• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AP-GfK poll: Obama approval hits 60 percent

shades said:
first of all dont pay to much attention to this particular poll given the target audience.
your tendancy to feel the need to praise him, albeit temporarily is a common human nature instinct. Like the bank robber that stops on the way out the door and hands the little kid a 20 and tells him to buy his mom something nice. for this brief moment you go "ahhhh, thats sweet".

but remember the bigger picture you pointed out, we ARE headed in the wrong direction with this administration.
Obama is clueless, you need to look no further than his apointees. Every president to date knows rule #1 is have a good team around you. the task is too large for one man and left to one man, ideologys are sure to trump common sense.

The presidency is a give and take affair, by refusing to, even through hook and crook, listen to the American people, thinking "hell, they elected me they must be on board with my vision".. Obama has lost his way.

The independants that voted for him were on board with his promise of CHANGE, bipartisan for the good of the country CHANGE promise..

there are those that will vote for him regardless, there are those that wont regardless,
but
This middle vote that will again sway the "12" election is a very smart lot...

we shall see
Click to expand...

There was no target audience. Read post #81, which explains why.
 
Approval ratings are like a thermometer...they go up and down all the time.
 
coolwalker said:
Approval ratings are like a thermometer...they go up and down all the time.
Click to expand...

Depends. If you set your air conditioning to 76 degrees all year, then it bears no relationship to a poll. Try a roller coaster..... Um, never mind. If you don't get on one, you don't go up and down. Ah, how about a trampoline.... Hmm, same problem as the roller coaster. OK, try taking LSD and heroin alternatively. Crap, that won't work either. Once you nod out on the heroin, you won't be flying on the acid, so no up and down there either. Wait, I've got it. There is a solution, but you are going to have to live on an elevator to make it work.
 
Redress said:
Apparently this went over your head, so I will try and be a little more clear.

The result of a question asking what party a person identifies with = result

How the poll was conducted = methodology

Your criticism has been with the former, not the latter. I even linked to the latter so you could actually see if there was a problem.
Click to expand...

Yes, the result of a question on party affiliation is a "result", but the decision to include a disproportionate number of Dems in the poll results is a "methodology".

The normal methodology is to include a ratio of Republicans, Democrats, and independents consistent with the known population.
 
Gill said:
Yes, the result of a question on party affiliation is a "result", but the decision to include a disproportionate number of Dems in the poll results is a "methodology".

The normal methodology is to include a ratio of Republicans, Democrats, and independents consistent with the known population.
Click to expand...

Hahaha. LMAO. That is not true at all. It is impossible to have a methodology to include a disproportionate amount of respondents from either political party in a poll that is conducted by using random dialing. It just doesn't exist. Excuse me for laughing at what you posted, but I just can't help it. Hehe.

Read post #81, which explains why this poll was not biased.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
Hahaha. LMAO. That is not true at all. It is impossible to have a methodology to include a disproportionate amount of respondents from either political party in a poll that is conducted by using random dialing. It just doesn't exist. Excuse me for laughing at what you posted, but I just can't help it. Hehe.

Read post #81, which explains why this poll was not biased.
Click to expand...

Slow down and actually read what I wrote. Yes, it is impossible to have a methodology that predetermines whether respondents are Dems or Republicans. but, the methodology determines the ratio of the respondents used to determine the results of the poll.

Do you actually believe that pollsters use every single person they contact to determine the results of the poll????

THAT is laughable.
 
I'm not sure why we're arguing the validity of this poll when it is so far out of line with the other 10-15 polls I posted through the Real Clear Politics link. Every other poll is pretty to close to being within the margin of error, but this one is not. That would lend to the high likelihood that this poll isn't an accurate representation of overall public sentiment at the time it was conducted.

We don't even have to argue methodology, sample make-up, or any of the other nonsense, we just have to do a simple comparison.
 
tessaesque said:
I'm not sure why we're arguing the validity of this poll when it is so far out of line with the other 10-15 polls I posted through the Real Clear Politics link. Every other poll is pretty to close to being within the margin of error, but this one is not. That would lend to the high likelihood that this poll isn't an accurate representation of overall public sentiment at the time it was conducted.

We don't even have to argue methodology, sample make-up, or any of the other nonsense, we just have to do a simple comparison.
Click to expand...

You are correct, but it is interesting to discuss the reason that the AP poll is so off-base compared to other polls. I believe it is due to the increasingly liberal slant of AP, which is why they used poor methodology to skew the poll.
 
it is impossible to have a methodology that predetermines whether respondents are Dems or Republicans
Click to expand...

I presume you mean methods and we are not discussing the philosophy behind a particular method(s).
Nonsense.
Examples:
I want dems. I poll a college campus, avoiding the business and engineering schools. I poll an inner-city area. I poll a hippie concert.
I want repubs. I poll a business school. I poll a southern rural area. I poll small business owners.

One can do it by geography, demographics, etc.
I want birfers. I poll a TP rally.
 
danarhea said:
Here is the whole matter of skew. As a percentage of the American population, there is not going to be a 50-50 split among Democrats and Republicans - EVER. There are a crapload of Independents out there who are willing to identify with either party. Some will identify with Democrats if they perceive the president doing something very good, such as killing bin Laden. When Obama was doing poorly, some of these same Independents were identifying as Republicans, which helped the GOP gain the majority in 2010.

There is no secret to this. Pollsters don't spend time combing through records looking for clues as to who might be a Democrat or a Republican. They call a random sample, and any scientist will tell you that the larger a sample is, the more it is going to represent the population as a whole, as the margin of error becomes less. So with this poll, it looks like more Americans are identifying with Democrats than Republicans. In 2010, more Americans were identifying with Republicans than Democrats, and that could very well happen in 2012, depending on how Obama does.

In short, those who are complaining that more Democrats were called are putting up a red herring, and building a straw man, both at the same time.

I have a story for you, and it is true. My wife is very Liberal, and strongly identifies as a Democrat. In 2010, she complained that Rasmussen was purposely polling Republicans to make the Democrats look bad. I explained to her what I have posted in this thread. She wasn't buying it, of course. She IS a hyperpartisan. We have a good marriage, but when it comes to politics, we argue hard. And, sometimes, she just refuses to listen to reason. Some people in this thread are also refusing to listen to reason. Some are just like my wife, and some are even worse than my wife. To them, it is better to take the blue pill, and forget reality. The only thing in life that is important to them are the political parties that they are slaves to. To those people I say "You can keep the political slavery". I don't want it. Critical thinking, and intellectual freedom, is better than being a slave to any political party or ideology.

To sum it all up, the whole argument brought up by those complaining that AP took a biased poll can be summed up in one word....

Bullocks and dishonest.... Oops, make that 3 words.
Click to expand...

nonsense, the lot of it.

You're telling me that if I happen to call 1000 people, and by sheer blind luck I get 80% Democrats... the poll I take is not skewed to favor Democrats?
 
ecofarm said:
I presume you mean methods and we are not discussing the philosophy behind a particular method(s).
Nonsense.
Examples:
I want dems. I poll a college campus, avoiding the business and engineering schools. I poll an inner-city area. I poll a hippie concert.
I want repubs. I poll a business school. I poll a southern rural area. I poll small business owners.

One can do it by geography, demographics, etc.
I want birfers. I poll a TP rally.
Click to expand...

Not to easy to specify locations with random digit dialing.
 
I'm just sayin' it can be done. Some people seem to be saying it was.

I don't think the digits are entirely random. I don't think they can call unlisted private numbers. :shrug:
 
Whovian said:
nonsense, the lot of it.

You're telling me that if I happen to call 1000 people, and by sheer blind luck I get 80% Democrats... the poll I take is not skewed to favor Democrats?
Click to expand...

That's exactly right.

Random digit dialing doesn't guarantee a level playing field of polled individuals. If a poll would slant 80% to either side, the poll would, or should, be thrown out. It's junk. The same is true of 17%, it isn't representative of a level field and shouldn't be published. Not that AP was TRYING to sway the poll, but anyone seeing that it was slanted almost 20% in favor of one side, EITHER SIDE, should have raised red flags and said "This one is crap, let's do it again." Ain't no shame in admitting a flub up, especially a flub up caused by a computer. Just re-do it. No big deal.

But don't post the poll saying the man has a 10 point gain in popularity when you are the only one getting those results. It kinda makes you look like an idiot, ya know?
 
dontworrybehappy said:
That's exactly right.

Random digit dialing doesn't guarantee a level playing field of polled individuals. If a poll would slant 80% to either side, the poll would, or should, be thrown out. It's junk. The same is true of 17%, it isn't representative of a level field and shouldn't be published. Not that AP was TRYING to sway the poll, but anyone seeing that it was slanted almost 20% in favor of one side, EITHER SIDE, should have raised red flags and said "This one is crap, let's do it again." Ain't no shame in admitting a flub up, especially a flub up caused by a computer. Just re-do it. No big deal.

But don't post the poll saying the man has a 10 point gain in popularity when you are the only one getting those results. It kinda makes you look like an idiot, ya know?
Click to expand...




True, but the intelligent among us, would see this poll, and who was sampled, and take it and its results anomaly for exactly what it is, an anomaly....


If I have 5 weather forecasts and and the one on monday, tuesday, thursday and friday say 10 inches of snow, and wednesday's says no snow.... I'd wouldn't be so quick to put that snow shovel away.


Simple really.
 
Gill said:
Yes, the result of a question on party affiliation is a "result", but the decision to include a disproportionate number of Dems in the poll results is a "methodology".

The normal methodology is to include a ratio of Republicans, Democrats, and independents consistent with the known population.
Click to expand...

This is false and would actually lead to inaccurate results.
 
ecofarm said:
I presume you mean methods and we are not discussing the philosophy behind a particular method(s).
Nonsense.
Examples:
I want dems. I poll a college campus, avoiding the business and engineering schools. I poll an inner-city area. I poll a hippie concert.
I want repubs. I poll a business school. I poll a southern rural area. I poll small business owners.

One can do it by geography, demographics, etc.
I want birfers. I poll a TP rally.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you want to poll dems or republicans, you use qualifying questions. Early in the polling, you ask what party a person identifies with, and if they identify with the wrong party, you terminate the interview.

I spent a few months before I went into the navy doing phone polling. We had any number of polls like that. In those cases, the qualifying question was not a part of the results.
 
Gill said:
Not to easy to specify locations with random digit dialing.
Click to expand...

Again, false. The computer that picks the numbers can be given details of what sets of area codes and/or first 3 digits of phone number.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
True, but the intelligent among us, would see this poll, and who was sampled, and take it and its results anomaly for exactly what it is, an anomaly....


If I have 5 weather forecasts and and the one on monday, tuesday, thursday and friday say 10 inches of snow, and wednesday's says no snow.... I'd wouldn't be so quick to put that snow shovel away.


Simple really.
Click to expand...

Actually, the technical term is "outlier", and they are still valid. Further, in cases where the question is something that won't usually be 50/50, it is stupid to expect it to be. Even further, the result on those questions go up and down based on events. Even more further, as the source Rev provided mentions, both party affiliations are within a couple percent of the last poll done by this company. It then makes the retarded comparison to several months ago when republicans where at peak popularity and even then the results where about the same number of democrats, but significantly more republicans.

So Rev, you not want to suggest that the intelligent would do the retarded thing, since not only are you wrong based on the results of the poll, not only do you not understand the difference between methodology and results, not only are you continuing to ignore the explanation your own source mentioned was possible, but your example with the temperatures is nothing like this polls results. That is some might big fail Rev.
 
Redress said:
Actually, the technical term is "outlier", and they are still valid. Further, in cases where the question is something that won't usually be 50/50, it is stupid to expect it to be. Even further, the result on those questions go up and down based on events. Even more further, as the source Rev provided mentions, both party affiliations are within a couple percent of the last poll done by this company. It then makes the retarded comparison to several months ago when republicans where at peak popularity and even then the results where about the same number of democrats, but significantly more republicans.

So Rev, you not want to suggest that the intelligent would do the retarded thing, since not only are you wrong based on the results of the poll, not only do you not understand the difference between methodology and results, not only are you continuing to ignore the explanation your own source mentioned was possible, but your example with the temperatures is nothing like this polls results. That is some might big fail Rev.
Click to expand...



Meh, enjoy your poll redress. :shrug:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Meh, enjoy your poll redress. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Remember, they are only for sheep...except when you use them to start threads bragging about the results! And remember to throw up as many objections as possible, no matter how wrong, when the results of a poll are not what you want.
 
Redress said:
Remember, they are only for sheep...except when you use them to start threads bragging about the results! And remember to throw up as many objections as possible, no matter how wrong, when the results of a poll are not what you want.
Click to expand...




So, that's not good enough eh? you want to have a last word where you lie about my position, lie about what I post, and come after me with utter nonsense in order to try and pick a fight. Pathetic redress, really, pathetic.


As I said, enjoy your poll.
 
Without reading this thread, I'm going to guess how the thread is going:

Liberals are saying that the poll demonstrates something, conservatives say the poll either demonstrates nothing or is flawed. If this poll said that Obama's approval rating was 28%, conservatives would say the poll demonstrated something, liberals would say the poll either demonstrated nothing or was flawed.

What do you think this demonstrates about all of YOU?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So, that's not good enough eh? you want to have a last word where you lie about my position, lie about what I post, and come after me with utter nonsense in order to try and pick a fight. Pathetic redress, really, pathetic.


As I said, enjoy your poll.
Click to expand...

I only lied if I said something completely different that what I did say. Since that is not the case, no lie. Nice try though.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Without reading this thread, I'm going to guess how the thread is going:

Liberals are saying that the poll demonstrates something, conservatives say the poll either demonstrates nothing or is flawed. If this poll said that Obama's approval rating was 28%, conservatives would say the poll demonstrated something, liberals would say the poll either demonstrated nothing or was flawed.

What do you think this demonstrates about all of YOU?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. I for one never claimed the poll meant anything. I just pointed out the flaws in the objections and pointing out hypocrisy.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Without reading this thread, I'm going to guess how the thread is going:

Liberals are saying that the poll demonstrates something, conservatives say the poll either demonstrates nothing or is flawed. If this poll said that Obama's approval rating was 28%, conservatives would say the poll demonstrated something, liberals would say the poll either demonstrated nothing or was flawed.

What do you think this demonstrates about all of YOU?
Click to expand...




Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if he polled at 60+% I just think that if you have polls before and after this one showing 50% or so, that one poll at 60% that is weighted heavily with democrats should be taken with a grain of salt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom