Barack Obama:"America ...has shown arrogance, been dissmisive, even derisive, BUT..."

HotParadox wrote:the best poll is the one you hear with your own ears talking to friends, family, people in your area and people you know out of state. that may not be the pulse of america, but the formal polls may not be either. that appears to be the bottom line, though, doesn't it?

Big Slick wrote:I work in Marketing Research and I do this all day.

Old Timer wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:

Old Timer wrote:

Big Slick wrote:

Old Timer wrote:While I do understand what you are saying and agree with it. I have a question. Who selects those selected for the polls and how are they selected.

It depends on each individual study. This one said it used an RDD sample. Which means they used a computer program to randomly dial phone numbers nationwide. There is no rhyme or reason to the dialing and if someone picks up they start asking them questions. Each survey will have a screening section to see if you are qualified to take the survey. So, for example, if Summer's Eve wanted to get opinions on a new product or idea they would screen out certain people who would not help their study. They would screen out men (for obvious reasons) and they would more than likely screen out 55+ due to the menopausal stage.

Now for this study, since it was a general population opinion poll, I would guess they would only screen you out if you directly worked for one of the political parties. Everyone else would qualify and anyone who was willing to participate would be allowed to.

Thanks, I have always wondered about that. So there is no way possible for them to control or fix the results then?

That would depend on what they were screening for and what were the screening questions. So yea, it can be fixed right there.

So basically there is no way anyone would ever know if the polls are honest or not. So we then must have blind faith. That presents a problem for me.

Big Slick wrote:

Kazza wrote:The full details of the poll are available on the site, including the exact wording of every question that they asked and how many respondents answered in each category.

My internet is playing up, so I can't open the pdf, but I think there were about 1000 people in the poll. If Obama had, say, a 50% approval rating, instead of 66, then they would need to conduct the poll.... ok, I just ran the numbers and the silly thing doesn't have enough decimal places. Which means they would need to have run at least 100,000 trials before they got a set of 1000 where 66% like Obama. Which means asking 30% of the population of the country.

Of course, the whole thing could just be made up, but then so could Obama. Have any of you actually seen him with your own eyes?

And in any case, gallup polls are the most reliable, and they show the same thing.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/117370/Satisfaction-Ratings-Continue-Slow-Steady-Climb.aspx

That's not how polls work. I work in Marketing Research and I do this all day. Increasing the number of people you interview will not change the results of the poll. All it will do is decrease the margin of error. So if you interview 100 random people and 60% approve of BO then that means that could be as high as 70% or as low as 50% so there is a huge margin of error. Increasing the number to 1000 will mean that 60% will still say the same thing but now the range closes to 57%-63%.

Theophilus wrote:So Obama is tying build bridges. So what?

Building bridges will benefit us.

Perhaps some of you were thinking Obama should of told Europe to go f**k themselves.

The fear mongering on this thread is deeply disturbing.

Theophilus wrote:So Obama is tying build bridges. So what?

Building bridges will benefit us.

Perhaps some of you were thinking Obama should of told Europe to go f**k themselves.

The fear mongering on this thread is deeply disturbing.

Old Timer wrote:

Theophilus wrote:So Obama is tying build bridges. So what?

Building bridges will benefit us.

Perhaps some of you were thinking Obama should of told Europe to go f**k themselves.

The fear mongering on this thread is deeply disturbing.

The only thing that concerns me is what will be coming back here over those bridges he is building. It does worry me when our president bows down to an arab, or anybody for that matter. Especially since he himself is still probably not only part arab by birth but mentally to.

Kazza wrote:

Old Timer wrote:

Theophilus wrote:So Obama is tying build bridges. So what?

Building bridges will benefit us.

Perhaps some of you were thinking Obama should of told Europe to go f**k themselves.

The fear mongering on this thread is deeply disturbing.

The only thing that concerns me is what will be coming back here over those bridges he is building. It does worry me when our president bows down to an arab, or anybody for that matter. Especially since he himself is still probably not only part arab by birth but mentally to.

How can you be part arab mentally?

CarolinaHound wrote:Actually I don't think Obama is even part Arabian (which refers to the region someone or their ancestors are from, not their religion). I think he's half white and half black (caucasian American and Kenyan to be specific). He was however raised with a lot of Muslim (which is a religion) influence. And I think he holds a much stronger sentiment for that religion than he wants to be known publicly. Which is how I'm taking what OT is saying to mean, and I agree with him. I could convert to Muslim, but no matter how hard I tried, I could never completely remove the christian beliefs and morals that have influenced me so much over the years. especially in those early years of my life. It's programed into my psyche and can never be completely removed, covered up and denied,yes; but not removed.

Old Timer wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:Actually I don't think Obama is even part Arabian (which refers to the region someone or their ancestors are from, not their religion). I think he's half white and half black (caucasian American and Kenyan to be specific). He was however raised with a lot of Muslim (which is a religion) influence. And I think he holds a much stronger sentiment for that religion than he wants to be known publicly. Which is how I'm taking what OT is saying to mean, and I agree with him. I could convert to Muslim, but no matter how hard I tried, I could never completely remove the christian beliefs and morals that have influenced me so much over the years. especially in those early years of my life. It's programed into my psyche and can never be completely removed, covered up and denied,yes; but not removed.

thank you as that is exactly what I meant. Sorry I wasn't more clear.

Theophilus wrote:So Obama is tying build bridges. So what?

Building bridges will benefit us.

Perhaps some of you were thinking Obama should of told Europe to go f**k themselves.

The fear mongering on this thread is deeply disturbing.

Peregrine(Endangered) wrote:

Theophilus wrote:So Obama is tying build bridges. So what?

Building bridges will benefit us.

Perhaps some of you were thinking Obama should of told Europe to go f**k themselves.

The fear mongering on this thread is deeply disturbing.

I agree...it happens constantly on political threads and it gets old...it doesn't matter who is in office, everything is gloom and doom..