Man, this must really make the trumptards crazy. A news outlet trashing trump.

It ebbs and it flows.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/fox...7BNZQrjmVPQ1TUoPNFwH

Maybe pick a competent polling organization.

https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org

Polling is all bullshit, like everything in American politics!

Every has an axe to grind!

Not one iota of honesty to be found!

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:
Maybe pick a competent polling organization.

https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org

Uh huh. You mean one that agrees with your version of trump? It's hard to find one outside of FOX.

https://www.newsweek.com/donal...update-polls-2091964

https://www.economist.com/inte...ump-approval-tracker

https://www.rasmussenreports.c...ne30#google_vignette

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3924

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:
Maybe pick a competent polling organization.

https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org

Uh huh. You mean one that agrees with your version of trump? It's hard to find one outside of FOX.

https://www.newsweek.com/donal...update-polls-2091964

https://www.economist.com/inte...ump-approval-tracker

https://www.rasmussenreports.c...ne30#google_vignette

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3924

Mike- The only polling that you inked with any credibility is Rasmussen. I picked Trafalgar's poll, simply because he was the only one who got the election right.

Rasmussen show's Trump at 51%-48% approval/disapproval.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:
Maybe pick a competent polling organization.

https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org

Uh huh. You mean one that agrees with your version of trump? It's hard to find one outside of FOX.

https://www.newsweek.com/donal...update-polls-2091964

https://www.economist.com/inte...ump-approval-tracker

https://www.rasmussenreports.c...ne30#google_vignette

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3924

Mike- The only polling that you inked with any credibility is Rasmussen. I picked Trafalgar's poll, simply because he was the only one who got the election right.

Rasmussen show's Trump at 51%-48% approval/disapproval.

Per my earlier comment: the only poll you believe has any credibility is the only poll that doesn't show trump upside down on approval ratings.

How could that be?

More polling regarding trump.....all showing almost universal disapproval. Total of 15 polling entities. Three show approval for trump.

Steve, you're in la-la land.

https://www.nytimes.com/intera...al-rating-polls.html

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
More polling regarding trump.....all showing almost universal disapproval. Total of 15 polling entities. Three show approval for trump.

Steve, you're in la-la land.

https://www.nytimes.com/intera...al-rating-polls.html

And all those polls showed Harris beating Trump, soundly. La-la-la

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
More polling regarding trump.....all showing almost universal disapproval. Total of 15 polling entities. Three show approval for trump.

Steve, you're in la-la land.

https://www.nytimes.com/intera...al-rating-polls.html

And all those polls showed Harris beating Trump, soundly. La-la-la

You'll need to provide something more than la-la-la to support that statement. I recall very few polls showing Harris beating trump soundly. In fact, almost all were within the margin of error.

Trafalger missed it in 2020, we do know that. And fucked the 2022 mid-terms up almost beyond belief, we know that too.

To both of you-

What do approval polls do?

They are not going to mystically change who is in charge.

While my view of Trump is that he can change his mind based on polls, the polls are only ones he agrees with.

So all these polls really are for is to generate funding for political causes and lobbyists… who already get too much and generate controversy for their own reasons.

While a poll can tell you something, they are way too easy to manipulate by their methodology and generally are used to find an answer the pollster wants.

They are a snap shot of the voting populace reaction to policy.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
They are a snap shot of the voting populace reaction to policy .

they provide an opinion difference of a (not random) subset of population of their opinion/sentiment of highly curated questions to achieve the goals of the pollster, without any agreed upon methodology or repeatability of outcomes. But it sells ads

Snap shot of the populace reaction to policy.

Ideally, yes.

Actually, no.

The closest thing to an accurate poll is the election results. Even then there is a large portion that just does not respond.

The goal is supposed to be what you say, but given that polls by two groups of the same populace at the same time give different results, it obviously is not that accurate.

There are a lot of ways they go awry, and from what I hear, the internal polls are generally more accurate- which says something of the actual goals of these reported polls.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Snap shot of the populace reaction to policy.

I done corrected you. You are confused with a trvial subset of all poll types. Such as, asking preferred candidate, even when same party and poltics. I get it, you didnt take higher maths and didnt have to create polls as a formal subject area of study.

Let me simplfy.. we have all heard "all square are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares" as an example of specific rules don't fit all cases of general rules. In this case, your statement is all rectangles are 1cm x1cm gray squares. See how that doesn't work?

You further dismissed the rethoric and rubric of the polls and designers.

Your example would only be correct if you said "some polls are on policy" most polls aren't, and a good deal of fully political polls have nothing to do with policy, rather than popularity.

It is amazingly rare for participants to offer their rationale (these are generally called verbatums) and are only used for color not sentiment

Let me simplify.

Your rambling are unconvincing.

Do these numbers matter? They do not today. However, come election time of these numbers hold or expend, they will matter.

They are a snap shot in time as to what the body politic thinks of policy.

Will they care 8 months from now? I’m betting they do because rural hospitals and med centers hire folks because of billing Medicaid.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Let me simplify.

Your rambling are unconvincing.

Do these numbers matter? They do not today. However, come election time of these numbers hold or expend, they will matter.

They are a snap shot in time as to what the body politic thinks of policy.

Will they care 8 months from now? I’m betting they do because rural hospitals and med centers hire folks because of billing Medicaid.

Only rambling because you refuse to take simple correction and have a history of moving goal posts. Like the post above.


You were incorrect, but without benefit of correction. You are now willfully incorrect.. a friend of mine preaches that process matters. Here's the process.

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-results


No one is showing this piece of policy to be supported by the body politic.

Vote for it and Trump and wear it on the election. Like President Biden wore the economy per the polls.

There is no room on Trump GOP fit compromise, decent, independence.

Okay, cave. You may keep a primary challenge at bay, but the general still plays. Not in all states, but maybe enough.

Rs in places like California, NY, parts of GA, and NC. Folks are not on support of this bill.

There objections have merit.

It will affect rural healthcare.

I am not a debt hawk. I’m against claiming you will break the debt, expand the debt, and partially fund tax breaks they affect none of us by hurting our most vulnerable.

You can keep defending Trump policy, and telling us that these polls are not representative. You are wrong.

If it passes, will folks care 6 months from now? Maybe.

This passing is a gift.

A swing state Senator just told the caucus this will lead to an electoral purge. Why? That Senator understands polls. See Sen. Tillis.

Some in Congress and the White House will lie about the bill.


It is time to stand up to MAGA from the top down and past time.

Pass this, and give the Dems the anchor to tie around your neck next general.

Things matter more than winning a primary. Things matter more than winning a primary for Senate.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

You can keep defending Trump policy, and telling us that these polls are not representative. You are wrong.

1 no.
2 holy plot twist... wow, what a spectacular moving of the goal posts. Bold move, cotton, let's see how it works out for him.

Lheym you went from the general (what are polls for) to the specific (what does this particular poll tell us and why).

Polls in general are supposed to gather information about a population in an estimate form, but usually what a poll is for is obscured because there is a desired outcome and bias creeps in- as well as significant issues truly getting a representative sample.

True, what comes up at a different time may be due to changes of the collective opinion more than poll error.

But my fundamental sarcastic question remains- what is the purpose of these polls. It certainly isn’t to inform anyone.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:
Maybe pick a competent polling organization.

https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org

Maybe pick a poll you like and call it competent.

It was in the news feeds today that republicans are looking cut an additional 312-313 billion from medicare.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Lheym you went from the general (what are polls for) to the specific (what does this particular poll tell us and why).

Polls in general are supposed to gather information about a population in an estimate form, but usually what a poll is for is obscured because there is a desired outcome and bias creeps in- as well as significant issues truly getting a representative sample.

True, what comes up at a different time may be due to changes of the collective opinion more than poll error.

But my fundamental sarcastic question remains- what is the purpose of these polls. It certainly isn’t to inform anyone.

Very simple, this is a snap shot. If this snap shot on this policy holds, the general looks bad for the GOP if they pass this bill. Sen. Tillis reads the polls as such. Sen. McConnell says come that time no one will care.

A good example is the ACA. Blue Dawg Dems lined up to vote for that thing against the polls. The general was not kind to them.

Pass it, ruin Medicaid, hurt funding for health care, and lose.

Blow up the debt so Jeff Brazos can pay for more Italian weddings while crashing the working class and Lowe. Reduce his cooperate tax requirements while folks lose buying power. Go ahead, make a new voting block for Dems.

This and tariffs are not the policies that brought Trump to power. He will destroy his slim majorities pushing this if folks care come election time like they do now.

Those who want to engage in class warfare from the Right are hoping to do it early. The matter bring cold come election.

Everything is linked. It all follows.

The goal of this bill is to allow a class to have even less responsibility to fund our legislative commitments while the rest bear the brunt.

Trump is destroying economic security, buying power that the Biden Administration reestablished following lockdowns. That hits your feelings, go cry to someone else.

Horse hucky.

The purpose of this poll, as you are admitting is to try and convince the currently elected folks that what they are trying to do is not good for their political future.

It has nothing to do with a snapshot of political approval.

Remember - Medicare is for the retirees.

Medicaid is for the US citizen indigent. You yourself told us how many times that illegals do not get any government aid?

Now we are finding out just how much of our tax dollars are going to fund illegals (and de facto subsidizing labor for the rich...)

Blow up the debt so Jeff Brazos can pay for more Italian weddings while crashing the working class and Lowe. Reduce his cooperate tax requirements while folks lose buying power. Go ahead, make a new voting block for Dems.

Is this saying you feel that your taxes are paying for Brazo's wedding? I already pay from what you have been saying here a lot more taxes than you do, yet you seem to go hunting as much as I do and buy some pretty nice stuff. Yet your continual refrain is raise MY taxes.

Lets go to a flat tax and not give carve out tax breaks.

This really has nothing to do with an approval poll. It seems to have more to do with what you think is causing the numbers.

Biden didn't reestablish squat. If he hadn't let people go back to normal (dragging his feet the whole time) there would have been a real insurrection. Biden's (and Trump's) throwing money to folks for not doing anything while shutting down most of the economy for over a year was the single biggest cause of the hyperinflation we had and your quoted loss of economic security and buying power.

Of course that doesn't mean that Trump is really fixing anything either.

My vote for Bill the Cat is looking more responsible all the time.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Lheym you went from the general (what are polls for) to the specific (what does this particular poll tell us and why).

Polls in general are supposed to gather information about a population in an estimate form, but usually what a poll is for is obscured because there is a desired outcome and bias creeps in- as well as significant issues truly getting a representative sample.

True, what comes up at a different time may be due to changes of the collective opinion more than poll error.

But my fundamental sarcastic question remains- what is the purpose of these polls. It certainly isn’t to inform anyone.

Very simple, this is a snap shot. If this snap shot on this policy holds, the general looks bad for the GOP if they pass this bill. Sen. Tillis reads the polls as such. Sen. McConnell says come that time no one will care.

A good example is the ACA. Blue Dawg Dems lined up to vote for that thing against the polls. The general was not kind to them.

Pass it, ruin Medicaid, hurt funding for health care, and lose.

Blow up the debt so Jeff Brazos can pay for more Italian weddings while crashing the working class and Lowe. Reduce his cooperate tax requirements while folks lose buying power. Go ahead, make a new voting block for Dems.

This and tariffs are not the policies that brought Trump to power. He will destroy his slim majorities pushing this if folks care come election time like they do now.

Those who want to engage in class warfare from the Right are hoping to do it early. The matter bring cold come election.

Everything is linked. It all follows.

The goal of this bill is to allow a class to have even less responsibility to fund our legislative commitments while the rest bear the brunt.

Trump is destroying economic security, buying power that the Biden Administration reestablished following lockdowns. That hits your feelings, go cry to someone else.

It says what it says. My tax burden percentage is much higher than the group he represents.

Like Trump told us, “I pay single digits because I’m smart. Change the tax code. But you won’t.”

Well, Trump did, or is trying to, to reduce the tax liability even further while providing no benefit to workers. At least, President Regan tried to reel in cooperate welfare. Look up his attempt to break cooperate right offs.


My taxes support our nation. Jeff Brazos and his ilk, like the First Estate in France, are not. You want to give them more tax breaks, for little benefit to creating jobs, increase the debt, and harm rural health providers, you and the rest of the mariachi right ahead.

It is an economic policy that is anthesis to what got the GOP elected. It is harmful to the majority of US citizens to the benefit of a few.

Trump is destroying economic security, buying power that the Biden Administration reestablished following lockdowns. That hits your feelings, go cry to someone else.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/r...d%20Payment%20Reform's%20report%20found,being%20at%20%22immediate%20risk.%22

300 Rural Hospitals, not counting rural healthcare clinics that act as doctor’s offices and er extenders now, at risk. That is okay, workers lose health insurance, children go hungry (SNAP), and major corporations paying ceos millions of dollars get more tax relief.

quote:

It is an economic policy that is anthesis to what got the GOP elected. It is harmful to the majority of US citizens to the benefit of a few.

I wonder about that.

IMO, the promise of harm for the sake of itself is what got the GOP elected. The "benefit" for the average GOPer was deemed to be the satisfaction of harming "them" in the us vs them scenario, the zero-sum of it, less for "them", more for "us".

Yes, I believe Trumpism is that sick.

Actually, it was all predictable. The authors and promoters of project 2025 told us in advance.

I don't understand Musk. If he is so smart then how did he get himself so deep into this mess, only after the fact wake up?

I read that he's given up on his Mars dream. Maybe now he can come down to earth, realizing there's nowhere else to go.

I was gonna say - like the rest of us, but that's not the case. Many Trump supporters think they have reservations in the clouds.

Trumpster Christian Nationalist's theme song:

https://youtu.be/swIcX57vYDI?si=nDegl3G1A6vN0jwx&t=10

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/r...d%20Payment%20Reform's%20report%20found,being%20at%20%22immediate%20risk.%22

300 Rural Hospitals, not counting rural healthcare clinics that act as doctor’s offices and er extenders now, at risk. That is okay, workers lose health insurance, children go hungry (SNAP), and major corporations paying ceos millions of dollars get more tax relief.

Senate dems voted down an amendment to double rural medical funding AND increase taxes on those earning over $25m. Go get em, tiger

Too much Fox and other bias confirmation:

quote:

Senate dems voted down an amendment to double rural medical funding AND increase taxes on those earning over $25m

https://www.google.com/search?...sclient=gws-wiz-serp

False. The claim that "Senate Dems voted down an amendment to double rural medical funding AND increase taxes on those earning over $25m" is a simplification that misrepresents what happened in the Senate.
Here's a breakdown of the actual situation:

(see the link)

Maggie, all but 4 dems voted against it. It was a tight, small amendment, not quite 1 page, but addressed doubling rural medical funding and raises taxes on super high income. These are facts.
Both the majority of NO votes were dems AND the 90+% of dems voted NO

Spin it however you want, spin doctor

quote:

These are facts.

Didn't you once upon a time argue that partial facts are lies?

Hummm

Go ahead, jeffee, man-up, own your false, distracting, what-about-them claim and apologize.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Go ahead, jeffee, man-up, own your false claim and apologize.

So, i have to ask.. is your condition congenital, injury, disease, or drug induced?

NOTHING i said was incorrect, in the least. Your spin would be interesting, 1,000 attempts ago

Speaking of actions after a false claim, we are waiting, we are waiting for you to
"Man up"

Good luck, we know it will be hard for you.

Will they next post be more spin or ignored post?

Will these increases offset the loss?

That is unknown snd not worth the risk to reward of this legislation.

Jeffe,

I see. So you think it's okay to give partial facts and claim that represents whole truth?

That's a rhetorical question, since you have demonstrated that so many times already.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Will these increases offset the loss?

That is unknown snd not worth the risk to reward of this legislation.

They cooked the books to smoke-screen this legislation already.

There is no reason whatsoever to think the smoke will clear.

"Where there's smoke, there's fire."

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Maggie, all but 4 dems voted against it. It was a tight, small amendment, not quite 1 page, but addressed doubling rural medical funding and raises taxes on super high income. These are facts.
Both the majority of NO votes were dems AND the 90+% of dems voted NO

Please point out one incorrect fact, just one. Further question, had the dems voted yes, would it have passed ?

Yeah.
Whatever

quote:

Please point out one incorrect fact, just one. Further question, had the dems voted yes, would it have passed ?

I didn't bother to dispute the facts you stated. That's because I established that they were partial, at best. That alone is enough to defeat your claim of (whole) truth.

If you had said - "here's some partial facts, which I'm using to draw whole truth and make equivalence", then you would have been truthful, but wrong.

Instead you are both not truthful and wrong.

Also, I'm sure you got that partial info and distressed claim from somewhere, obviously unreliable.

And you continue to miss the point with, "had the dems voted yes, would it have passed?"

You are/were making some sort of false equivalence out of partial truths. It's SOP, GOPerish.

Another thing that's SOP with you is distracting from the thread.

I'm about done arguing with you on this.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Please point out one incorrect fact, just one. Further question, had the dems voted yes, would it have passed ?

I didn't bother to dispute the facts you stated. ....

I'm about done arguing with you on this.

Because you can't.

I wonder if these Medicaid cuts affect seniors in supported living situations?

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I wonder if these Medicaid cuts affect seniors in supported living situations?

Probably.

Lots of poor seniors use MA to cover the copays and use as secondary insurance for what Medicare does not cover.