• 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!

Poll: Trump approval sinks 5 points after Mueller report, tying all-time low

MovingPictures said:
It's really simple: impeachment takes the political pressure off yourselves, and sends it to the Senate.

When the Democrats had to vote "not guilty" on all of Bill Clinton's articles, it wasn't a good look, as even the moderates felt Clinton was "guilty", even if they didn't want him removed from office, and it's those optics Democrats should be going for with censure or impeachment.

Make the Republicans do the same and be forced to vote "not guilty", when 57% of Americans know Trump damn well is.
Click to expand...

It looks like 57% of Americans don't know a damn thing if they still stupidly think Trump colluded with the Russians like Adam Schitff is telling them.
 
Mycroft said:
I agree.

Not only are Dems oversampled but Inds are grossly undersampled.

What's amazing is that even with that edge, the questions that pertain to Dems are generally not favorable to the Dems. For example, favorability for Pelosi and Schumer...unfavorable.
Click to expand...

You are once again showing your ignorance on polling. "Oversampling" does not mean, as you imply, that the democratic opinion is weighted heavier so has to skew the outcome. "oversampling" is a technique that is used to refine the sub-sample of Democrats, which is a more heterogenous population than Republicans. They simply ask more democrats the question to understand the distinct opinions of Democratic sub-groups such as Hispanics, Blacks, Asian, Jews, the gay population, WASPs etc.... that information is then used to determine the true Democratic opinion, which is then blended into the overall poll to reflect the true clout of the Democratic vote.

Oversampling is a statistical technique used to improve precision of the final poll. It is not, as you imply, adding more Democrats to the poll in a way the distorts the outcome. You will be a better man if you are better informed. Read up!

Oversampling is used to study small groups, not bias poll results | Pew Research Center
What is the scientific rationale for oversampling in political polling? - Quora
There Is No "Oversampling" Conspiracy to Sink Donald Trump's Polls - The Atlantic
 
Last edited:
MovingPictures said:
It's really simple: impeachment takes the political pressure off yourselves, and sends it to the Senate.

When the Democrats had to vote "not guilty" on all of Bill Clinton's articles, it wasn't a good look, as even the moderates felt Clinton was "guilty", even if they didn't want him removed from office, and it's those optics Democrats should be going for with censure or impeachment.

Make the Republicans do the same and be forced to vote "not guilty", when 57% of Americans know Trump damn well is.
Click to expand...

Elizabeth Warren makes my exact argument. But, you know, smarter n’ stuff. I’ve always respected Warren, but her strong and principled stand on this has made her rise 100% in my eyes.

Elizabeth Warren on Twitter: "Last night on @maddow, I made it clear: We can’t ignore a president’s repeated efforts to obstruct an investigation into his own disloyal behavior. The House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.… https://t.co/bMBg81dRId"
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (Politico) Poll: Trump approval sinks 5 points after Mueller report, tying all-time low

[FYI - This thread replaces & supersedes my previous defective thread of the same title]

An immediate 5 points drop? I'm a bit surprised. I figured by now, Trump's numbers were more baked-in.

It's only one poll, the first I'm aware of, though the article claims other polls are reflecting similar results. So we'll just have to see, I suppose.

But we've seen Trump slump before, and he always seems to come around to that same 42% regression line. So I don't particularly think this is too bad for him. I just wish there was a deeper break-out by party & demographics. If it's Indies he lost, then perhaps he is taking a hit from the report.
Click to expand...

We shall have to wait until the weekend polls and see if this is a crack in the Wall. Trumps base is small, any two or three point crack in that wall would be a disaster.
 
Last edited:
Cardinal said:
Elizabeth Warren makes my exact argument. But, you know, smarter n’ stuff. I’ve always respected Warren, but her strong and principled stand on this has made her rise 100% in my eyes.

Elizabeth Warren on Twitter: "Last night on @maddow, I made it clear: We can’t ignore a president’s repeated efforts to obstruct an investigation into his own disloyal behavior. The House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.… https://t.co/bMBg81dRId"
Click to expand...

If the Dems are really serious about rule of law as Warren suggest I see no alternative on the committee drawing up articles of impeachment. Its about doing the right thing, to not is setting a dangerous precedent for the checks and balances.
 
Last edited:
Chomsky said:
Source: (Politico) Poll: Trump approval sinks 5 points after Mueller report, tying all-time low

[FYI - This thread replaces & supersedes my previous defective thread of the same title]

An immediate 5 points drop? I'm a bit surprised. I figured by now, Trump's numbers were more baked-in.

It's only one poll, the first I'm aware of, though the article claims other polls are reflecting similar results. So we'll just have to see, I suppose.

But we've seen Trump slump before, and he always seems to come around to that same 42% regression line. So I don't particularly think this is too bad for him. I just wish there was a deeper break-out by party & demographics. If it's Indies he lost, then perhaps he is taking a hit from the report.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't rely on individual polls for judging Trump's approval. Individual polls tend to vary a lot. Here are some polls at the same time:
YouGov 21st - 22nd: 45%.
HarrisX: 19 - 21: 45%
YouGov: 20-22: 42%
 
the harder he fights for to stop the investigation based on his own lawyer's comments under oath in congress, like his business records that he supposedly inflated, the better democrats will be able to say: "Is that the behavior of an innocent man? A man who has nothing to hide?". Why his lie about his taxes?".

Then they can show a video, saying his taxes are under audit, use that with a bit of his the Mueller report (showing him lying about the Moscow tower), show him and his spokeswoman saying the democrats are too stupid to understand his taxes and all the media he is going to give them until that date. Most of his attack ads write themselves. I am not sure how effective they will be but the ads pretty much write themselves.
 
MovingPictures said:
Impeachment hearings brings the conversation of the presidents conduct to the dinner table, where families can listen to details and matters of law, and draw their own conclusions.

Even if you don't go all the way with impeachment, that's a sound strategy for public messaging.

People have to understand and be sensitized to presidential misconduct again.
Click to expand...

You make a valid point. Many people are not going to read the report. They are getting snippets from TV were most folks get there news. To bring these folks into the House Judiciary Committe to testify publicly will bring this into Americas living room. Straight from the horses mouth. It will be wall to wall coverage even Fox will have to broadcast.
 
Peter King said:
the harder he fights for to stop the investigation based on his own lawyer's comments under oath in congress, like his business records that he supposedly inflated, the better democrats will be able to say: "Is that the behavior of an innocent man? A man who has nothing to hide?". Why his lie about his taxes?".

Then they can show a video, saying his taxes are under audit, use that with a bit of his the Mueller report (showing him lying about the Moscow tower), show him and his spokeswoman saying the democrats are too stupid to understand his taxes and all the media he is going to give them until that date. Most of his attack ads write themselves. I am not sure how effective they will be but the ads pretty much write themselves.
Click to expand...

Who ever the nominee is they must focus on there strengths. Bang the drum on healthcare and growing the middle class. Let the super pacs have the ads on negative Trump, and there is much there for ripe pickings.
 
washunut said:
Timing doesn't work. Will take the oxygen out of the room while candidates are trying to show the public why they should be the candidate. If it goes to trial in the senate, could be during the presidential campaign. It would make for great TV, CNN would love it. However would hurt any candidate trying to show why his/her policies would be better for the public.
Click to expand...

Not to mention if Trump gets out of it. It would only end up strengthening his position in all of this and making the democrats look even worse, all over again.

Challenging him on policy and the other aspects of the political arena, would be the better choice.
 
~ Polls ... Which one is right ? None are correct all the time. Maybe we look at the poll that says our side is winning ?
This one was the most accurate on 2016 elections - no so on the 2018 midterms.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday April 23 shows that 47% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove.
The latest figures include 35% who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing and 43% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -8.
 
~ Polls ... Which one is right ? None are correct all the time. Maybe we look at the poll that says our side is winning ?
This one was the most accurate on 2016 elections - no so on the 2018 midterms.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday April 23 shows that 47% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove.
The latest figures include 35% who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing and 43% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -8.
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
You are once again showing your ignorance on polling. "Oversampling" does not mean, as you imply, that the democratic opinion is weighted heavier so has to skew the outcome. "oversampling" is a technique that is used to refine the sub-sample of Democrats, which is a more heterogenous population than Republicans. They simply ask more democrats the question to understand the distinct opinions of Democratic sub-groups such as Hispanics, Blacks, Asian, Jews, the gay population, WASPs etc.... that information is then used to determine the true Democratic opinion, which is then blended into the overall poll to reflect the true clout of the Democratic vote.

Oversampling is a statistical technique used to improve precision of the final poll. It is not, as you imply, adding more Democrats to the poll in a way the distorts the outcome. You will be a better man if you are better informed. Read up!

Oversampling is used to study small groups, not bias poll results | Pew Research Center
What is the scientific rationale for oversampling in political polling? - Quora
There Is No "Oversampling" Conspiracy to Sink Donald Trump's Polls - The Atlantic
Click to expand...

From your first link:

Oversampling small groups can be difficult and costly, but it allows polls to shed light on groups that would otherwise be too small to report on.
Click to expand...

What was the "small groups" this Politico poll was intending to shed light on? Did the pollsters identify the groups they oversampled and did they give their reasoning for doing so?

Or, are you just assuming they had good reasons for grossly undersampling Independents and oversampling Democrats?

All three of your articles justify oversampling when the poll is designed to show results for small groups. This Politico poll, according to the quote in the OP, is designed to show results for "of voters". Voters is hardly a "small group" that requires any kind of over or under sampling. If they want a true representative sample of subgroups of the "of voters", say...Democrats (hardly a "small group" themselves), then their sampling of Democrats in relation to their sampling of Republicans and Independents should have been more in line with national numbers for those large groups.

If Politico was intending to give poll results for, say, Hispanic Democrats they should have provided sampling numbers for that demographic. They didn't. They should also have identified the results by that demographic. They didn't. In fact, they didn't identify any subgroups in the poll numbers...not even whether the answers to questions were from Dems or Reps. It was just "of voters".

Now, your objection and attempts to justify use of oversampling is okay...when talking about polls in general...as long as those polls meet the reasoning given for justifiable oversampling. In this case, we are talking about a specific poll...this Politico poll...and there is no indication that this poll meets the reasoning you've presented in those articles.
 
Only ONE POLL really matters and that POLL will not take place until November 3rd, 2020.

But it sure is fun and entertaining playing with all those intermediary Polls in the meant time, isn't it?

Case in point.

Congressional overall Approval Rating at the time of the 2018 Mid Term Election was Approximately 15%

That means 85% of those Polled Disapproved of the job that Democrats + Republicans were doing in Congress.

Yet the Reelection Rates for Congressional Incumbents in the 2018 Mid Term Elections are as follows:

Democrat Incumbent Reelection Rate in the House in 2018
98.9%
Democratic Incumbent Reelection Rate in the Senate in 2018
82.7%

Republican Incumbent Reelection Rate in the House in 2018
84.7%
Republican Incumbent Reelection Rate in the Senate in 2018
80%

So one can see that non Election Day Polls don’t really tell us what the American Electorate will do on Election Day.
Click to expand...
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (Politico) Poll: Trump approval sinks 5 points after Mueller report, tying all-time low

[FYI - This thread replaces & supersedes my previous defective thread of the same title]

An immediate 5 points drop? I'm a bit surprised. I figured by now, Trump's numbers were more baked-in.

It's only one poll, the first I'm aware of, though the article claims other polls are reflecting similar results. So we'll just have to see, I suppose.

But we've seen Trump slump before, and he always seems to come around to that same 42% regression line. So I don't particularly think this is too bad for him. I just wish there was a deeper break-out by party & demographics. If it's Indies he lost, then perhaps he is taking a hit from the report.
Click to expand...

Here's something else that might interest you that I just received this AM. "Trump Job Approval Slightly Improved in Ninth Quarter"

Trump Job Approval Slightly Improved in Ninth Quarter

Gallup has always been a couple of points lower than the RCP averages. Even so, further down it list the 9th quater averages of all presidents going back to Nixon.
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (Politico) Poll: Trump approval sinks 5 points after Mueller report, tying all-time low

[FYI - This thread replaces & supersedes my previous defective thread of the same title]

An immediate 5 points drop? I'm a bit surprised. I figured by now, Trump's numbers were more baked-in.

It's only one poll, the first I'm aware of, though the article claims other polls are reflecting similar results. So we'll just have to see, I suppose.

But we've seen Trump slump before, and he always seems to come around to that same 42% regression line. So I don't particularly think this is too bad for him. I just wish there was a deeper break-out by party & demographics. If it's Indies he lost, then perhaps he is taking a hit from the report.
Click to expand...

Here's a yougov poll dated 16 Apr which does break it down via party and demographics. YouGov will come out with a new one tomorrow. yougov also gives you the breakdown for Trump's approval/disapproval into the strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove, strongly disapprove and not sure. Question 55 covers Trump's approval ratings.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/egvqvgp5a7/econTabReport.pdf

Question 51A will give you Trump's favorable/unfavorable ratings, 68 run for reelection, 48 the generic presidential vote along with all the announced Democratic presidential candidates, congressional leaders and a whole lot more to include all the issues.

What I like to do at time is compare Trump's numbers to his election day numbers and to the numbers at the end of January 2017 after he was inaugurated.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/l37rosbwjp/econTabReport_lv.pdf


http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/pyonz5d0lq/econTabReport.pdf
 
Last edited:
Chomsky said:
Source: (Politico) Poll: Trump approval sinks 5 points after Mueller report, tying all-time low

[FYI - This thread replaces & supersedes my previous defective thread of the same title]

An immediate 5 points drop? I'm a bit surprised. I figured by now, Trump's numbers were more baked-in.

It's only one poll, the first I'm aware of, though the article claims other polls are reflecting similar results. So we'll just have to see, I suppose.

But we've seen Trump slump before, and he always seems to come around to that same 42% regression line. So I don't particularly think this is too bad for him. I just wish there was a deeper break-out by party & demographics. If it's Indies he lost, then perhaps he is taking a hit from the report.
Click to expand...


Politico ... Huh. What Edward Bernays { Father of Public Relations } would consider
" Engineering Consent " using the Media to drive an Ideological Agenda. To use Propaganda by all means
as part of Society's anatomy." The Masses MUST be shephered and managed for their own good
and betterment of Society. " Politico Lives up to that molding of being Propagandized to.
 
Cardinal said:
Elizabeth Warren makes my exact argument. But, you know, smarter n’ stuff. I’ve always respected Warren, but her strong and principled stand on this has made her rise 100% in my eyes.

Elizabeth Warren on Twitter: "Last night on @maddow, I made it clear: We can’t ignore a president’s repeated efforts to obstruct an investigation into his own disloyal behavior. The House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.… https://t.co/bMBg81dRId"
Click to expand...
Ask yourself this question, Cardinal: why did George Bush win the 1988 election after Iran-Contra, while Gore lost in 2000 after Lewinsky?

Because the Democratic party was too afraid of impeaching grand pappy Reagan and his "Aw, shucks!" routine, and because of no impeachment hearing, the public perceived that the vice president had done nothing wrong.

Meanwhile, the Republicans capitalized on Lewinsky and held Clinton to the strictest standard. Impeachment wasn’t popular in the beginning, but with time the public recognized that he did create grounds for impeachment, even if the Republicans were indeed out to get him. Becoming only the second president impeached in history was a black eye for Gore’s campaign, and opened the door for Bush to become the candidate that would restore honor and norms to the WH.

Impeachment worked long term for Republicans in the big picture. That's because being the party that's trying to restore law and integrity is a good campaign pitch.
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (Politico) Poll: Trump approval sinks 5 points after Mueller report, tying all-time low

[FYI - This thread replaces & supersedes my previous defective thread of the same title]

An immediate 5 points drop? I'm a bit surprised. I figured by now, Trump's numbers were more baked-in.

It's only one poll, the first I'm aware of, though the article claims other polls are reflecting similar results. So we'll just have to see, I suppose.

But we've seen Trump slump before, and he always seems to come around to that same 42% regression line. So I don't particularly think this is too bad for him. I just wish there was a deeper break-out by party & demographics. If it's Indies he lost, then perhaps he is taking a hit from the report.
Click to expand...

It's still higher than Obama's all time low.
 
Mycroft said:
From your first link:



What was the "small groups" this Politico poll was intending to shed light on? Did the pollsters identify the groups they oversampled and did they give their reasoning for doing so?

Or, are you just assuming they had good reasons for grossly undersampling Independents and oversampling Democrats?

All three of your articles justify oversampling when the poll is designed to show results for small groups. This Politico poll, according to the quote in the OP, is designed to show results for "of voters". Voters is hardly a "small group" that requires any kind of over or under sampling. If they want a true representative sample of subgroups of the "of voters", say...Democrats (hardly a "small group" themselves), then their sampling of Democrats in relation to their sampling of Republicans and Independents should have been more in line with national numbers for those large groups.

If Politico was intending to give poll results for, say, Hispanic Democrats they should have provided sampling numbers for that demographic. They didn't. They should also have identified the results by that demographic. They didn't. In fact, they didn't identify any subgroups in the poll numbers...not even whether the answers to questions were from Dems or Reps. It was just "of voters".

Now, your objection and attempts to justify use of oversampling is okay...when talking about polls in general...as long as those polls meet the reasoning given for justifiable oversampling. In this case, we are talking about a specific poll...this Politico poll...and there is no indication that this poll meets the reasoning you've presented in those articles.
Click to expand...

Let's see if I can better illustrate my point..... Let's say we have a sample of 1000. In that sample size it is determined that 390 need to be Democrats to reflect the population and their proclivity to vote*. The problem is that "Democrats" are comprised of multiple subgroups more so than Republicans. If 10% of the Democratic vote is Hispanic, for example, merely polling 39 Hispanics will tend to give you a distortion of how Hispanics will vote (its not a valid sample).... so, to understand the 39 votes that are Hispanic, they do a full survey of Hispanic votes, maybe drawing 100-200 Hispanics (repeat for other subgroups) That sub-sample, however, exists ONLY to give us a good read on the 39 Hispanic votes. It does NOT effect the outcome of the overall poll, it is only there to give us better precision within the poll.

https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/190452_crosstabs_POLITICO_RVs_v2_AP.pdf

* - Where polls go askew, and where you may have a point, is in the determination of likely voters. That one is very hard to nail, as "likely voters" shift with the wind. If one side excites their voters more than expected, they can beat the polls.

Opinion polls are easy - you just survey a population. They can usually be done with impressive precision. Election polls, however, are difficult as you have to take an opinion poll and THEN project the likelihood of the subgroups actually voting.

The oversampling, however, is generally their to add precision to the opinion aspect of the poll, not the forecast of likely voters.
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
Let's see if I can better illustrate my point..... Let's say we have a sample of 1000. In that sample size it is determined that 390 need to be Democrats to reflect the population and their proclivity to vote*. The problem is that "Democrats" are comprised of multiple subgroups more so than Republicans. If 10% of the Democratic vote is Hispanic, for example, merely polling 39 Hispanics will tend to give you a distortion of how Hispanics will vote (its not a valid sample).... so, to understand the 39 votes that are Hispanic, they do a full survey of Hispanic votes, maybe drawing 100-200 Hispanics (repeat for other subgroups) That sub-sample, however, exists ONLY to give us a good read on the 39 Hispanic votes. It does NOT effect the outcome of the overall poll, it is only there to give us better precision within the poll.

https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/190452_crosstabs_POLITICO_RVs_v2_AP.pdf
Click to expand...

Well, perhaps you can show me in the Respondent Demographics Summary where this poll did anything like what you describe. I don't see it. I mean, you can make any assumption you like...but without something to justify it, that's all you are doing...making an assumption.

On the other hand, the demographics they present are very clear about party affiliation of the people they sampled.

* - Where polls go askew, and where you may have a point, is in the determination of likely voters. That one is very hard to nail, as "likely voters" shift with the wind. If one side excites their voters more than expected, they can beat the polls.
Click to expand...

This is a non-issue. The poll clearly states "This poll was conducted from April 19-21, 2019, among a national sample of 1992 Registered Voters."

Opinion polls are easy - you just survey a population. They can usually be done with impressive precision. Election polls, however, are difficult as you have to take an opinion poll and THEN project the likelihood of the subgroups actually voting.

The oversampling, however, is generally their to add precision to the opinion aspect of the poll, not the forecast of likely voters.
Click to expand...

Again, give me evidence this is what they did.

I don't see any "small group" identified in the poll results.
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (Politico) Poll: Trump approval sinks 5 points after Mueller report, tying all-time low

[FYI - This thread replaces & supersedes my previous defective thread of the same title]

An immediate 5 points drop? I'm a bit surprised. I figured by now, Trump's numbers were more baked-in.

It's only one poll, the first I'm aware of, though the article claims other polls are reflecting similar results. So we'll just have to see, I suppose.

But we've seen Trump slump before, and he always seems to come around to that same 42% regression line. So I don't particularly think this is too bad for him. I just wish there was a deeper break-out by party & demographics. If it's Indies he lost, then perhaps he is taking a hit from the report.
Click to expand...

A Politico polls? :lamo
 
I hope Democrats continue to believe their fake echo chamber polls in 2020 like they did in 2016.

You may notice NONE of these polls have any linkage to the electoral college, so all are worthless. Sure, sample 1900 voters in San Francisco and NYC as it shows Trump getting smashed in the election. I hope Democrats again make all their strategies around their own feel-good fake polls like they did in 2016.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom