Donald Trump

The Juggler

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

What does it matter if they don't believe them? If they support Trump they would believe the sky is green if Trump said so. 

Approval polls are a snapshot of what the country is thinking at the moment. Right now his minimal support is dropping right before an election year....


Edit--plus that was a Fox News poll. If a republican Trump supporter doesn't believe a Fox poll, they're kind of a lost cause anyway.

The Juggler

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

all polls had Hillary winning by a landslide. this is why trumpsters don't believe polls anymore. regardless of the fact that the 2016 polls were only off in a few keys areas, which led to him winning. they don't understand that or choose to ignore it. 

No they didn't.  The average of all polls was HRC +2.1, which was quite close to the result and within the MOE.  The polls were remarkably accurate.  The difference is that these are national polls, so they don't achieve statistical significance at the state level.  

sorry, not a landslide, wrong wording, but a 92% chance of winning. from what I recall of watching that night. 

Yes, the "inside straight" argument.  And it was true.  He won Michigan and PA by less than a percent each.  Those flip, and the election flips.  The problem is not the polls and the stats, the problem is the conclusions drawn by media analysts, disregarding the margins of error.  

I think it is incredible that people still do not understand this 3 years later. 

tempo_n_groove

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/trump-to-consider-e-cigarette-policy-amid-outbreak-of-lung-disease.html

Banning flavored e-cigs!

tempo_n_groove

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

all polls had Hillary winning by a landslide. this is why trumpsters don't believe polls anymore. regardless of the fact that the 2016 polls were only off in a few keys areas, which led to him winning. they don't understand that or choose to ignore it. 

No they didn't.  The average of all polls was HRC +2.1, which was quite close to the result and within the MOE.  The polls were remarkably accurate.  The difference is that these are national polls, so they don't achieve statistical significance at the state level.  

sorry, not a landslide, wrong wording, but a 92% chance of winning. from what I recall of watching that night. 

Yes, the "inside straight" argument.  And it was true.  He won Michigan and PA by less than a percent each.  Those flip, and the election flips.  The problem is not the polls and the stats, the problem is the conclusions drawn by media analysts, disregarding the margins of error.  

I think it is incredible that people still do not understand this 3 years later. 

I mentioned that I had not seen 1 single poll with Clinton ahead by much.  55/45 yes but no landslide?

The Juggler

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

all polls had Hillary winning by a landslide. this is why trumpsters don't believe polls anymore. regardless of the fact that the 2016 polls were only off in a few keys areas, which led to him winning. they don't understand that or choose to ignore it. 

No they didn't.  The average of all polls was HRC +2.1, which was quite close to the result and within the MOE.  The polls were remarkably accurate.  The difference is that these are national polls, so they don't achieve statistical significance at the state level.  

sorry, not a landslide, wrong wording, but a 92% chance of winning. from what I recall of watching that night. 

Yes, the "inside straight" argument.  And it was true.  He won Michigan and PA by less than a percent each.  Those flip, and the election flips.  The problem is not the polls and the stats, the problem is the conclusions drawn by media analysts, disregarding the margins of error.  

I think it is incredible that people still do not understand this 3 years later. 

I mentioned that I had not seen 1 single poll with Clinton ahead by much.  55/45 yes but no landslide?

Most polls leading up to Election Day correctly had her up by a few percentage points. 

Gern Blansten

The Juggler said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

all polls had Hillary winning by a landslide. this is why trumpsters don't believe polls anymore. regardless of the fact that the 2016 polls were only off in a few keys areas, which led to him winning. they don't understand that or choose to ignore it. 

No they didn't.  The average of all polls was HRC +2.1, which was quite close to the result and within the MOE.  The polls were remarkably accurate.  The difference is that these are national polls, so they don't achieve statistical significance at the state level.  

sorry, not a landslide, wrong wording, but a 92% chance of winning. from what I recall of watching that night. 

Yes, the "inside straight" argument.  And it was true.  He won Michigan and PA by less than a percent each.  Those flip, and the election flips.  The problem is not the polls and the stats, the problem is the conclusions drawn by media analysts, disregarding the margins of error.  

I think it is incredible that people still do not understand this 3 years later. 

I mentioned that I had not seen 1 single poll with Clinton ahead by much.  55/45 yes but no landslide?

Most polls leading up to Election Day correctly had her up by a few percentage points. 

correct....they had her by 3% nationally and she ended up at 2.1%

The only outliers were MI, PA and WI where tRump won by a combined 77,000 votes.  That's what got him elected.

Halifax2TheMax

Gern Blansten said:

The Juggler said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

all polls had Hillary winning by a landslide. this is why trumpsters don't believe polls anymore. regardless of the fact that the 2016 polls were only off in a few keys areas, which led to him winning. they don't understand that or choose to ignore it. 

No they didn't.  The average of all polls was HRC +2.1, which was quite close to the result and within the MOE.  The polls were remarkably accurate.  The difference is that these are national polls, so they don't achieve statistical significance at the state level.  

sorry, not a landslide, wrong wording, but a 92% chance of winning. from what I recall of watching that night. 

Yes, the "inside straight" argument.  And it was true.  He won Michigan and PA by less than a percent each.  Those flip, and the election flips.  The problem is not the polls and the stats, the problem is the conclusions drawn by media analysts, disregarding the margins of error.  

I think it is incredible that people still do not understand this 3 years later. 

I mentioned that I had not seen 1 single poll with Clinton ahead by much.  55/45 yes but no landslide?

Most polls leading up to Election Day correctly had her up by a few percentage points. 

correct....they had her by 3% nationally and she ended up at 2.1%

The only outliers were MI, PA and WI where tRump won by a combined 77,000 votes.  That's what got him elected.

That and Putin on the ritz’s social media campaign that Team Trump Treason’s campaign knew about and “colluded” with.

Gern Blansten

Halifax2TheMax said:

Gern Blansten said:

The Juggler said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

all polls had Hillary winning by a landslide. this is why trumpsters don't believe polls anymore. regardless of the fact that the 2016 polls were only off in a few keys areas, which led to him winning. they don't understand that or choose to ignore it. 

No they didn't.  The average of all polls was HRC +2.1, which was quite close to the result and within the MOE.  The polls were remarkably accurate.  The difference is that these are national polls, so they don't achieve statistical significance at the state level.  

sorry, not a landslide, wrong wording, but a 92% chance of winning. from what I recall of watching that night. 

Yes, the "inside straight" argument.  And it was true.  He won Michigan and PA by less than a percent each.  Those flip, and the election flips.  The problem is not the polls and the stats, the problem is the conclusions drawn by media analysts, disregarding the margins of error.  

I think it is incredible that people still do not understand this 3 years later. 

I mentioned that I had not seen 1 single poll with Clinton ahead by much.  55/45 yes but no landslide?

Most polls leading up to Election Day correctly had her up by a few percentage points. 

correct....they had her by 3% nationally and she ended up at 2.1%

The only outliers were MI, PA and WI where tRump won by a combined 77,000 votes.  That's what got him elected.

That and Putin on the ritz’s social media campaign that Team Trump Treason’s campaign knew about and “colluded” with.

and dumbfuck Comey's letter

Bentleyspop

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

Your republican friends aren't very familiar with statistics, are they?  "Well, they didn't ask me"....

Everyone knows that numbers in general, and statistics  in particular,  have a liberal bias.

ikiT

pearljammr78 said:

Let’s see how Mr Douche Bag makes the 9/11 remembrance about how great he is and how he is just picked on. Oh and let’s see if we get a shout out to himself for being at ground zero. Fuck you Mr. Chump. 

THIS

ikiT

Halifax2TheMax said:

Gern Blansten said:

The Juggler said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

Beyond the topline of Trump's approval rating, CNN also asked how strongly Americans approved or disapproved of Trump's job performance. The percentage who moderately approve (11%) is similar to the percentage who moderately disapprove (10%).

The real nugget is that the 45% who strongly disapprove is significantly higher than the 28% who strongly approve. That 17-point gap is wider than the 7-point gap we found in April of this year.

What's so interesting about that is some form of enthusiasm gap on approval exists across age, gender, race and even education levels.

Now, it's not unusual for there to be an enthusiasm gap in which more people strongly disapprove than strongly approve of a president. We saw it with George W. Bush and Barack Obama at roughly this point in their presidencies.

The difference is that Trump's is much larger. Obama's strongly disapprove rating in CNN polling was never more than 10 points higher than his strongly approve rating through his first three years in office. The same held true with Bush.

Coming into 2020, it's easy to imagine that Trump may lack the enthusiastic supporters he will likely need to overcome what looks to be an unpopular standing overall.

So let me tell you how the other half looks at polls.

Remember that FOX poll that stated the 37% or whatever said he was "tearing the country apart"?

I posted that and none of my rep friends could find it and thought I was lying.

I told them how to find it and still called me a fibber.

Posted direct link to that very question and it's findings and question the "amount of people whom actually were polled on that question".

Polls don't matter to them.  It is just mind blowing.

all polls had Hillary winning by a landslide. this is why trumpsters don't believe polls anymore. regardless of the fact that the 2016 polls were only off in a few keys areas, which led to him winning. they don't understand that or choose to ignore it. 

No they didn't.  The average of all polls was HRC +2.1, which was quite close to the result and within the MOE.  The polls were remarkably accurate.  The difference is that these are national polls, so they don't achieve statistical significance at the state level.  

sorry, not a landslide, wrong wording, but a 92% chance of winning. from what I recall of watching that night. 

Yes, the "inside straight" argument.  And it was true.  He won Michigan and PA by less than a percent each.  Those flip, and the election flips.  The problem is not the polls and the stats, the problem is the conclusions drawn by media analysts, disregarding the margins of error.  

I think it is incredible that people still do not understand this 3 years later. 

I mentioned that I had not seen 1 single poll with Clinton ahead by much.  55/45 yes but no landslide?

Most polls leading up to Election Day correctly had her up by a few percentage points. 

correct....they had her by 3% nationally and she ended up at 2.1%

The only outliers were MI, PA and WI where tRump won by a combined 77,000 votes.  That's what got him elected.

That and Putin on the ritz’s social media campaign that Team Trump Treason’s campaign knew about and “colluded” with.

It was online ADVERTISING and repetitive SLOGANS they fell for.  Morons.

Tallest building on Wall Street.  

ikiT

#ITMFA

Jearlpam0925

Anybody see The Great Hack on Netflix? Very, very good. Well, except all the sleaziness.

Meltdown99

josevolution

Meltdown99 said:

But PJ did so there’s that ...

Thoughts_Arrive

I found his aggressive rhetoric at the 9/11 memorial totally inappropriate. What a classless POS.

ikiT

Thoughts_Arrive said:

I found his aggressive rhetoric at the 9/11 memorial totally inappropriate. What a classless POS.

I found the fact that he's afraid to go to NYC totally inappropriate.  Spineless.

Halifax2TheMax

ikiT said:

Thoughts_Arrive said:

I found his aggressive rhetoric at the 9/11 memorial totally inappropriate. What a classless POS.

I found the fact that he's afraid to go to NYC totally inappropriate.  Spineless.

Well, he did say he went down to the site to help in any small way he could whilst delivering remarks at the Pentagon memorial so he was there in spirit.

OnWis97

Thoughts_Arrive said:

I found his aggressive rhetoric at the 9/11 memorial totally inappropriate. What a classless POS.

So did I.  Of course, it did not change my opinion of him...just Trump being Trump.

ikiT

Halifax2TheMax said:

ikiT said:

Thoughts_Arrive said:

I found his aggressive rhetoric at the 9/11 memorial totally inappropriate. What a classless POS.

I found the fact that he's afraid to go to NYC totally inappropriate.  Spineless.

Well, he did say he went down to the site to help in any small way he could whilst delivering remarks at the Pentagon memorial so he was there in spirit.

Everyone was and stiil IS.  912 was an eyeopener.  All of 2001 was.  That fastball that W threw at Yankee Stadium?  strong
Douchey J McDoucheface has been to NYC once since being sworn in in front of "record crowds".  weak

At least Mike 'The Situation' Sorrentino is outta jail.   Trumpito couldn't have pardoned THAT guy?   Ponderous.