Warning: file_get_contents(/home/www/settings/mirror_forum_db_enable_sql): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /var/www/html/content/Forum/functions.php on line 8
Really dude? You bitch when I respond too fast, You bitch when I respond too slow, you bitch when I don't respond at all. There are no rules on when/where/how often I respond to you. Get used to it, or don't, not my concern. If it bothers you, please wait patiently for my next response which I'll be working on diligently...
Sorry, you asked for it ... (this is a music site an all ...)
In politics, representation describes how some individuals stand in for others or a group of others, for a certain time period. Representation usually refers to representative democracies, where elected officials nominally speak for their constituents in the legislature. Generally, only citizens are granted representation in the government in the form of voting rights; however, some democracies have extended this right further.
Is it just me or is representation solely dependent upon voting as defined above ?
Really dude? You bitch when I respond too fast, You bitch when I respond too slow, you bitch when I don't respond at all. There are no rules on when/where/how often I respond to you. Get used to it, or don't, not my concern. If it bothers you, please wait patiently for my next response which I'll be working on diligently...
Do you think their needs and concerns should be considered by those making policy and governing?
I ask because I'm seeing this as a developing line of thought. I think all people in the nation deserve representation and consideration. A lot of people I know don't think that is so. It extends beyond those who don't vote to those who voted for any candidate who didn't win.
This is beyond the basics of having a mandate, or setting basic policy direction. A lot of people (and Trump both appears to espouse this view and encourages it in his supporters), seem to really think it's not important to represent those who did not support them. I think this is contrary to our ideals, but I haven't had a candidate of my choosing win in decades, so I may just be overly sensitive about it.
In politics, representation describes how some individuals stand in for others or a group of others, for a certain time period. Representation usually refers to representative democracies, where elected officials nominally speak for their constituents in the legislature. Generally, only citizens are granted representation in the government in the form of voting rights; however, some democracies have extended this right further.
Is it just me or is representation solely dependent upon voting as defined above ?
Any poll taken consistently with the same methods over time has meaning as it relates to a trend. That is one criteria for measuring a trend.
Who cares what those who won't vote think ? They aren't doing anything about their thoughts.
If you want an extended discussion about public polls during February, you're gonna have to find someone else to respond. It is way too early to get into opinion polls about Trump and the direction of the country and frankly I don't think recent polls on either subject accurately reflect a strong understanding of the complete disarray of Trump's administration.
Quickly, then:
Your first two sentences don't take into account whether that poll is accurate. You can poll people the same way and apply the same statistical methods to the raw data over and over again but if your results aren't accurate, they aren't worthwhile.
I leave it to you to sort through the opinions of various professional polling and news organizations as to the merits of Rasmussen Reports. Have a good evening. From September 2012: Rasmussen: The GOP’s cure for the common poll
From early 2010: Is Rasmussen Reports Biased? What Rasmussen has had is a “house effect”. So far in the 2010 cycle, their polling has consistently and predictably shown better results for Republican candidates than other polling firms have. But such house effects can emerge from legitimate differences of opinion about how to model the electorate.
Rasmussen’s election polling has tended to be quite accurate in the past. Nor, incidentally, has their election polling has a particularly strong house effect in the past; it is something new to the 2010 cycle. But that’s OK; each election cycle features different dynamics in terms of turnout and motivation, and what might be smart assumptions in one cycle won’t necessarily carry over to the next.
Now, what you do need to be aware of is that Rasmussen’s opinion is one among many. They might turn out to be right — but so might all of the other pollsters who have a different opinion about the electorate. If you’re running a news organization and you tend to cite Rasmussen’s polls disproportionately, it probably means that you are biased — it does not necessarily mean that Rasmussen is biased.
"Who cares what those who won't vote think ? They aren't doing anything about their thoughts."
Note the excerpt below from the FiveThirtyEight.com, which I am re-posting. Note the bold-faced sentence (emphasis mine). There's no guarantee that the adults who don't normally vote will not vote in 2018. See also the bolded sentence above: "...each election cycle features different dynamics in terms of turnout and motivation, and what might be smart assumptions in one cycle won’t necessarily carry over to the next."
While there can be good reasons for using polls of voters as opposed to those of all adults, however, I’d be wary of making too much about the difference between registered-voter and likely-voter polls. At this early stage, it’s hard to predict what the likely voter electorate will look like in 2018. Midterm voters are typically older and whiter than registered voters overall, which should help Republicans. But they’re also better-educated, which should help Democrats. Furthermore, the “enthusiasm gap” can vary quite a bit from election to election, although it usually favors the opposition party in the midterms (i.e., Democrats in 2018).
The differences between these various types of polls may also narrow as we collect more data. So far, the only pollsters surveying likely voters are Rasmussen Reports and Zogby, and they aren’t very good pollsters. And the only pollsters we could find releasing numbers among both all adults and registered voters — which provides for the most direct comparison between those groups — are YouGov and Pew Research. YouGov’s poll showed Trump’s approval rating lower among all adults than among registered voters, but his disapproval rating was lower also. That’s a fairly typical pattern: Adults who aren’t registered to vote are often politically disengaged and may have indifferent views toward Trump.
Any poll taken consistently with the same methods over time has meaning as it relates to a trend. That is one criteria for measuring a trend.
Who cares what those who won't vote think ? They aren't doing anything about their thoughts.
Yes, you are trumpeting (hah!) the Rasmussen poll of 46% saying 'right track', yet that same poll list 48% as 'wrong track'. So not only are you selecting the one of many polls that somewhat supports your oddball claim, you are even selectively reporting the numbers from that poll.
You do realize the significance of looking at one particular poll over a lonnnnnnng period of time, right ?
Whatever significance you're referring to depends on the success of the poll's methods. I think you might benefit from reading this FiveThirtyEight.com article, which cautions both pro- and anti-Trump Americans from reading too much into polls at this point in time. In the article, btw, Nate Silver states that Rasmussen Reports "aren't very good pollsters."
Instead, Trump’s approval ratings are systematically higher in polls of voters — either registered voters or likely voters — than they are in polls of all adults. And they’re systematically higher in polls conducted online or by automated script than they are in polls conducted by live-telephone interviewers.
...
While there can be good reasons for using polls of voters as opposed to those of all adults, however, I’d be wary of making too much about the difference between registered-voter and likely-voter polls. At this early stage, it’s hard to predict what the likely voter electorate will look like in 2018. Midterm voters are typically older and whiter than registered voters overall, which should help Republicans. But they’re also better-educated, which should help Democrats. Furthermore, the “enthusiasm gap” can vary quite a bit from election to election, although it usually favors the opposition party in the midterms (i.e., Democrats in 2018).
The differences between these various types of polls may also narrow as we collect more data. So far, the only pollsters surveying likely voters are Rasmussen Reports and Zogby, and they aren’t very good pollsters. And the only pollsters we could find releasing numbers among both all adults and registered voters — which provides for the most direct comparison between those groups — are YouGov and Pew Research. YouGov’s poll showed Trump’s approval rating lower among all adults than among registered voters, but his disapproval rating was lower also. That’s a fairly typical pattern: Adults who aren’t registered to vote are often politically disengaged and may have indifferent views toward Trump.
...
In the meantime, be on alert for selective citation of polls that are used to advance a narrative. In his press conference last week, for instance, Trump cited a Rasmussen Reports poll showing him with a 55 percent approval rating — neglecting to mention that no other recent poll shows him above 49 percent approval.
But I’ve seen at least as much cherry-picking from liberal and mainstream reporters. In my Twitter feed last week, for instance, a Pew poll that had Trump at 39 percent approval5 got a lot more attention than a Fox News survey which had him at 48 percent instead.6
...Trump is not very popular, but he’s also no more unpopular than Barack Obama was for much of his presidency. If his numbers hold where they they are right now — especially among registered voters — Republicans would probably hold their own in 2018, and 2020 would be another highly competitive election.
What’s different, as I mentioned, is Trump’s approval ratings are much worse than what a president typically enjoys at this stage of his term. So the question is whether his ratings will continue to decline or if he steadies the ship, or eventually pivots and sees his approval ratings improve. It’s possible — I’d wager more likely than not if forced to bet — that Trump’s ratings will continue to decline over the next six to 18 months, at which point he’d be in trouble since he’s starting from a low baseline. But while he faces a lot of challenges — mostly of his own making — he sometimes benefits from news coverage that overextends itself and predicts his immediate demise only to have to pull back later, perhaps making him seem more formidable in the process.
You do realize that the poll you quoted (one that is generally noted as having a rightward slant) actually shows a higher percentage of people with a different/opposing view than the one you are trumpeting (hah!).
You do realize that the poll you quoted (one that is generally noted as having a rightward slant) actually shows a higher percentage of people with a different/opposing view than the one you are trumpeting (hah!).
You do realize the significance of looking at one particular poll over a lonnnnnnng period of time, right ?
You do realize that the poll you quoted (one that is generally noted as having a rightward slant) actually shows a higher percentage of people with a different/opposing view than the one you are trumpeting (hah!).
