Why Do Democrat Commentators Keep Saying "Historically Low Approval Ratings"?,According To Who?

[Rexx Taylor]

This is such Bullchit! It seems as if all Democrat guests on any cable news outlet are given their scripts ahead of time and being paid to press the fact that Trump has very very low approval ratings when any normal minded American thinks otherwise.
Did these paid commentators see the massive crowd last night in Pennsylvania? Maybe Razmuffin and Gallup should just go there and take a poll.
Can you imagine if all these pollsters polled every state except New York and California? you think the results would still be Trump at 47% ???

 

[Rexx Taylor]

and regarding bogus polls, who was it that had Hillary over Trump by 14 points last October when in reality it was Trump over Hillary by 14 points?

 

[Redfish]

the media lies, the pollsters lie. Ignore both. these are the same morons who said that Trump had no path to 270 EC votes and that HRC had a 95% chance of winning.

THEY ARE LIARS, ALL OF THEM.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

the media lies, the pollsters lie. Ignore both. these are the same morons who said that Trump had no path to 270 EC votes and that HRC had a 95% chance of winning.

THEY ARE LIARS, ALL OF THEM.

right! and some scumbagg just used the term on Fox about 15 Minutes ago! I guess he only polls illegal aliens and dead people

 

[Care4all]

historical

would
mean

according to History

it's simply a comparison of polling on a month to month basis of previous presidents...including this president

 

[Iceweasel]

We are supposed to blindly accept the word of the preachers in the democrat propaganda outlets.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

According to who is according to them.

 

[Iceweasel]

historical

would
mean

according to History

it's simply a comparison of polling on a month to month basis of previous presidents...including this president

But polling has been proven to be way off so the statements mean nothing unless you are already a disciple.

 

[rightwinger]

Name your poll
Even look at good ole Rassmussen. Trump sucks compared to other Presidents. It's not even close

If you don't like Polls.......find some other indicator that says Trump is popular

You can't

 

[Rexx Taylor]

According to who is according to them.

ever since the obvious fake polls of 2016,,,we have learned to just add 15 points to any republican candidate,,right?

 

[Ted Frazier]

This is such Bullchit! It seems as if all Democrat guests on any cable news outlet are given their scripts ahead of time and being paid to press the fact that Trump has very very low approval ratings when any normal minded American thinks otherwise.
Did these paid commentators see the massive crowd last night in Pennsylvania? Maybe Razmuffin and Gallup should just go there and take a poll.
Can you imagine if all these pollsters polled every state except New York and California? you think the results would still be Trump at 47% ???

Because polls have never found approval so low for any other President in history. and you knew this, but you're playing dumb about it.

 

[Ted Frazier]

According to who is according to them.

ever since the obvious fake polls of 2016,,,we have learned to just add 15 points to any republican candidate,,right?

On average, polls forecasted a 3.1% victory for Clinton in the popular vote. She won by 2.1%. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
That's very accurate. The only way you can say pollsters were wrong is by repeating the fake "voter fraud" meme that even Republicans in Congress have debunked. Republicans in Congress don’t want anything to do with Trump’s voter-fraud probe

 

[Cellblock2429]

Name your poll
Even look at good ole Rassmussen. Trump sucks compared to other Presidents. It's not even close

If you don't like Polls.......find some other indicator that says Trump is popular

You can't

/---- Hildabeast up by 14 points bwhahaha bwhahaha bwhahaha

 

[Care4all]

historical

would
mean

according to History

it's simply a comparison of polling on a month to month basis of previous presidents...including this president

But polling has been proven to be way off so the statements mean nothing unless you are already a disciple.

Polling has never been 100% accurate...so even in the polling of previous Presidents they too are less than 100% accurate...

there is always a margin of error....

 

[Ted Frazier]

and regarding bogus polls, who was it that had Hillary over Trump by 14 points last October when in reality it was Trump over Hillary by 14 points?

Your post was idiotic in three ways:
1) Only one pollster had Hillary ahead by 14% in early October
2) There's no way to know who was ahead in early October because the elections were in November.
3) You have no idea whether Trump was ahead by 14% in October.

Please be less of an idiot.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

Name your poll
Even look at good ole Rassmussen. Trump sucks compared to other Presidents. It's not even close

If you don't like Polls.......find some other indicator that says Trump is popular

You can't

/---- Hildabeast up by 14 points bwhahaha bwhahaha bwhahaha

Trump beats Hillary in an embarrassing landslide,,his voters still love him,,so why are these bogus polls at around 42%? especially when Trump beat Hillary by 7 Million Legal votes?

 

[Iceweasel]

This is such Bullchit! It seems as if all Democrat guests on any cable news outlet are given their scripts ahead of time and being paid to press the fact that Trump has very very low approval ratings when any normal minded American thinks otherwise.
Did these paid commentators see the massive crowd last night in Pennsylvania? Maybe Razmuffin and Gallup should just go there and take a poll.
Can you imagine if all these pollsters polled every state except New York and California? you think the results would still be Trump at 47% ???

Because polls have never found approval so low for any other President in history. and you knew this, but you're playing dumb about it.

I don't think Lincoln was subject to daily polling. It only started recently, even W Bush wasn't polled that much. Polling has become a cottage industry and they are selling a product.

 

[Ted Frazier]

historical

would
mean

according to History

it's simply a comparison of polling on a month to month basis of previous presidents...including this president

But polling has been proven to be way off so the statements mean nothing unless you are already a disciple.

Polls had Hillary ahead in the popular vote by 3.1% and she won by 2.1%: RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

 

[Rexx Taylor]

and regarding bogus polls, who was it that had Hillary over Trump by 14 points last October when in reality it was Trump over Hillary by 14 points?

Your post was idiotic in three ways:
1) Only one pollster had Hillary ahead by 14% in October
2) There's no way to know who was ahead in October because the elections were in November.
3) You have no idea whether Trump was ahead by 14% in October.

Please be less of an idiot.

based on my poll, with my average american friends,,,Trump was always ahead of the beast by 13/14 points,,,,,,i dont ask illegal aliens for their views on Trump

 

[Rexx Taylor]

This is such Bullchit! It seems as if all Democrat guests on any cable news outlet are given their scripts ahead of time and being paid to press the fact that Trump has very very low approval ratings when any normal minded American thinks otherwise.
Did these paid commentators see the massive crowd last night in Pennsylvania? Maybe Razmuffin and Gallup should just go there and take a poll.
Can you imagine if all these pollsters polled every state except New York and California? you think the results would still be Trump at 47% ???

Because polls have never found approval so low for any other President in history. and you knew this, but you're playing dumb about it.

I don't think Lincoln was subject to daily polling. It only started recently, even W Bush wasn't polled that much. Polling has become a cottage industry and they are selling a product.

and wasnt Kerry supposed to beat Bush in a 52/48 landslide?