poll results

[HAL 9000 96]

Rob has a major point that Charles is maybe missing on purpose??

I hardly would label that attacking the messenger since he is focusing on something quite contextual behind how all those polls are- even by the admission of those that create them, UNSCIENTIFIC.

But its more of the same hackery that prevents science from standing in the way of ignorance.

The question is... why?

[The_Dude 1,142]

and that changes the fact that obama sucks how?

Nice driveby post there smoke. The results of this post can be as easily manipulated as American Idol was a few years ago when there were people using bots to vote hundreds of thousands of times online. But if you sheeple want to believe that this poll is legitimate, thats your prerogative I suppose. I'm done arguing because you simply cannot grasp the concept of methodology.

[Ban Hammer 12,884]

Rob has a major point that Charles is maybe missing on purpose??

I hardly would label that attacking the messenger since he is focusing on something quite contextual behind how all those polls are- even by the admission of those that create them, UNSCIENTIFIC.

But its more of the same hackery that prevents science from standing in the way of ignorance.

The question is... why?

pretty much every poll could be called unscientific.....

i'm not saying this one is any better, or worse, than any other polls out there.

[HAL 9000 96]

pretty much every poll could be called unscientific.....

i'm not saying this one is any better, or worse, than any other polls out there.

Sure could be called unscientific... but it doesn't take away from the methodology, which is scientific. Sometimes you have to look beyond the results.

And webpolls, are not scientific in results and much less in methodology.

[The_Dude 1,142]

pretty much every poll could be called unscientific.....

i'm not saying this one is any better, or worse, than any other polls out there.

The difference between this poll and one conducted by say The Pew Institute or Rasmussen is that they take care to ensure the integrity of a poll by following a strict methodology to maintain it. Simply put, they take measures to ensure that the results cannot be manipulated by people and that the results show the opinion of a microcosm of the target population.

This CBS poll is just an open poll, which leaves it wide open for hacking and manipulation. There is no attempt to poll random people, or any attempt to ensure the integrity. I wasn't questioning your motives as if you were the one generating the poll, my question was why post this when it is obviously invalid and not indicative of anything.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Rob has a major point that Charles is maybe missing on purpose??

I hardly would label that attacking the messenger since he is focusing on something quite contextual behind how all those polls are- even by the admission of those that create them, UNSCIENTIFIC.

But its more of the same hackery that prevents science from standing in the way of ignorance.

The question is... why?

And what if the scientific polls also show Obama sucks? (They do)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/gallup-daily-obama-job-approval.aspx

[Ban Hammer 12,884]

The difference between this poll and one conducted by say The Pew Institute or Rasmussen is that they take care to ensure the integrity of a poll by following a strict methodology to maintain it. Simply put, they take measures to ensure that the results cannot be manipulated by people and that the results show the opinion of a microcosm of the target population.

This CBS poll is just an open poll, which leaves it wide open for hacking and manipulation. There is no attempt to poll random people, or any attempt to ensure the integrity. I wasn't questioning your motives as if you were the one generating the poll, my question was why post this when it is obviously invalid and not indicative of anything.

sure, the poll in the op could be skewed. i'm also sure that the results could be skewed in either direction too, which makes me wonder if it was painting a rosy picture, would you be so quick to attack it? in essence, just because the results are not what one would like to see, should it be dismissed so easily?

i btw gave obama good marks in some areas, bad in others, and a C overall. pretty much a middle of the road average.

[HAL 9000 96]

And what if the scientific polls also show Obama sucks? (They do)

http://www.gallup.co...b-approval.aspx

Then you can open the floor for logical discussion, which includes reasons for such responses, using the methodology for said responses. Context, context, context.

Just be careful with that, since we all know certain methodologies can be directed.

sure, the poll in the op could be skewed. i'm also sure that the results could be skewed in either direction too, which makes me wonder if it was painting a rosy picture, would you be so quick to attack it? in essence, just because the results are not what one would like to see, should it be dismissed so easily?

i btw gave obama good marks in some areas, bad in others, and a C overall. pretty much a middle of the road average.

Personally, such a scenario I'd likely ignore like all other polls when people's minds are fickle, independent on partisan loyalties that are not taken into account on those polls.

[The_Dude 1,142]

And what if the scientific polls also show Obama sucks? (They do)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/gallup-daily-obama-job-approval.aspx

LoL, i don't dispute that his popularity is sagging, but put that into a historical context, and he's on-par with most presidencies. I dont't think he's had a distinguished presidency. Despite having a few moments to shine, he hasn't.

sure, the poll in the op could be skewed. i'm also sure that the results could be skewed in either direction too, which makes me wonder if it was painting a rosy picture, would you be so quick to attack it? in essence, just because the results are not what one would like to see, should it be dismissed so easily?

i btw gave obama good marks in some areas, bad in others, and a C overall. pretty much a middle of the road average.

I gave him mostly c's and d's. I don't think he handled the stimulus correctly, I don't agree with his handling of Iraq and afghanistan either. I agree, he is a fairly mediocre president, thus far.

If this poll showed that 70% thought he was doing a great job, I would call BS just as quickly. It's a manipulation of numbers and people's lack of understanding of methodology to present a biased information that was undoubtedly manipulated.

Edited August 31, 2010 by Rob & Mel

[Ban Hammer 12,884]

Personally, such a scenario I'd likely ignore like all other polls when people's minds are fickle, independent on partisan loyalties that are not taken into account on those polls.

yet, you didn't ignore this one, when it paints a negative picture.....

I gave him mostly c's and d's. I don't think he handled the stimulus correctly, I don't agree with his handling of Iraq and afghanistan either. I agree, he is a fairly mediocre president, thus far.

If this poll showed that 70% thought he was doing a great job, I would call BS just as quickly. It's a manipulation of numbers and people's lack of understanding of methodology to present a biased information that was undoubtedly manipulated.

it looks like we're in violent agreement then about his performance.

[HAL 9000 96]

yet, you didn't ignore this one, when it paints a negative picture.....

it looks like we're in violent agreement then about his performance.

Would it make you feel better if I did not participate in this one thread?

I am also somewhat not satisfied with his overall performance for not doing enough in the manner he promised on the campaign trail. Although does that make him unelectable for 2012? Not sure about that. I prefer to put things into the proper context.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I am also somewhat not satisfied with his overall performance for not doing enough in the manner he promised on the campaign trail. Although does that make him unelectable for 2012? Not sure about that. I prefer to put things into the proper context.

You hit the nail on the head. I am underwhealmed with his follow through on the ideals espoused in his campaign. However, I think it's a bit premature to call his re-election dead in the water. There is still 18 months before any 2012 campaigning begins in earnest, and a lot can happen there. I think ultimately, it is going to come down to who the republicans nominate, and can they unite behind that candidate.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Nice driveby post there smoke. The results of this post can be as easily manipulated as American Idol was a few years ago when there were people using bots to vote hundreds of thousands of times online. But if you sheeple want to believe that this poll is legitimate, thats your prerogative I suppose. I'm done arguing because you simply cannot grasp the concept of methodology.

oh poopie robbie's in a bad mood. it was a joke. obama still sucks and i don't care what any poll says.

[Ban Hammer 12,884]

Would it make you feel better if I did not participate in this one thread?

I am also somewhat not satisfied with his overall performance for not doing enough in the manner he promised on the campaign trail. Although does that make him unelectable for 2012? Not sure about that. I prefer to put things into the proper context.

there's plenty it seems that are not pleased with his performance, and that's the far either side of the spectrum. hannah (a vj member) is royally peeved at him for not being liberal enough, if i recall correctly.

i suspect he'll be facing an uphill battle in 2012 due to a highly fractured left that is highly displeased with his performance.

[The_Dude 1,142]

oh poopie robbie's in a bad mood. it was a joke. obama still sucks and i don't care what any poll says.

Ok smoke, by your logic, I could put up a poll for anyone to respond on one of those public poll websites. I could put up the question "Is smoke a chode smoking tool". If the results were 90%, does that make them valid?