1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Oh My! Bush at 33%

Discussion in 'The OT' started by billpa, Aug 11, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. billpa

    billpa Icon

    869
    0
    Jul 11, 2003
    Many Republicans have spun the Ned Lamont supporters in Connecticut as "out of the mainstream". Might it be that it's actually THEIR leader who's exited stage right of the mainstream?


    From Yahoo
     
  2. juan ellitinez

    juan ellitinez Icon/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,981
    0
    Jan 31, 2003
    Hmm do you have a copy of the actual poll? Who they asked, what they asked ETC?
     
  3. Olevia37HD

    Olevia37HD Banned User

    199
    0
    Jul 12, 2006
    The man should be committed but other than that hes good for a laugh once in awhile.
    The Daily Show - Fool Me Once....
    I guess he's ear piece wasn't working that day!!!!:grin: :hurah: :grin::icon_lol:
     
  4. billpa

    billpa Icon

    869
    0
    Jul 11, 2003
    I do not. I suppose that since I don't have the proverbial "link", this can be dismissed.
     
  5. GeneralDisarray

    GeneralDisarray Banned User

    293
    0
    Jul 8, 2006
  6. cdru

    cdru Hall Of Fame

    2,517
    0
    Dec 4, 2003
    It's also worth noting that Congress's approval rating is even worse then Bush's, 55% of the people were leaning towards the left in the November elections, and that 52% would like to see a Democratic Congress.
     
  7. JM Anthony

    JM Anthony Child of the 60's DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,127
    1
    Nov 16, 2003
    In a recent Family Poll (as in my family poll), with an incredible 100% response rate, none of us think Bush is doing a good job. Gus, our right leaning family member due mainly to his girth (he actually lists to the righ when he walks) had nothing good to say about the Bushster.

    John
     
  8. Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    I asked my cat (in sign language, as he's deaf) what he thinks about Bush. He blinked once. I think that means "Why are you not currently petting me?" so I'm not sure what that says about him politically.
     
  9. billpa

    billpa Icon

    869
    0
    Jul 11, 2003
    Looking at the cat in your avatar he seems to be saying that we need an exit policy in Iraq.
     
  10. anthonyi

    anthonyi Legend

    122
    0
    Feb 4, 2006
    Who cares about polls. Polls don't tell you nothing. Remember the polls had Kerry wiping out Bush. Polls are nothing but BS.
     
  11. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    I have a little secret... I know this isn't widely known or anything, but, uh... Bush isn't running for reelection. Why there is an obsession with his job approval numbers really baffles me. His numbers are on par with every two-term president for the past 50 years at this point in their presidency.

    Not saying his numbers are meaningless (it does get it harder for him to get his initiatives through Congress - although even with those numbers he's still been pretty effective on that front). I do have a reco for the democrats up for election this year: DEVELOP A PLAN. Their ENTIRE campaign strategy this time around has been: vote for us because Bush sucks! Um, I do have a news flash - with VERY few exceptions (as in the candidate being caught buying drugs or something) you don't win elections by running as the anti-other candidate (Rick Lazio tried that against Hillary in 2000 in NY, and, well you can see how well that worked out).

    Right now, the democrats have no plan. And "we'll do this better" is NOT a plan. Saying you're concerned about an issue is not a plan. You don't actually need concrete steps, but when someone talks about a candidate with regard to an issue, you should at least be able to say "this candidate will implement this kind of program to fix this problem." The democrats have not done that this time around (I have a theory as to why that is, but I won't get into it here).

    As for Lamont, he's going to get his clock cleaned in November (Lieberman would have to run the worst campaign in the history of the Republic to lose this one). Congrats to the democrats - they have just thrown away another seat! And you don't have to wait til November for that - when Congress comes back from summer recess, the democrats are going to be down 1. Good job!
     
  12. GeneralDisarray

    GeneralDisarray Banned User

    293
    0
    Jul 8, 2006
    Polls also had Gore losing the election in 2000 in regards to the popular vote but winning the electoral vote. :D
     
  13. GeneralDisarray

    GeneralDisarray Banned User

    293
    0
    Jul 8, 2006
    And it also worth noting that more than 80% of English speakers know the difference between the words "then" and "than" and when to use the proper term.:hurah:
     
  14. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    Sorry, but this poll is worthless, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a conservative republican who ALWAYS votes... If you look historically, the overall Congressional approval rating has been an abysmal indication of how things play out for Congressional elections. That democrat lead is always there (I seem to remember that it hit something like +20% for the democrats in 2002... and again in 2004... and well, they lost seats both times out). I'm not exactly sure why political analysts focus so much energy on it. It makes news a couple months before an election... and has no bearing on how the elections play out.

    Part of that has to do with the fact that you don't vote for "Congress." You vote for YOUR representative and senators. I can get ticked off all the live long day at what Teddy Kennedy had to say, but as a PA resident there isn't a darn thing I can do about it. There ARE better indicators out there - for example, individual Congressional approval - where people are asked how they feel about HIS/HER representative/senator. Another good indicator is looking at voting motivation - how motivated are you to get out to vote in November. A report I saw yesterday seriously bucks conventional wisdom - the media paints republicans as being despondant, and not motivated this time out (ticked off at their party, so they won't show up at the polls). This report paints a VERY different picture. Republicans are very unified this time out (something 81% are very likely to vote, and 88% of those are going to pull the republican lever).

    BTW, another useless poll - the generic ballot. As in "who do you favor in general, the republicans or democrats?" Again, historically the democrats ALWAYS outpoll the republicans (frequently by double digits) and the poll has been shown to be crap, having no semblence to reality.
     
  15. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002

    What poll said that?
     
  16. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    That's correct. I remember Rush Limbaugh being interviewed by Tim Russert, not long before the election, and Russert asked him about that very situation: what do you think will happen if these polls play out and Gore wins the electoral vote and Bush wins the popular vote?

    Rush's response was on the order of: It'll be a disappointing loss, but Bush will concede.

    It was Rush who threw at Russert the possibility of things happening the other way around, something on the order of: but if Gore wins the popular vote and Bush wins the electoral vote, there's going to be pandemonium... and lo and behold, we had Florida 2000...
     
  17. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    Polls going into the conventions had it that way. During that election some pollsters, I think, sold their souls. Zogby declared, in April 2004 (a good 6 - 7 months before the election) that Kerry would win - the stars were all aligned for that happening.

    Also, not to pick on Zogby (but you asked about a specific poll) he, like other pollsters, did a read of the landscape the weekend before the election. He picked Kerry winning in a land-slide. Kerry was going to win FL by, if I remember right, 12 points. He was going to win OH by a few (I think it was 5). And this was 4 days before the election.

    Who is Zogby, and why do I focus on him? For those not familiar, he built up his reputation in 1998 (can you tell I'm a political junkie?) for the MN governor's race. If you remember, it was a 3-way race, where Ventura running as an independent. Every other poll I saw out there had either the republican (Pawlenty) or the democrat (can't remember his name) winning -- it was a close race any way you sliced it -- but all of them had Ventura in 3rd place - by a pretty big margin in some cases. Zogby was the only one who predicted the upset. Ventura wasn't the only winner that year. Zogby became the gold standard overnight... and held on to that, more or less, until 2004, when he really blew it.
     
  18. Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    That cat has passed away, sadly. :( He's had his exit.
     
  19. Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    The best pollster I've seen of late has been Rasmussen. He's been quite close. He also does something I like--not snapshot polls, but rolling polls. That way you have and can see the polling trend. Polls are good for trends. www.rasmussenreports.com if you'd like to see. He tracks Bush daily, by the way, who last I checked was at 38 or 39 percent or so. If memory serves, Rasmussen had the 2004 election within like .5%, which is pretty good.
     
  20. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    I agree - I've always liked Rasmussen's approach - which has since been adopted by other pollsters - of doing rolling averages. For example, I like the Battleground poll, which is a bipartisan poll done as election day approaches - and they do a 5-day rolling average, instead of just 3, and they avoid weekend polling, which tends to be less accurate. I also like Rasmussen's approach of using automated telephone calling. He has definitely gotten more accurate over time too.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page