger to Obama in 2012, and their lies be exposed, will see them become the minority once again in 2012.

No, unless they really, super-majorly fuck up between now and Nov 2012, they'll likely have BOTH houses of Congress, but with less of a majority in the House.


Despite that, it still looks good for the Prez, though.
 
fer sure, and he and the Democrats didn't just get a Historical ass kicking this last election either.

Funny how the liberals, all full of self-righteous superiority forget that just a few short months ago only, they got their collective tails kicked so hard they still haven't hit the ground yet.

Well basically that occurred for several reasons. Economy did fire up enough to add any jobs. There was a 500 Billion dollar cut in Medicare. And the Tea Party movement picked up some voters. Add in the Chamber of Commerce doling out the moula on a record level and a good many Democrats trying to make a "point" by staying home or going Republican and you have the makings of the perfect storm.

I don't think it's going to hold. The Republicans ran on cutting the deficit and producing jobs. However, they have come in attacking abortion and unions. That ain't what they ran on..and if they shut down government again..that will be the icing on the cake for 2012.

WAIT A MINUTE! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!


You're saying there was a confluence of happenstance circumstances that formed a perfect storm for the democrats to lose, not because people thought the democrats sucked? This has all the makings of a joke without a laugh track!

1. Obama's number were - as they are again - in the toilet.

2. the democrats in congress had the worst approval ratings since congressional approval ratings originated. What is all this, an attempt to keep the liberal base somehow energized?

3. Wherever Obama went to help, the candidate almost always wound up with lower ratings.

4. Obama promised jobs through bankruptcy amounts of spending, jobs that never materialized.

5. The democrats crafted Obamacare in secret, and passed it on Christmas eve despite 70% of polled American not wanting it.

Now you can slide the numbers around a bit, or find some justification for the occasional this or that, but taken together you cannot realistically extrapolate that the result of the November 2010 elections in which democrats lost by historic numbers is not due to the fact that the democrats governed very badly in the eyes of the public and they gave the house back to the republicans, in strong measure to stop Obama from having complete control.

Every pundit knows this. the guy on the street know it. How on earth can you begin to pretend that the results were some extraordinary alignment of bad circumstances that just happened to make the democrats lose when their poll numbers were already in the bottom of the sewer.

Take up writing fiction. It's what you're good at.
 
As usual we see liberal democrats doing what they always do when faced with bad news about their party: claim the source is unreliable, make comparisons to Bush who has been gone for 2 years, or change the subject, in this case the Florida housing market.

Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.
Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.
Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.
Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.
Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.

Live in the real world. It's a fact. Deal with it.
 
As usual we see liberal democrats doing what they always do when faced with bad news about their party: claim the source is unreliable, make comparisons to Bush who has been gone for 2 years, or change the subject, in this case the Florida housing market.

Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.
Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.
Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.
Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.
Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's.

Live in the real world. It's a fact. Deal with it.

Let's for the sake of argument say that Obama's approval numbers today are in the low 40s. How the heck does that matter? Next week they could be higher. Next week could be lower. Heck everything could change tomorrow.

If you don't believe that then you don't remember 9/11
 

Forum List

Back
Top