The State of The Union Address (2055 EST)

reply to post by beezzer


He will say whatever he has to in order to get claps from his subjected crowd. In his defense he is a Narcissus. Like all other mental disorders you really can't help yourself and medication only subsides symtoms. Hope he was able to keep his insurance and didn't lose his doctor. God help us if he can't be medicated.

Wrabbit2000

Well, if we want to be real exact.. By all means.. Lets be.

(Source: Realclearpolitics)

There just aren't many ways to put lipstick on that one.

I am skipping the Obama yada yada part, because I am not defending him, I am defending basic math.

Even the numbers you selectively posted...has Disapproval at 50, 52, 52, 55 ??

How do you get.."well over 50% numbers. In fact...pushing 60% to be exact."

Wrabbit2000
Polls indicate the American public distrust, detest or outright HATE this President at well over 50% numbers. In fact...pushing 60% to be exact.

The basic laws of estimation dispute your claim, even with the selective sampling.

You chose the "to be exact" qualifier.

Nothing to with Obama yada lipstick yada...

Not sure why it is difficult to premise an argument, claim or debate with facts and acknowledge when we get them wrong?

reply to post by Indigo5


Indigo... You always say you don't defend Obama, yet you are singularly exclusive in taking just one side of every issue which comes up and Obama is remotely connected ..in even a passing way. So, it's kinda like saying 'I have nothing against Obama..but.'. No one would believe me or take me seriously ..nor should they, if I actually said such a thing. I'm not partisan..but I dislike that man with a passion that vibrates.

Having said that... The polls range from a 37% approval to a 47% approval rate. Now, I'm not getting into the science of polling, how they compile statistics or how sampling is accomplished to get them. I've had that course too..and I've gotten the impression you have as well. So we don't need to rehash the fact *ANY* poll can basically be made to say ANYTHING people want it to say, based on manipulation of the above factors.

That is why I always look at a range of numbers and never..ever..just 1 number or poll. the 43% I'd originally quoted was a spot poll taken the night of the SOTU speech and I believe Gallup was the sourcing on it. It was offered offhandedly in my post as an example.

In that example, using grade school math, 43% approving means that 57% ..IN SOME FORM OR ANOTHER did not "approve" of him. Most outright disapproved ..and one there has a 37% approval / 63% other ratio, to be VERY SPECIFIC here.

I'll leave you to argue the math and the poll companies however you'd like...but the math is a pure thing. It's just numbers. Nothing more or less, and math doesn't lie. It just is. When we have numbers from a wide range of sources that DO NOT agree, like each other and are in direct competition? We can USUALLY take the average as being something close to the truth.

The truth is, the nation generally thinks President Barack Obama is doing a crappy job...it shows clearly...and his ratings have been in the crapper for a good period of time now. That isn't new, different or remarkable except for the timing here to coincide with his speech at the SOTU.

Take care 'not supporting Obama'...when you so very clearly are. Regularly. (In my very personal opinion, of course)

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Indigo... You always say you don't defend Obama, yet you are singularly exclusive in taking just one side of every issue which comes up and Obama is remotely connected ..in even a passing way. So, it's kinda like saying 'I have nothing against Obama..but.'. No one would believe me or take me seriously ..nor should they, if I actually said such a thing. I'm not partisan..but I dislike that man with a passion that vibrates.

Did not say "I do not defend Obama"...For any objective mind would find themselves both attacking and defending the President dependant on issue. I said "I am not defending Obama"...I am defending MATH.

The fact you would choose to go personal on a non personal issue as MATH...seems poor judgment at the least and against T&C at the most?

Wrabbit2000
In that example, using grade school math, 43% approving means that 57% ..IN SOME FORM OR ANOTHER did not "approve" of him.

What??? Here is that stat..
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 1/22 - 1/25 800 Approve 43 Disapprove: 51

By that logic he has a 49% approval rating!! Not 43%!

You can't disregard the actual "Disapprove" and invent your own through subtraction, lumping the No-Answer/No-Opinion folks in as "Disapprove"...and for effs sake you said "Detest"...and "to be exact" and bumped it up to 60%???

Disappointingly dishonest head to toe on this exchange rabbit.

Wrabbit2000
Take care 'not supporting Obama'...when you so very clearly are. Regularly. (In my very personal opinion, of course)

Take care being "exact" and "honest" in the "facts" you provide when clearly you are not?

from the funny pic thread….

reply to post by Indigo5


You have a good day Indigo..... Perhaps another thread...perhaps not.

Always a pleasure chatting tho.

His foreign policy is the only thing that I think he is even ballpark right about. It's everything else that he does that makes me shake my head about. But trying to force gun control is probably one of the touchiest things he will attempt.

Well, what to say after one sees a staged production, SOTU address with
plagiarism, no less...I guess Obama just cant let go of Bush.

One thing was obvious, his focus on Michelle, which left an odd
feeling lingering. I guess he can be proud that she at least has not
been accused of criminal activities, unlike Hillary Clinton.

And anyone thinking they will get anything different or better
with Hillary Clinton is suffering from Nostalgia.

Obama talks more like a lawyer than a President.

So does Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton Exposed


Hillary Clinton on Benghazi


People, never forget please - The U.S. has had enough of
the corrupt dynasty. Only thing worse than the next three
years of the Obama Whitehouse would be 16 years
by The Clintons.

reply to post by Indigo5


Indigo I really like your posts in this thread because you actually state facts and don't hop on any bandwagons.

It seems at times ats ignores facts and jumps on the bandwagon. Thanks for staying true and on a personal note I may add a lot of the "ats celebrities" seem to be more on the bash Obama and ignore everything else side.

Trubl
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Indigo I really like your posts in this thread because you actually state facts and don't hop on any bandwagons.

It seems at times ats ignores facts and jumps on the bandwagon. Thanks for staying true and on a personal note I may add a lot of the "ats celebrities" seem to be more on the bash Obama and ignore everything else side.

Thanks for that. I do not understand why folks believe they must sacrifice basic facts and intellectual honesty in order to hold an opinion?

Opinions and facts are two completely different things. You can have one without sacrificing the other...

Daniel Patrick Moynihan — 'Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.'

I actually believe we harm our cognitive centers when we repeatedly train ourselves to disregard facts that disagree with our claims or opinions. It trains our minds to build conclusions on muddy foundations. Unhealthy thinking.

And frankly, dishonesty is not required to be a critic of the President, so it drives me to question motivation and character amongst those who clearly recognize facts, but choose to disregard or molest them.

The machinations of the human mind is full of irony and in the same way a thief believes that everyone is a thief, the poster who sacrifices basic intellectual honesty for emotional partisanship (a sacrifice not required BTW)...is the first to attack anyone challenging their muddy or false claims as a partisan "kool aide drinker"...A shout in the mirror...the ever false assumption that other people think and operate like we do.

burntheships

And anyone thinking they will get anything different or better
with Hillary Clinton is suffering from Nostalgia.

I think a significant number of voters choose the candidate that least offends them and most aligns with their positions on issues.

In that context I'd be interested in who you would like as a nominee for 2016?

Admittedly...it's a question I'd like to pose to conservatives at large, because strangely they seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time bashing away at Hillary Clinton vs. championing a viable candidate of their own?

There is plenty to be critical about with Hillary Clinton, but come election day, I imagine most Americans will be making their decision based on the available choices?

Who's your pick?

Indigo5

In that context I'd be interested in who you would like as a nominee for 2016?

Personally you want to know?
Or are you part of a strategic group somewhere?

Very interesting....

There is plenty to be critical about with Hillary Clinton,

What comes to your mind?

There is so much to choose from when it comes to Hillary Clinton -
not the least is our founders intent was that there would never be a ruling
dynasty. Another 8 years with Bill and Hillary pretty much equals that.

In the forefront of the dangers to The United States by way of a candidate
such as Hillary, one of the most corrupt, experienced liars ever to hold office.

but come election day, I imagine most Americans will be making their decision based on the available choices?

Hillary is old - she is failing - its not like we would be seeing the same younger Hillary
as in 2008, she barely could manage it then. Seriously, she is a traitor to this country
for sure - along with her partner Bill. But that is only one set of dangers - the worst
of it I fear is that she is incompetent - old and frail and in NO way capable of
leading this country.

reply to post by burntheships


Rather than answer my question you chose to affirm my observation? Which I guess hints at the answer to my question...

Indigo5

In that context I'd be interested in who you would like as a nominee for 2016?

Admittedly...it's a question I'd like to pose to conservatives at large, because strangely they seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time bashing away at Hillary Clinton vs. championing a viable candidate of their own?

Personally I hope that the GOP or TP puts forth a good nominee. Credible competition tends to cast light on important issues and encourage much needed debate and discourse amongst the average American.

burntheships


Personally you want to know?
Or are you part of a strategic group somewhere?

Very interesting....

Yes. I am part of a multi-million dollar covert political think-tank tasked with finding out who "Burntheships" on ATS thinks should be the GOP nominee.

We have conducted exhaustive algorithmic analysis of political forum postings and determined that you have the best representative pulse on the current conservative mindset, amongst the 22,145,965 individual forum posters on the internet with conservative political leanings.

You are our last best hope of divining who the GOP Nominee will be...what do you say? Help a covert political think tank agent out?

Well, Hillary Clinton has only been out of official office for a very short time,
and she left office under seemingly a state of distress, following a sensational
tragedy, one that she was responsible for to a large degree, as Secretary of State.

How telling that you refer to political discourse about the subject as Hillary bashing

It is not like this is an old event, this is still a current scandal in The White House!

Indigo5

Personally I hope that the GOP or TP puts forth a good nominee.

Who comes to mind?

Credible competition tends to cast light on important issues and encourage much
needed debate and discourse amongst the average American.

Well, the Democrats, despite the huge backlash against them due to the Obamacare
fiasco, and Obama's terrrible public approval ratings might just be able to pull it
off if they can keep the nation divided enough between support for a Tea Party
candidate, and the GOP. Hmmm.....interesting is it not?

Even without a credible candidate, which Hillary is NOT.

Indigo5

We have conducted exhaustive algorithmic analysis of political forum postings and determined that you have the best representative pulse on the current conservative mindset, amongst the 22,145,965 individual forum posters on the internet with conservative political leanings.

You are our last best hope of divining who the GOP Nominee will be...what do you say? Help a covert political think tank agent out?

LMAO.

Really, there 22,145,965 forum posters with conservative leaning?