CNN Poll: Country split on how things are going

[chance1]

49% say things are very or fairly well
51% say pretty or very badly

sounds decent right ? it's up a couple points from November polling ........ but wait

More than six in ten said the country was doing well when Presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan had their second inaugurations, with 58% feeling that way when President George W. Bush started his second term in 2005."

conventional wisdom suggests the guy running the country might try to unite people right ?

yeah

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ing/?hpt=hp_t1

[xbuzzerx]

49% say things are very or fairly well
51% say pretty or very badly

sounds decent right ? it's up a couple points from November polling ........ but wait



conventional wisdom suggests the guy running the country might try to unite people right ?

yeah

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ing/?hpt=hp_t1

Of course this completely overlooks the years of financial collapse that followed Bush's 2nd term.

[CowboyBob]

"conventional wisdom suggests the guy running the country might try to unite people right ?"

Is this another swipe at the President?

What do you think Mittzy and Lyin' brown noser Paul Ryan are doing this weekend? Certainly not at any victory parties.

[tigerfan482]

49% say things are very or fairly well
51% say pretty or very badly

sounds decent right ? it's up a couple points from November polling ........ but wait



conventional wisdom suggests the guy running the country might try to unite people right ?

yeah

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ing/?hpt=hp_t1

Conventional wisdom would actually dictate that the minority party would encourage their supporters to work with the majority party to compromise and make things better instead of trying to use fear to divide them. The only reason things in this country aren't better are because you've had a party of roadblocks to anything meaningful occurring. Also, make sure to note that this isn't a poll on Obama and anything he has done. It's a poll on the condition of the country, which I believe Republicans have had a huge hand in creating and maintaining in its currently poor state.

[GiancarloC]

"conventional wisdom suggests the guy running the country might try to unite people right ?"

Is this another swipe at the President?

What do you think Mittzy and Lyin' brown noser Paul Ryan are doing this weekend? Certainly not at any victory parties.

Yup it's another desperate grasping of the straws and weak attempt to take a swipe at a President who has 55~% approval rating. And the republican held House is one of the most hated, despised parts of the system... his republican held House where that asshole Paul Ryan is has a 9% approval rating.

55% versus 9%. LOL.

By the way, taking the original poll... two years ago 60-65% of the country said the country was headed in a bad direction. Was this Obama's fault? No... he had to pick up the pieces of the economic disaster which occurred under a disastrous republican president. Obama is making clear progress and more people are becoming optimistic about the future.

[chance1]

I love it

a POLL is a desperate swipe at the President

sensitive much ?

it's a conspiracy clearly

[GiancarloC]

I love it

a POLL is a desperate swipe at the President

sensitive much ?

it's a conspiracy clearly

The original post was riddled with attacks on the President... using a poll to support a weak point isn't a strong case.

[tigerfan482]

The original post was riddled with attacks on the President... using a poll to support a weak point isn't a strong case.

A poll that doesn't even apply to the President at that. It also makes the incorrect assumption that the President is responsible for everything that goes on in the country.

[chance1]

The original post was riddled with attacks on the President... using a poll to support a weak point isn't a strong case.

49% say things are very or fairly well
51% say pretty or very badly

sounds decent right ? it's up a couple points from November polling ........ but wait



conventional wisdom suggests the guy running the country might try to unite people right ?

yeah

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ing/?hpt=hp_t1

i'm missing the "riddled" part - i imagine anyone would miss it as it doesn't exist

rid·dle 1 (rdl)
tr.v. rid·dled, rid·dling, rid·dles
1. To pierce with numerous holes; perforate: riddle a target with bullets.
2. To spread throughout: "Election campaigns have always been riddled with demagogy and worse" (New Republic).
3. To put (gravel, for example) through a coarse sieve.

i think the "way over sensitive" part is much more likely

as for the poll, the timing and context is the inauguration of SECOND TERM presidents tigerfan - it's a short link - read it again

[tigerfan482]

as for the poll, the timing and context is the inauguration of SECOND TERM presidents tigerfan - it's a short link - read it again

That's great and all except that context still has no relation to the president or his approval or policies. The only tie in it has is that the time period the poll was taken corresponded to the second term inauguration. Other than that, there is no correlation at all between the results of the poll and the President or his policies.

[GiancarloC]

i'm missing the "riddled" part - i imagine anyone would miss it as it doesn't exist

rid·dle 1 (rdl)
tr.v. rid·dled, rid·dling, rid·dles
1. To pierce with numerous holes; perforate: riddle a target with bullets.
2. To spread throughout: "Election campaigns have always been riddled with demagogy and worse" (New Republic).
3. To put (gravel, for example) through a coarse sieve.

i think the "way over sensitive" part is much more likely

as for the poll, the timing and context is the inauguration of SECOND TERM presidents tigerfan - it's a short link - read it again

It's there as clear as day... blaming the President in typical partisan fashion... and the poll is irrelevant to Obama's own approval rating or his policies.

[chance1]

That's great and all except that context still has no relation to the president or his approval or policies. The only tie in it has is that the time period the poll was taken corresponded to the second term inauguration. Other than that, there is no correlation at all between the results of the poll and the President or his policies.

you're fighting an uphill battle here tiger

1 - cnn thinks o/w - they're an established news organization - hard for you to say with any oomph that they don't know what they're doing

2 - the leader of a country - in our case our president - is the "go to" for how are things going - it's part of the gig

who else would it be ?

Baltimore 28 Pats 13 .... 9 mins left

[GiancarloC]

you're fighting an uphill battle here tiger

1 - cnn thinks o/w - they're an established news organization - hard for you to say with any oomph that they don't know what they're doing

2 - the leader of a country - in our case our president - is the "go to" for how are things going - it's part of the gig

who else would it be ?

Baltimore 28 Pats 13 .... 9 mins left

INTERESTING. I didn't realize the President controlled private sector job growth. Shall we instate a 5 year plan like they did in the Soviet Union? And I didn't realize the President controlled the Congress. Shall we just set up a puppet Congress? LOL. The leader of this country is doing quite well and has high marks when it comes to approval ratings... so try again.

[tigerfan482]

you're fighting an uphill battle here tiger

1 - cnn thinks o/w - they're an established news organization - hard for you to say with any oomph that they don't know what they're doing

2 - the leader of a country - in our case our president - is the "go to" for how are things going - it's part of the gig

who else would it be ?

Baltimore 28 Pats 13 .... 9 mins left

1) No one is arguing the results of the survey. However, the survey was gauging how people view the current status of the country, not how people currently view the President.

2) There are so many factors that figure in to peoples' views on the country that it would be hard to list them here. The President has VERY little to do with just about all of them. A dysfunctional Congress, greedy private sector, slow growing middle class wages, rising prices - these are all contributors to how people view the current state of the country. I know you are just aching to blame this all on the President, but you're the one who is actually fighting an uphill battle, because you're trying to overlay your biases on these poll results.

[GiancarloC]

1) No one is arguing the results of the survey. However, the survey was gauging how people view the current status of the country, not how people currently view the President.

2) There are so many factors that figure in to peoples' views on the country that it would be hard to list them here. The President has VERY little to do with just about all of them. A dysfunctional Congress, greedy private sector, slow growing middle class wages, rising prices - these are all contributors to how people view the current state of the country. I know you are just aching to blame this all on the President, but you're the one who is actually fighting an uphill battle, because you're trying to overlay your biases on these poll results.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/03/news...its/index.html - Hmm... and many of these big corporations pay for the republican party to even exist. Corporate profits have hit all time highs under Obama... oh wait... I thought he was bad for corporations... now this doesn't make sense lol. These men, including the Koch Brothers, are just hoarding all the profits for themselves and funneling that money to the GOP.

[chance1]

not sure why you're splitting hairs

the Pres. approval rating last i looked was 51%

so you're barking at the moon

as for me and you getting in my head ...... with words like "aching to blame" ..... "overlaying your biases" .....

again an overreach well beyond your paygrade (to quote a ce+p regular)

[GiancarloC]

The Presidential approval rating is closer to 55% actually (disregard Fox News poll as that's rubbish and an outlier)... according to the more reputable polls. The less reputable ones got discredited in the last election. The President has solid approval ratings and has a majority of the country him. What overreach? I state the facts.

[Kulindahr]

Conventional wisdom would actually dictate that the minority party would encourage their supporters to work with the majority party to compromise and make things better instead of trying to use fear to divide them. The only reason things in this country aren't better are because you've had a party of roadblocks to anything meaningful occurring. Also, make sure to note that this isn't a poll on Obama and anything he has done. It's a poll on the condition of the country, which I believe Republicans have had a huge hand in creating and maintaining in its currently poor state.

That's nicely described by the term "loyal opposition" used by a number of parliamentary systems (e.g. the UK). Since Grover Norquist got his claws into the process, the U.S. no longer has a loyal opposition, just an opposition.

[WisonsinProud]

The Presidential approval rating is closer to 55% actually (disregard Fox News poll as that's rubbish and an outlier)... according to the more reputable polls. The less reputable ones got discredited in the last election. The President has solid approval ratings and has a majority of the country him. What overreach? I state the facts.

That is an interesting take on poll numbers because the President was re-elected with 51.1% of the popular vote which is more in line with the polls you call rubbish then the so-called reputable ones that you talk about.

[JayHawk]

I love it

a POLL is a desperate swipe at the President

sensitive much ?

it's a conspiracy clearly

Actually it would appear that your every post is a desperate attempt at a slight of the current President despite being elected to a second term by historic margins. Weird huh?

[GiancarloC]

That is an interesting take on poll numbers because the President was re-elected with 51.1% of the popular vote which is more in line with the polls you call rubbish then the so-called reputable ones that you talk about.

This is complete spin. Right now he has a 54-55% approval rating, and only Fox puts him at 47%. And no, that 51.1% isn't in line with the polls I call rubbish. Nice attempt. But falls short. Most republican leaning polls gave Obama 45-46% in the polls prior to the election. They were completely wrong.

I could give Nate Silver's blog on how wrong the republican leaning pollsters were... some were off by 5-6%. Like Rasmussen and Fox.

[chance1]

Actually it would appear that your every post is a desperate attempt at a slight of the current President despite being elected to a second term by historic margins. Weird huh?

Imagine the "weirdness" if THE POLL said 52 % very or pretty badly

LOL

Obamallegiance has so many strange side effects it appears

More and more each day

[GiancarloC]

The Obamabashingclub seems to be in full force today.. obviously. Bash bash bash bash... with no real reason behind it. Even if he's doing a good job... spin it. He's doing a bad job because he's doing a good job! lol.

[Rolyo85]

Must be the inauguration. It affects right wingers like the full moon affects werewolves - makes them HOWL.

[xbuzzerx]

Actually it would appear that your every post is a desperate attempt at a slight of the current President despite being elected to a second term by historic margins. Weird huh?

That's really the bottom line.

The American people resoundingly stated that Obama offered superior ideas, performance and policy than the Republicans were offering.

No clue what point Chance is trying to make with this study-- I think we all know what he's driving at-- but it's all irrelevant since any claim he's trying to make that Americans see the present in a negative light is obviously not something they blame Obama for, and they voted accordingly.

[youfiad]

I never believe in national polls on economic/political questions because 99.9% of the people have NO IDEA what's going on. How can a poll reflect anything if thepeople are randomly casting their ballot?

[GiancarloC]

Yea that's a real awesome attitude to have. The voters don't have any idea what's going on... I guess they only have no idea what's going on when they don't vote the way one wants. lol.

[youfiad]

Yea that's a real awesome attitude to have. The voters don't have any idea what's going on... I guess they only have no idea what's going on when they don't vote the way one wants. lol.

You shouldu really ask around to see how often people know what they're voting for. I worked in the campaign for that 2 presidential elections and a congressional election against Bachmann with Clark. I was astonished how little anybody knew about anything. I don't think that I heard one person say anything intelligent for or against any candidate.

[GiancarloC]

You shouldu really ask around to see how often people know what they're voting for. I worked in the campaign for that 2 presidential elections and a congressional election against Bachmann with Clark. I was astonished how little anybody knew about anything. I don't think that I heard one person say anything intelligent for or against any candidate.

And I've worked in quite a few Presidential elections and on campaigns. Most people have issues they vote around and do understand what is going on to a certain degree. Sure there could be more exposure for some voters, but to dismiss 99.9% of voters is just silly.

[youfiad]

And I've worked in quite a few Presidential elections and on campaigns. Most people have issues they vote around and do understand what is going on to a certain degree. Sure there could be more exposure for some voters, but to dismiss 99.9% of voters is just silly.

Meh. I guess everybody sees things differently. I guess that's why I said that I don't trust these polls based on what I've seen. If you have seen something different, by all means, accept the statistics.

[GiancarloC]

Meh. I guess everybody sees things differently. I guess that's why I said that I don't trust these polls based on what I've seen. If you have seen something different, by all means, accept the statistics.

What is there not to trust about the polls? They asked for a perception and people give it. And many people do care about their jobs and livelihood.

[youfiad]

What is there not to trust about the polls? They asked for a perception and people give it. And many people do care about their jobs and livelihood.

Meh. I guess everybody sees things differently. I guess that's why I said that I don't trust these polls based on what I've seen. If you have seen something different, by all means, accept the statistics.

[xbuzzerx]

I think you're both looking at it in a different way.

The poll's just basically "do you think the country's in a good state"... kind of just an opinion question. So in that sense an answer can't really be wrong.

Opinions can, of course, be very misinformed. That's true. I doubt if most Americans could give a coherent and meaningful description of WHY things are either good or bad, based on their answer.

That being said I think the OP was making a very specific political argument with this thread, and his position isn't validated by the poll, as Just_Believe18 and others pointed out.

[youfiad]

If your opinion doesn't match mine, xbuzzerx, you're automatically wrong

Another thing that I have with such opinion poles is because people get emotional. I see people who complain about the economy, but who go out there and blow their moneyon stupid crap all the time. Then, you have people like me, who work hard and, at the end of the day, end up with quite a bit of money in savings, who are doing fairly well. I'm not necessarily saying that this is in the scope of this particular pole, but people are just stupid.

[GiancarloC]

I still don't think it's fair to dismiss the entire country that way... but maybe half are misinformed or something around that figure. Either way, fair enough.

[TX-Beau]

There is no nation on the planet that has a huge majority of people who are “informed.” It’s extremely ill “informed” to bitch about how ill “informed” voters are. It’s ignorance to think that politics functions on accurate information - it never has, no where, at no time in history has that ever been the case. Even people who know the “facts” are swayed by emotion and perception – in fact you’d be hard pressed to find two “informed” voters who agree on what “fact” is. Even with it staring both of them in the face.

Frankly the “informed” voters are the most likely to rigidly adhere to their emotions and perceptions and call them facts than anyone else.

An OPINION poll is just that – and an OPINION poll is not trying to be a scholarly study, and since the people polled are the people in the electorate – feel as pretentious, superior, and precious as one likes – that’s pretty fucking relevant to the state of political OPINIONS in the country.

So long as we can agree on methodology of course. (grin)

[youfiad]

There is no nation on the planet that has a huge majority of people who are “informed.” It’s extremely ill “informed” to bitch about how ill “informed” voters are. It’s ignorance to think that politics functions on accurate information - it never has, no where, at no time in history has that ever been the case. Even people who know the “facts” are swayed by emotion and perception – in fact you’d be hard pressed to find two “informed” voters who agree on what “fact” is. Even with it staring both of them in the face.

Frankly the “informed” voters are the most likely to rigidly adhere to their emotions and perceptions and call them facts than anyone else.

An OPINION poll is just that – and an OPINION poll is not trying to be a scholarly study, and since the people polled are the people in the electorate – feel as pretentious, superior, and precious as one likes – that’s pretty fucking relevant to the state of political OPINIONS in the country.

So long as we can agree on methodology of course. (grin)

I agree with your first sentence when you say that no country has a majority of the citizens that are informed. However, you contradict yourself in your second sentence by saying that it's ill informed to "bitch" about this? Firstly, nobody was bitching, secondly what is that even supposed to mean? That's like saying that a cancer specialist is ill informed because the general populous, who knows hardly anything about cancer, makes uninformed claims about cancer. At least, that's what I have interpreted based on what you wrote. Maybe you meant something different, but it's not clear.

Other than that, I agree with most of what you said, especially about people being emotionally persuaded to beleive many things. I have also noted that and catch myself doing that often. Being aware of our emotions is a good way to separate ourselves from those who are unwilling to admit it, in my opinion. I know many liberals who follow the whole emotional movement that is based solely on emotion rather than reasons because that's what progressivism seems to be based on these days. A good example of that would be socialism (whole 'nother topic that I don't want to dive into in this thread). I don't believe that socialism is a good thing, overall, even though emotionally, I wish it were.

Opinion polls are opinion polls, I agree, but you must realize that more often than not, they are used for political purposes and often misrepresented in media (Fox news anyone?). Maybe it's just me, but I tend to read these polls then just take a complete memory dump of it and throw it aside as BS. Call me crazy.

To illustrate what I'm trying to say, I have a few examples when I was told to give my opinion on a topic that I wasn't very well informed in. I told them, "I don't really know enough information to give a good opinion" to which I was told that it's just an opinion. I seem to have a rather different view of what having an opinion should be. Sure, if something is, "What's your favorite color"? I will readily reply to. When it starts to become more educated, I tend to step back and check myself .

[White Eagle]

Actually it would appear that your every post is a desperate attempt at a slight of the current President despite being elected to a second term by historic margins. Weird huh?

Well, a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do to get the hatred out there.

[chance1]

Well, a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do to get the hatred out there.

Did u cum when u pressed "send"

If not opportunity lost

[MystikWizard]

Trolls should not be fed.

[Jack Springer]

Of course this completely overlooks the years of financial collapse that followed Bush's 2nd term.

Why not look at things in the present? it's 2013.

[GiancarloC]

Why not look at things in the present? it's 2013.

Yikes. So just disregard everything that happened in the past? This country had one the worst financial collapses in 2007/08 under the Bush administration... so it's just something to ignore? Should we also ignore Herbert Hoover's role in the 1929 Depression? If one doesn't learn from the past, they'll be doomed to repeat it.

[Jack Springer]

Well, a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do to get the hatred out there.

What does that mean? You frequently mention that people highjack threads -- are you trying to hijack this one?

[CowboyBob]

What does that mean? You frequently mention that people highjack threads -- are you trying to hijack this one?

Just like you did here.

[Jack Springer]

Yikes. So just disregard everything that happened in the past? This country had one the worst financial collapses in 2007/08 under the Bush administration... so it's just something to ignore? Should we also ignore Herbert Hoover's role in the 1929 Depression? If one doesn't learn from the past, they'll be doomed to repeat it.

I do know that it's not 1929 -- but I wonder if you do.

We have to deal with today's problems and issues. I know you're smart enough not to blindly follow someone -- why do that with Obama?

[GiancarloC]

I do know that it's not 1929 -- but I wonder if you do.

We have to deal with today's problems and issues. I know you're smart enough not to blindly follow someone -- why do that with Obama?

What is that supposed to mean? The past is just as important and the eight years of fuck ups during the Bush administration has wide reaching consequences that will be felt for decades. Those stupid wars and tax cuts your man initiated will cost this country for decades. And I'm not blindly following Obama... I'm also not blindly shitting on him either.

And today's problems and issues? Thanks the republicans for all of that. They had eight years of the Presidency in the RECENT PAST and were a major obstacle in the Congress of getting anything done.

[tigerfan482]

I do know that it's not 1929 -- but I wonder if you do.

We have to deal with today's problems and issues. I know you're smart enough not to blindly follow someone -- why do that with Obama?

Because today's problems and issues are a direct result of things done in the past. The situation people are in today, which is directly related to how they would answer that opinion poll question, is a result of past administrations and past legislative action (or inaction.) In government, what's happening today is a result of the additive effects of actions that were taken years ago in addition to the actions being taken now. What actions are taken now won't be fully realized until years down the road. That fact can't be ignored when reading the results of opinion polls. If you don't learn from the past (or just choose to pretend it never happened), then you are indeed doomed to repeat it.

[GiancarloC]

No wait, tiger... I get what he's saying all the problems today are Obama's fault because of some silly ridiculous partisan rhetoric that decides one cannot talk about what happened under the Bush administration.

[rareboy]

49% say things are very or fairly well
51% say pretty or very badly

sounds decent right ? it's up a couple points from November polling ........ but wait



conventional wisdom suggests the guy running the country might try to unite people right ?

yeah

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ing/?hpt=hp_t1

Of course...probably most people would also lay a lot of the blame at the feet of the Legislative Branch.

But I suppose you think it is all about the guy you hate in the White House.

four more years there Chance.

[chance1]

Of course...probably most people would also lay a lot of the blame at the feet of the Legislative Branch.

But I suppose you think it is all about the guy you hate in the White House.

four more years there Chance.

Hate is a word u throw around as often as u miss the bowl with your spray

In this case posting a poll from CNN constitutes

Hate is what u have in ur grinch like heart for the US - perhaps driven by envy

You need to find some new material