namelesstavern.net

liberal media lol

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192468,00.html

NEW YORK — More Americans disapprove than approve of how George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Congress are doing their jobs, while a majority approves of Condoleezza Rice. President Bush’s approval hits a record low of 33 percent this week, clearly damaged by sinking support among Republicans.

Opinions are sharply divided on whether Rumsfeld should resign as secretary of defense. In addition, views on the economy are glum; most Americans rate the current economy negatively, and twice as many say it feels like the economy is getting worse rather than better. These are just some of the findings of the latest FOX News national poll.

President Bush’s job approval rating slipped this week and stands at a new low of 33 percent approve, down from 36 percent two weeks ago and 39 percent in mid-March. A year ago this time, 47 percent approved and two years ago 50 percent approved (April 2004).

Yes, but what about Clinton?

He's about as important as Canada.

labbats wrote:He's about as important as Canada.

This gives me an opportunity to post a funny :

Forgive me for my ignorance, but where do they come up with the numbers for these approval ratings? I don't recall ever once being asked whether or not I approve of the president (by anyone "official"), so I'm curious how they come up with these approval ratings.

often they call and ask a bunch of people and extrapolate. Thats where you get the whole the poll is right 85% of the time, 9 times out of 10

I know I get called all the time from people wanting to do surveys

I've been called several times for polls and surveys like that.

Snero wrote:often they call and ask a bunch of people and extrapolate. Thats where you get the whole the poll is right 85% of the time, 9 times out of 10

I know I get called all the time from people wanting to do surveys

Yes. Tried and true, very accurate probability math and math for large groups.

But part of the conservative attack plan : When something you disagree with happens, like a poll, or evidence for evolution, question the science and data behind it.

By the way, Bush's approval rating has been in the toilet for a full year. You apologists gonna question every poll taken for an entire year?

mofish wrote:

Snero wrote:often they call and ask a bunch of people and extrapolate. Thats where you get the whole the poll is right 85% of the time, 9 times out of 10

I know I get called all the time from people wanting to do surveys

Yes. Tried and true, very accurate probability math and math for large groups.

But part of the conservative attack plan : When something you disagree with happens, like a poll, or evidence for evolution, question the science and data behind it.

By the way, Bush's approval rating has been in the toilet for a full year. You apologists gonna question every poll taken for an entire year?

Yes, but what about Clinton.

that or do what a lot of people here seem to like doing

Bush umpopular or did something stupid? lets bring up clinton, or kerry or gore and turn it into a right vs left debate


(not saying people didn't do the same during the last election with kerry though)

His real approval rating is probably more like 20%. Luckily he has sheep like Kahar and Martrae to keep it above 20%

Bush has done a terrible job for years. People are just now taking notice?

Despite Zan's attempt to accuse me of switching sides I am not now nor have ever been a conservative / republican. I've always hated the chimp n chief and the GOP as a whole.

mofish wrote:liberal media lol

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192468,00.html

NEW YORK — More Americans disapprove than approve of how George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Congress are doing their jobs, while a majority approves of Condoleezza Rice. President Bush’s approval hits a record low of 33 percent this week, clearly damaged by sinking support among Republicans.

Opinions are sharply divided on whether Rumsfeld should resign as secretary of defense. In addition, views on the economy are glum; most Americans rate the current economy negatively, and twice as many say it feels like the economy is getting worse rather than better. These are just some of the findings of the latest FOX News national poll.

President Bush’s job approval rating slipped this week and stands at a new low of 33 percent approve, down from 36 percent two weeks ago and 39 percent in mid-March. A year ago this time, 47 percent approved and two years ago 50 percent approved (April 2004).

I'm happy to see that you went to a reliable news source. Good job.

Mindia wrote:I'm happy to see that you went to a reliable news source. Good job.

It's true, you can absolutely rely on it being complete garbage.

So it's a group of people who call households and ask how they feel about the president rather than one of those stupid news "Call in now and tell us how you feel!" surveys? The latter seems like it would be horribly skewed, as the only people who call in would be the ones who had very strong feelings about the subject.

Anyway, maybe one day I'll get my chance to be part of the population that the approval rating is based on

Tacks wrote:His real approval rating is probably more like 20%. Luckily he has sheep like Kahar and Martrae to keep it above 20%

Did you ever stop to think that people vote for candidates for various reasons, one being that they don't want to see the opponent in office no matter what? Kerry is a disgrace, and his presidency would have been a disaster. Bush was the definite better choice for president. That's why he won the majority of the American voters, and that's also why he won in the electoral college. There's nothing sheepish about that.

Diekan wrote:Bush has done a terrible job for years. People are just now taking notice?

Despite Zan's attempt to accuse me of switching sides I am not now nor have ever been a conservative / republican. I've always hated the chimp n chief and the GOP as a whole.

Your opinion has changed a lot in the last few years Deik, even if your political "side" remains the same.

Yes, they call about 1000 randomly selected people and ask them their opinions. At a sample size of 1000, the margin for error statistically is about 3-5% or so. The reasons for how the margin for error work are long and very math-heavy, and involve calculus and understanding statistical mathematics. Not going to reproduce all of it here, especially as I'd have to go look them up again in my statistics text, cause I don't remember it off the top of my head. heh.

The important thing to keep in mind is that it's a curve. 500 people is about a 5-7% margin for error, but you need to go to like 5000 people to drop from 3-5% to 2-3%. So, the most common sample sizes are 500-1000 people or so. Any publishing of poll numbers that's reputable will list its sample size and the margin for error, usually at the very end of the article, you just need to know to look for it.

-Arlos

the views on the economy are proof that people are idiots
the economy is actually BETTER today then it was under clinton

Mindia wrote:

Tacks wrote:His real approval rating is probably more like 20%. Luckily he has sheep like Kahar and Martrae to keep it above 20%

Did you ever stop to think that people vote for candidates for various reasons, one being that they don't want to see the opponent in office no matter what? Kerry is a disgrace, and his presidency would have been a disaster. Bush was the definite better choice for president. That's why he won the majority of the American voters, and that's also why he won in the electoral college. There's nothing sheepish about that.

Well Lyion saying Bush is one of the greatest presidents of all time kinda does make you wonder what they're putting in the water down there in Ohio.

Zanchief wrote:

Mindia wrote:I'm happy to see that you went to a reliable news source. Good job.

It's true, you can absolutely rely on it being complete garbage.

How is it garbage? Seriously. Compare FOX News with CNN, NBC, ABC, etc. I can point out plenty of examples that prove CNN and their ilk are liberally-biased. I stopped watching CNN when I heard that assclown Wolf Blitzer make several negative comments about the republicans. I also heard Katie Couric of NBC (who is switching to the CBS nightly news) also make retarded comments against republicans and conservatives, while at the same time lauding the efforts of her liberal social elitist friends. That's not liberal bias? Go ahead, chump. Show us how FOX News is "garbage" when I've just proven how the alternate news sources are the true "garbage."

you just did the same thing as you always do with clinton

zanchief did not mention the alternatives in any way, he did not say the other sources were better, or unbiased

Zanchief wrote:

Mindia wrote:

Tacks wrote:His real approval rating is probably more like 20%. Luckily he has sheep like Kahar and Martrae to keep it above 20%

Did you ever stop to think that people vote for candidates for various reasons, one being that they don't want to see the opponent in office no matter what? Kerry is a disgrace, and his presidency would have been a disaster. Bush was the definite better choice for president. That's why he won the majority of the American voters, and that's also why he won in the electoral college. There's nothing sheepish about that.

Well Lyion saying Bush is one of the greatest presidents of all time kinda does make you wonder what they're putting in the water down there in Ohio.

Bush had the opportunity to be one of the best presidents, at least in the last 40 years or so, but he missed his mark. If he would have sent in more troops and waged a larger and more aggressive campaign against the Iraqi insurgency to do the job right, and strengthened the border between the U.S. and Mexico, he would have had a shot at that title. But, he blew it. There's still some time left for Bush to "make good" on his screw-ups, but he's too soft and has made too many poor choices, so I'm not going to hold my breath.

Are there any news sources that are "objective"?

Snero wrote:you just did the same thing as you always do with clinton

zanchief did not mention the alternatives in any way, he did not say the other sources were better, or unbiased

Not in that post, but he has before. Besides, that's side-stepping the issue.