Obamas popularity

I think if there is one thing that this election has showed us it is that the media, the pollsters, the entertainment industry, and academia are in the tank for the left, and out of touch with the country.

Focusing on the polls specifically, they suffered perhaps there most embarrassing moment yet. Despite being wrong in the 2012 elections, the 2014 elections, Brexit, and now the Trump election, we still see politicians and the media citint polls as gospel truth.

Now I know some will try to say the polls weren't that wrong, but they were. Places had the chances of Trump winning from the most generous 25% to 1%. States like Wisconsin where not even supposed to be contested, yet Trump won. Many national polls had Hillary with double digit leads going into to the week of the election.

It was an absolute shalacking for the polls, proving what I and many others had been saying all along; these scientific polls are garbage. Rather they are intentionally skewed to help one side or just inept, the point is we need to take them all with a grain of salt.

That brings me to this;

I have heard every single media outlet drone on and on about how popular Obama is. They say polls show his popularity is at a high for him, over 50%. They ask how could his policies have been repudiated so strong by so much of America, but he be so popular? People have suggested perhaps his personal charm is the reason for this, and I think this may be a good explanation.

However, could it be possible that these polls that show how popular he is be just as wrong as all of the election polls where? Why should we listen to all of these media outlets that tell us how wrong the election polls were tell us how right they are on Obamas popularity?

I think that maybe, just maybe, Obama may not be as popular as everyone wants to make him out to be. At the end of the day iot doesn't really matter seeing as how the election at the very least showed many people are fed up with his policies, but I just think it is interesting to remember that we shouldn't just take these media and pollsters word on these matters when they have proven to be so wrong amost all of the time.

a reply to: Grambler

While you're right, what it also shows is with all the power at their fingertips (media, influence in education ect) people are pushing back, and it's proof we don't want what they are trying to sell.

The left movement is being fought on all fronts in the western world. Brexit and Trump are evidence of that.

The hypocrisy of the left is glaring. They brag about being tolerant and wanting diversity then call opponents of their logic names to discredit them.

Oh and God forbid any European country show reminisce of their history which dates back thousands of years.

George Soros is the shining example of the Alt-Left, destabilize and conquer. Do so while calling yourself a philanthropist and no one will stop you.

The polls were a true reflection of the popular vote, but the popular vote doesn't guarantee an election victory.

The college is there to prevent the popular vote from winning on such a small margin. Otherwise the POTUS candidates would just focus on an handful of states throughout the campaign and that would be totally unacceptable. The union wouldn't exist.

the media, the pollsters, the entertainment industry, and academia are in the tank for the left, and out of touch with the country

Hillary won the popular vote, so no they weren't that far off, and certainly not completely out of touch.

Obama got more electoral votes than Trump did, were you calling republicans out of touch then?

I for one dont think anyone should care about popularity, whether its a highschooler or the president.

Second, who cares? He's outta here in a matter of days and will be nothing more than a footnote after its all said and done.

Third, polls are garbage...period! Yet, come 2020 I bet most people forget and begin creating threads about their candidates popularity in the polls....

...wait for it...

...because people have short memories and are, for loss of a better word, idiots!

G'day!

a reply to: Grambler

Obama has used his skin color to further divide this nation! That is why he was selected by the elite over Hillary 8 years ago! The only promise he kept after him being elected? "I will fundamentally transform America!".

The indoctinization of cultural Marxism was implemented many years ago to subvert the United States of America and destroy it.

Look no further than the ijits graduating from our wonderful institutions of higher learning who scream HATE SPEECH while spitting, beating upon and subjugating anyone whom disagrees with the ideology they promote! Wouldn't and educated person fight hate with love? Hell, I loved the hippies of the 70's compared to the new breed of hippies whom disguise love by hating and promoting violence on anyone whom thinks differently than they do acting like fascists, while all the while calling those whom disagree verbally with them as the fascists?

Bizarro world! Where IMO being educated has now become the new standard for being dumber than a rock!

Now I know some will try to say the polls weren't that wrong, but they were.

Actually two weren't wrong.

The LA Times, and IBD polls.

Barack was very popular with sertain insects

a reply to: Grambler

Focusing on the polls specifically, they suffered perhaps there most embarrassing moment yet. Despite being wrong in the 2012 elections, the 2014 elections, Brexit, and now the Trump election, we still see politicians and the media citint polls as gospel truth.

Polls aren't a sure bet. I don't think that the media being wrong about reading their data and predicting the election outcome was the most embarrassing part of this election cycle, not by a long shot.

a reply to: windword

The most embarrassing part in my opinion is that the American people even considered either of those buffoons for president. The founding fathers must be face palming right now.

The only poll that truly gets this right is the "Rod-Cone" model...

Or, in laymen terms, your eyes...

In this poll, Obama is slightly more popular than Ebola...

-Christosterone

polls are crap,

polls say that the approval rating for congress is at an all time low, but almost every incumbent was re-elected this year.

either the polls are wrong or the voters re-elected people who they believe are doing a bad job.
I know that the average voter isn`t the sharpest tool in the shed but even I don`t believe that they would intentionally re-elect someone who they thought was doing a bad job.

originally posted by: CB328

the media, the pollsters, the entertainment industry, and academia are in the tank for the left, and out of touch with the country

Hillary won the popular vote, so no they weren't that far off, and certainly not completely out of touch.

Obama got more electoral votes than Trump did, were you calling republicans out of touch then?

Yes I was calling the pollsters and media out of touch. Most of them had Romney doing far better, and they were wrong. See any one of a number of my posts this year about how wrong the polls were in 2012.

a reply to: Grambler

I tend to agree....and for anyone who doesn't agree, then you have to admit his popularity didn't translate into a third term by proxy through HRC.

Keep trusting polls at your peril and you can expect to be blindsided over and over again.

Here is an excellent article illustrating the point from the DNC's own people.

DNC Staff: Arrogance Cost Clinton the Election

On election night, DNC number crunchers' first saw signs of trouble when tallies from Virginia began to roll in. Here was a state the Clinton camp expected to carry by nearly 10 points, and the early returns showed that wasn't going to happen. She won it by 5, but the slimmer-than-expected margin made DNC staffers nervous, especially because they had warned the Clinton camp not to pull staff and resources from there. The campaign did anyway, slashing its advertising investment in August. Sure, they survived inside the commonwealth, but inside the DNC, the late call of Virginia for Clinton was a distressing warning of things to come.

If their projected margin in Virginia was cut in half, where else was their forecast wrong?

...

There were the numerous pleas from state party leaders to get Clinton to specific states – like Michigan – earlier, and to devote more resources to state party operations, which provide the oil and expertise to get out the vote.

"But it was all about analytics with them," the DNC source says. "They were too reliant on analytics and not enough on instinct and human intel from the ground."

'nough said.

If you can bus in supporters, protestors and voters for your cause, I'm pretty sure you can bus in people to manipulate or even dictate the results of a poll.

F**** the MSM

a reply to: Grambler

The pollsters definitely got it wrong but it wasn't just the ones that are partnered with the media or providing results to media outlets, Donald Trump's own internal polling showed him behind on election day as well. I can find a source if you'd like but Chris Christie was saying it in a phone interview that I heard Thursday morning I believe? It also came out that the Trump campaign was paying $100k a week for polling.

I imagine the campaign's internal polling was at least in some part being done by Kellyanne Conway's own company, the cleverly named The Polling Company (which had been paid as of October, nearly a million dollars by the Mercer PAC, Make America Number 1).

Clearly Team Trump believes in polling and their own internal polling, which I think we can stipulate isn't subject to any corporate media bias, showed him losing too.

One interesting thing that came out was that apparently there was something like a 6% difference in responses between polls where responses were giving to live humans rather than automated according to one of the pollsters. This would seem to suggest the possibility that people were less likely to admit to an intent to vote for Trump than were actually willing to vote for Trump. The most likely reason I can think of is that not wanting to be perceived as a "Trump supporter."

It's not unlike the difference between something like voting by a show of hands and voting via secret ballot. When people respond to or in the presence of human beings, their responses are clearly influenced by concerns over how they're perceived. I imagine that these effects are even stronger depending on what the respondent knows about the live human questioning them and how they relate that to themselves. For instance, if a guy with a thick Southern accent calls 1000 people and asks, "Do you approve of the job being done by President Obama?" the results will be different than the same question asked of the same people by a black woman with a Northeastern accent.

What does that tell us about Obama's poll numbers?

It would be anyone's guess without breaking down the polls and even then, we probably wouldn't know all the major factors that could come into play. I think they'd have to be addressed on a case by case basis.

a reply to: Grambler

The reason most polls are garbage is because polling is NOT a science.

It is an art.

a reply to: seeker1963

Lol. "Cultural Marxism!" You want to talk about indoctrination? You may find it interesting (I'm kidding, you won't) that the Nazis employed probably the earliest example of this sort of meme. They called it Kulturbolschewismus ("Cultural Bolshevism") and it too was used to denounce their opponents.

Just sayin' you might want to get a little introspective about your own programming and consider the sources of concepts that you incorporate into your worldview.

originally posted by: Tardacus
polls are crap,

polls say that the approval rating for congress is at an all time low, but almost every incumbent was re-elected this year.

either the polls are wrong or the voters re-elected people who they believe are doing a bad job.
I know that the average voter isn`t the sharpest tool in the shed but even I don`t believe that they would intentionally re-elect someone who they thought was doing a bad job.

That approval rating would be right. Both sides use the term 'do nothing congress'. They viote along party lines, incumbents get re elected over and over,

a reply to: eisegesis

Disgusting. Isn't it?



ETA: What happened to your headline graphic????