Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 800 times:
Rather a silly survey, as it assumes that there will be a better alternative at the next election. Given that his principle opponent in 2004 will be a democrat, that is far from being a safe assumption.
NormalSpeed From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 780 times:
I say this in the most objective way possible: You can get a poll to say anything you want it to. It's all a matter of how the questions are phrased. Numbers don't lie, but they don't tell the entire truth either. Besides that, the election is not for another two years. Trying to predict who will win is like trying to predict the weather a month from now: Useless.
Also, point of the article was not "Bush would not be re-elected," it was "Bush's approval ratings, according to whatever poll that was, are down." Even so, 47% said that they'd still vote for Bush. That's still a very high number. And remember, the US President isn't elected by a simple majority.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 750 times:
David B, there is an old American saying: there are lies, damned lies, and statictics. Polls are the latter. 2 years out, it's crazy to even speculate on what will happen.
But I will say this: if this economic downturn, and this corporate house of cards gets any worse, Mr. Bush could have a world of hurt in 2004. And no, I'm not saying the downturn and the corporate fiascos are his doing primarily, but the president will pay a price if this keeps up.
NormalSpeed From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 729 times:
"Guys, please don't turn this into a political things."
How could we not? The thread was started with a political topic. And when David B. wrote "BTW: This is not ment to be a political flame war so control yourself." I'm asking myself "Then why did you post that then?"
What he really meant to say was "This poll doesn't lie, so don't argue with it," as if anything that supports his agenda becomes gospel truth.
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 24 Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 674 times:
Surveys taken on the weekends tend to under reported conservatives and Republicans. I have no idea why but when I worked @ the Public Policy Research Institute @ Texas A&M University (try saying that 200 times a day), we did several political surveys and we were always told the same thing on the first night the survey went into "production". You'll get more Democrats and liberals on the weekends and more conservatives and Republicans during the week, usually on the evening shifts.
That was a interesting job, getting told to F*** off 5-10 times a days really made one feel good. I'm glad I don't work there anymore. It was a stressful time and telling that one supervisor to pull his head out of his as* was a great way to make an exit.