• Poll: 4 in 10 support impeaching Trump
    148 replies, posted
Trump was voted in on the basis of being on both sides of a policy so it's no wonder a lot of people voted for him and now hate him. Look at obamacare durin the debates "I don't think we should get rid of all of it" vs the campaign "we'll tear it all down" and then meeting with obama "I'm not going to get rid of pre existing conditions" vs the reality that they just want to drop it all (as liberals expected and got laughed at for).
[QUOTE=ChadMcGoatMan;51767716]And also impeach Pence in same time too you add it Because fuck 25th amendment for allow Vice President filled now former president previous position.[/QUOTE] I don't even think Pence would be worse than Trump at this point. If Steve Bannon is really pulling Trump's strings, which seems highly likely, Pence may actually be slightly [I]better[/I]. He'd be a stable piece of shit.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51767856]so transparently anti-truth it's not even funny[/QUOTE] "I've never studied statistics but polls tend to say things that I don't like, so I'm going to spout off about how core methodologies of statistics that have been scrutinized and validated by professionals in the field for decades are invalid in my opinion."
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;51767867]You should be familiar with people voting for something that has consequences they didn't think about[/QUOTE] not at all, I voted for Brexit and I still believe it is going to be advantageous to the UK.
[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51767723]Point being? It's not like they only surveyed 30 people. While it's not 1000, 725 is a decent amount. Plus, it's from PPP.[/QUOTE] Wasn't PPP that one polling site which expected Clinton to sweep the rust belt with comfortable margins before the election? [media]https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/794562547462635524[/media] I dunno which was the bigger polling slip-up, Winconsin or North Carolina.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51767856]so transparently anti-truth it's not even funny[/QUOTE] Or we can just admit that one of the primary means society has been using to gauge public opinion is inherently flawed, easily open to manipulation and simply not all it was cracked up to be.
[QUOTE=Socram;51767743]"I don't know how statistics work"[/QUOTE] There is nothing wrong with being skeptical about methodology especially when it describes the use of online interviews. 725 people is preeeetty good in terms of the number of people and it being conducted over the phone also isn't bad per say. As long as the way they did it is indicative of the U.S. population, then it "should" be pretty close. -- But the point that I was making earlier, online interviews seems..off? Depending on how its done, I would think that it may skew the survey. Just thinking, if someone was willing to talk online about questions such as these, it could possibly stratify their results. Then agaaaaain, the survey said it has a margin of error of 3.6 points which may indicate that they take this into account. I'm no expert on statistics by any means (most of my knowledge only comes from two classes on how to conduct surveys. I still have a long ways to go) but there is nothing wrong with being worried if methodology seems wonky because if it is indeed wrong (Breitbart 900% of the time), then it just fuels a particular narrative.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767868]This is why I hold his critics in contempt: they're basically incapable of two things which make for a halfway rational opposition: an ability to begrudgingly respect an opponent when he keeps his promises, OR being able to admit to a certain amount of relief when he goes back on what you saw as his most dangerous proposals. They will never allow themselves to give him any credit, the telltale signs of hacks.[/QUOTE] Oh bless you, you're still trying. Let's make things simple: If you promise to do something stupid, you can only ever end up looking like an idiot or a liar.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767868]This is why I hold his critics in contempt: they're basically incapable of two things which make for a halfway rational opposition: an ability to begrudgingly respect an opponent when he keeps his promises, OR being able to admit to a certain amount of relief when he goes back on what you saw as his most dangerous proposals. They will never allow themselves to give him any credit, the telltale signs of hacks.[/QUOTE] Every important policy he talked about he was on one side and the other. Outcome... Good side? Bad side? He's still a liar.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767891]Or we can just admit that one of the primary means society has been using to gauge public opinion is inherently flawed, easily open to manipulation and simply not all it was cracked up to be.[/QUOTE] maybe you can admit to not knowing shit about statistics if the best argument you have against it is "no one asked me"
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767799]The problem with all polls is that they can be quite easily discredited by someone saying "no one asked me". All polls are inherently flawed because of the whole "sample" thing, it may be "scientifically" selected, but it's still just a small group of people getting asked the questions. While I do think Trump's Presidency will be cut short one way or another (most likely him resigning out of stress) I don't expect most people in America will be comfortable, and they will very soon remember why they hated the establishment and decided to vote for him in the first place.[/QUOTE] no again, not how poling science works every thread there's an "expert" here to tell everyone how polls work. No, many of us have a firm understanding of the methodology generally implored by poll science and many of us are not appreciative of mis truths of this nature.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767868]This is why I hold his critics in contempt: they're basically incapable of two things which make for a halfway rational opposition: an ability to begrudgingly respect an opponent when he keeps his promises, OR being able to admit to a certain amount of relief when he goes back on what you saw as his most dangerous proposals. They will never allow themselves to give him any credit, the telltale signs of hacks.[/QUOTE] The ability to keep a promise is not something to respect, it's something that should be commonplace. Additionally, if said promises are [b][i]fucking terrible[/i][/b], I most CERTAINLY will not have anything positive to say about him keeping his promises. Any credit he 'gains' from keeping promises (like any normal, actually trustworth person does???) he instantly loses by said promises being fucking garbage.
[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51767813]Sure, you can take that angle. Or as the article states, this period is where a president is supposed to enjoy the highest approval and satisfaction rating of their stay in the White House. Trump is far from it.[/QUOTE] A few months after the election is where a president should enjoy the highest approval rating? Are you mad? Do you genuinely think he's going to have an 80% approval rating after the election cycle and everything that went down? If Hillary had won she'd of had the same numbers, maybe even worse. Besides, I'm not trusting any polls whatsoever after Hillary having a supposed 10% national lead in the general election.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767868]This is why I hold his critics in contempt: they're basically incapable of two things which make for a halfway rational opposition: an ability to begrudgingly respect an opponent when he keeps his promises, OR being able to admit to a certain amount of relief when he goes back on what you saw as his most dangerous proposals. They will never allow themselves to give him any credit, the telltale signs of hacks.[/QUOTE] If you promise to do something that I consider to be stupid, when you do it, I am not going to be "Oh well at least he's an honest idiot" because you still did something stupid.
A lot of people don't realize they vote against their best interests. Have you seen how many people voted Trump because he said he would get rid of Obamacare Just for them to find out that they will lose their heathcare because they didn't know that the affordable heathcare act and obamacare are the same things? The main platform of the Republican party is based off lies and misinformation to get their voters to vote against their best interests. So you wanted jobs? Sure you can have jobs. But only when they get rid of every regulation that was meant to save our planet for future generations to live on. Build a wall? Sure! If only most illegal immigration was because of people crossing the border and not people over staying work visas. And it's only gonna cost 25 billion dollars of tax payer money and billions of dollars a year for upkeep! Oh? You say Mexico will pay for it? Oh yeah sure. Hope you enjoy losing a valuable trade partner when they refuse to trade with us anymore because of threats of heavy tariffs. Human rights? Who needs those when you can tell woman what to do with their bodies and to tell people who they can and can not marry because a book told them it's allowed! But who cares about your best interests when the democrats are obviously the bad guys because of emails and anything else the Republicans can find to blame on them.
[QUOTE=Pootis Mann;51767930]A few months after the election is where a president should enjoy the highest approval rating? Are you mad? Do you genuinely think he's going to have an 80% approval rating after the election cycle and everything that went down? If Hillary had won she'd of had the same numbers, maybe even worse. Besides, I'm not trusting any polls whatsoever after Hillary having a supposed 10% national lead in the general election.[/QUOTE] Historically yes. Are you going to deny history now, too?
And a 10 point lead before Director Comey said "Emails" again. For christs sakes. What is with the literal historical revisionism done by super pro Trump people like yourself? The history, and events did not happen as you describe
[QUOTE=Pootis Mann;51767930][B]A few months after the election is where a president should enjoy the highest approval rating?[/B] Are you mad? Do you genuinely think he's going to have an 80% approval rating after the election cycle and everything that went down? If Hillary had won she'd of had the same numbers, maybe even worse. Besides, I'm not trusting any polls whatsoever after Hillary having a supposed 10% national lead in the general election.[/QUOTE] [url=http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-presapp0605-31.html]Yes.[/url]
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767891]Or we can just admit that one of the primary means society has been using to gauge public opinion is inherently flawed, easily open to manipulation and simply not all it was cracked up to be.[/QUOTE] Is this what being sick of experts leads to? Saying statistics is an inherently flawed science because you don't understand how it works?
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51767715]Always look at the numbers when news articles publish poll articles.[/QUOTE] If I see one more comment on sample sizing being not good enough I'm going to lose it. There are literal calculators for this stuff on how accurate a sample size can be for a given population. [url]https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/sample-size-calculator/[/url]
I'd like to see a similar poll done by Pew or something.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767891]Or we can just admit that one of the primary means society has been using to gauge public opinion is inherently flawed, easily open to manipulation and simply not all it was cracked up to be.[/QUOTE] so not only is your argument based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the entire field you're criticizing- you're also using generic buzzwords and made up problems to demonize it you're learning well from daddy trump i see
If you don't trust a science that's been well studied and is backed up by mathematics just because you don't like it's results - then you're an anti-intellectual and wallowing in ignorance.
[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;51767784]Only 4 in 10? Should be 10 in 10. How anyone can still support him after all the shit he has done is beyond me.[/QUOTE] A lot of the things he does are approved by the people who voted him into power in the first place.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51767799]The problem with all polls is that they can be quite easily discredited by someone saying "no one asked me". All polls are inherently flawed because of the whole "sample" thing, it may be "scientifically" selected, but it's still just a small group of people getting asked the questions. While I do think Trump's Presidency will be cut short one way or another (most likely him resigning out of stress) I don't expect most people in America will be comfortable, and they will very soon remember why they hated the establishment and decided to vote for him in the first place.[/QUOTE] "I don't know the difference between a statistic and a parameter"
[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;51767924]The ability to keep a promise is not something to respect, it's something that should be commonplace. Additionally, if said promises are [b][i]fucking terrible[/i][/b], I most CERTAINLY will not have anything positive to say about him keeping his promises. Any credit he 'gains' from keeping promises (like any normal, actually trustworth person does???) he instantly loses by said promises being fucking garbage.[/QUOTE] Then please stop telling us Trump supporters that we should start mourning for Hillary's loss because of the latest thing he does which you'll assume we shouldn't like. We'll decide when Trump has betrayed us thank you very much. [QUOTE=BuffaloBill;51767924]But who cares about your best interests when the democrats are obviously the bad guys because of emails and anything else the Republicans can find to blame on them.[/QUOTE] I'm really getting tired of the trivialization of emailgate. Do even half the people expressing incredulity that someone would take Hillary's emails more seriously than, say, the access Hollywood tapes really know anything about the email scandal? Do they just hear the word "email" and assume it must be something so frivolous and inconsequential that there is no way it could be anywhere near as bad as what Trump has said and done? Seriously, does anyone know what she did wrong there, anyone? I 100% guarantee that NO Democrat would let anyone hear the end of it if ANY Republican did the smae thing.
[QUOTE=Pootis Mann;51767930] Besides, I'm not trusting any polls whatsoever after Hillary having a supposed 10% national lead in the general election.[/QUOTE] Which poll?
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51768000]I 100% guarantee that NO Democrat would let anyone hear the end of it if ANY Republican did the smae thing.[/QUOTE] i 100% guarantee hillary would've been a better president than trump
[QUOTE=Mining Bill;51767982]so not only is your argument based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the entire field you're criticizing- you're also using generic buzzwords and made up problems to demonize it you're learning well from daddy trump i see[/QUOTE] We. Know. They. Can. Be. WRONG!! What more do I need than this very election to show that polls simply cannot be trusted?
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51768000]Then please stop telling us Trump supporters that we should start mourning for Hillary's loss because of the latest thing he does which you'll assume we shouldn't like. We'll decide when Trump has betrayed us thank you very much. I'm really getting tired of the trivialization of emailgate. Do even half the people expressing incredulity that someone would take Hillary's emails more seriously than, say, the access Hollywood tapes really know anything about the email scandal? Do they just hear the word "email" and assume it must be something so frivolous and inconsequential that there is no way it could be anywhere near as bad as what Trump has said and done? Seriously, does anyone know what she did wrong there, anyone? I 100% guarantee that NO Democrat would let anyone hear the end of it if ANY Republican did the smae thing.[/QUOTE] I read the emails, the juicy ones. Hillary still would've been a better president than Trump lmao.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.