RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High

RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Cagey18 -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/19/2009 7:01:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf I used the word sculpting to describe their new stories. Skewed would be a word I would use for polls, though with enough effort you might call it sculpting as well. Actually you used the phrase "sculpted news stories and polls". Your effort, not mine. Once again, nice try.

KenDckey592 -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/19/2009 8:12:04 PM)
Personally, I don't think polls mean a thing. They don't reflect the way I think, nor should they. They should not reflect the way we are governed. They just represent a snapshot in time based upon a limited sampling of some sector of society. Polls can also be skewed by asking the "right" quesiton. I believe it was California, because popular measures were defeated because people voted yes thinking it would pass, whereas it failed because the question was one in the negative. Polls can be run the same way and I believe there has been substantial evidence in the past that this is the way they work in some instances.

TheHeretic -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/19/2009 8:27:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cagey18 Found that proof for your claim of "sculpted" polls yet? Nothing that would shift you from your position, Cagey, but this tidbit in your OP did catch my eye; Nonetheless, Obama's job approval on the economy has declined from 60% in April to 52% currently." "The slippage in the president's economic ratings appears unrelated to the public's assessments of his administration's impact on current economic conditions... Instead, it may have more to do with his relatively poor ratings for handling the problems of troubled automakers General Motors and Chrysler." That could have been spun very differently than it was here. Note how the falling number is at the end of the paragraph instead of the lead? How it is followed by an explanation/excuse for the slipping number? The use of the word "appears" is a nice way to slip in some opinion. Appears to whom, exactly? And how does it "appear" to others who don't share the ingrained prejudices of the author? How might those same facts have been reported if McCain was in the White House, or if the story was from a year ago, during the Bush II administration? Would it "appear" the same way to the author of the story, and to the editors?

Cagey18 -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/19/2009 10:02:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Cagey18 Found that proof for your claim of "sculpted" polls yet? Nothing that would shift you from your position, Cagey Since you provided nothing I asked about, this is at least one thing you did get right. quote: , but this tidbit in your OP did catch my eye; Nonetheless, Obama's job approval on the economy has declined from 60% in April to 52% currently." "The slippage in the president's economic ratings appears unrelated to the public's assessments of his administration's impact on current economic conditions... Instead, it may have more to do with his relatively poor ratings for handling the problems of troubled automakers General Motors and Chrysler." That could have been spun very differently than it was here. Note how the falling number is at the end of the paragraph instead of the lead? One whole paragraph later? My goodness, how that must warp the thinking of people who read only headlines. quote: How it is followed by an explanation/excuse for the slipping number? Funny that you interpret his relatively poor ratings for handling the problems of troubled automakers General Motors and Chrysler as an "excuse". Sounds more like an indictment.

TheHeretic -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/19/2009 11:08:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cagey18 Since you provided nothing I asked about, That's a neat trick, isn't it Cagey? Demand hard, firm evidence of something ever so slippery as propaganda? Hope it goes well for you. I won't be playing. From a much more philosophical point of view, there's an old line about three kinds of lies. Lies, damn lies, and statistics. The nice column of tidy results is full of data that could be run with in a negative direction just as easily. How about a headline of "Undecideds Decide to Disapprove!" That reflects one big swing in the numbers, doesn't it? Something to ponder.

Cagey18 -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/20/2009 12:16:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Cagey18 Since you provided nothing I asked about, That's a neat trick, isn't it Cagey? Demand hard, firm evidence of something ever so slippery as propaganda? Uh, no...rather, evidence of this poll being "sculpted" as was claimed. As in, evidence that this poll is poorly sampled, worded badly, etc. Since you provided nothing of the sort, you are correct that your non-response shifted me not at all.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/20/2009 6:28:08 AM)
The ping pong match still going on? Cagey you give me a good laugh. Thanks for that. Now back to serious discussion , take care.

xBullx -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/20/2009 7:16:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cagey18 You're funny! You're using criticism of a Pew poll to question a NYTimes poll? Really? Nice try... He provided you with what you seemed so eager to hear, then you did what you claim he was doing; extending the terms of your agreement to satisfy your agenda. Do you sell used cars?

Cagey18 -> RE: GOP Hits All Time Lows; Obama Approval Remains High (6/20/2009 8:16:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx quote: ORIGINAL: Cagey18 You're funny! You're using criticism of a Pew poll to question a NYTimes poll? Really? Nice try... He provided you with what you seemed so eager to hear. Not at all. I was "eager to hear" criticism of the actual polls in the OP, the ones he claimed were "sculpted". Instead, he conflated criticism of a 2007 poll with the methodology of one of the polls in the OP, as if that proved something. If you can't see the faulty logic in that approach, I can't help you.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125