The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

jimmurphy said:

Smedley said:

If somehow Biden comes back strong, the Dems outperform in the midterms and Biden wins a second term I’ll be happy to admit I was wrong. 

But in the interim, if you’re going to cite polls, at least cite aggregate stuff.  

Do you want me to post the Quinnipiac poll from 4 days ago? Guessing you don’t. 

You’ve made your point very clearly umpteen times.

What is the reason for continuing to bring this up?

Are you trying to change minds? It’s pretty clear that isn’t happening.

Are you trying to mobilize people to do something? If so, what?

Are you just trying to go on record so that at some future point you can say “I told you so!?”

Can we just let the polls speak for themselves and move on?

Help me out. Why is this so important to you?

 I'm only engaging back with posters who engage. Which I thought was the purpose of this discussion forum. If I were just quoting my own posts and adding to them , ie, talking to myself, I'd see your point, but I'm not, so I don't. All I can suggest is for you is to skip my posts.

It's funny, sometimes my political posts are in line with the prevailing wisdom on here, eg. on the vaccines, the Big Lie, and Trump being an f___tard. Generally, crickets on those posts. But people often want to debate the other stuff, sometime to great lengths, and I'm fine with that.

And don't forget, you frequently (and justifiably) flame mtierney for not responding to stuff. And now you flame me for responding to stuff?   

 dude, please.  YOU are the one who resurfaced your poll obsession last week.  


Smedley
said:

Anyone worried about the Biden presidency yet?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bidens-approval-rating-isnt-bouncing-back/

 It was news, not recycled stuff. Just like the Sabato tweet that I don't see you tsk-tsking about.

The topic wouldn't have come up again absent your decision to bring it back. So for you to say you're just responding to others is disingenuous. This is your pet issue and not anyone else's.


jimmurphy said:

Smedley said:

 I'm only engaging back with posters who engage. Which I thought was the purpose of this discussion forum. If I were just quoting my own posts and adding to them , ie, talking to myself, I'd see your point, but I'm not, so I don't. All I can suggest is for you is to skip my posts.

It's funny, sometimes my political posts are in line with the prevailing wisdom on here, eg. on the vaccines, the Big Lie, and Trump being an f___tard. Generally, crickets on those posts. But people often want to debate the other stuff, sometime to great lengths, and I'm fine with that.

And don't forget, you frequently (and justifiably) flame mtierney for not responding to stuff. And now you flame me for responding to stuff?   

OK, but given that there’s no movement on the part of the posters who are disagreeing/engaging, doesn’t it make sense to agree to disagree and move on?

 there is zero expectation of movement of other posters' opinions. At least, I have zero expectation of this.

As far as your question -- I guess, but new polls and new articles about polls come out all the time, and I don't see why they wouldn't be fair game to discuss, even if some people don't like the information that is presented. 


ml1 said:

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

jimmurphy said:

Smedley said:

If somehow Biden comes back strong, the Dems outperform in the midterms and Biden wins a second term I’ll be happy to admit I was wrong. 

But in the interim, if you’re going to cite polls, at least cite aggregate stuff.  

Do you want me to post the Quinnipiac poll from 4 days ago? Guessing you don’t. 

You’ve made your point very clearly umpteen times.

What is the reason for continuing to bring this up?

Are you trying to change minds? It’s pretty clear that isn’t happening.

Are you trying to mobilize people to do something? If so, what?

Are you just trying to go on record so that at some future point you can say “I told you so!?”

Can we just let the polls speak for themselves and move on?

Help me out. Why is this so important to you?

 I'm only engaging back with posters who engage. Which I thought was the purpose of this discussion forum. If I were just quoting my own posts and adding to them , ie, talking to myself, I'd see your point, but I'm not, so I don't. All I can suggest is for you is to skip my posts.

It's funny, sometimes my political posts are in line with the prevailing wisdom on here, eg. on the vaccines, the Big Lie, and Trump being an f___tard. Generally, crickets on those posts. But people often want to debate the other stuff, sometime to great lengths, and I'm fine with that.

And don't forget, you frequently (and justifiably) flame mtierney for not responding to stuff. And now you flame me for responding to stuff?   

 dude, please.  YOU are the one who resurfaced your poll obsession last week.  


Smedley
said:

Anyone worried about the Biden presidency yet?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bidens-approval-rating-isnt-bouncing-back/

 It was news, not recycled stuff. Just like the Sabato tweet that I don't see you tsk-tsking about.

The topic wouldn't have come up again absent your decision to bring it back. So for you to say you're just responding to others is disingenuous. This is your pet issue and not anyone else's.

Seems odd that in a Rose garden thread, the highly germane topic of presidential approval rating wouldn't come up unless I brought it up.    


Smedley said:

Seems odd that in a Rose garden thread, the highly germane topic of presidential approval rating wouldn't come up unless I brought it up.    

it didn't come up again so soon from anyone but you though, did it?


Smedley said:

Seems odd that in a Rose garden thread, the highly germane topic of presidential approval rating wouldn't come up unless I brought it up.    

Odd that a topic wouldn’t come up unless someone who thought it was germane brought it up? 


ml1 said:

Smedley said:

Seems odd that in a Rose garden thread, the highly germane topic of presidential approval rating wouldn't come up unless I brought it up.    

it didn't come up again so soon from anyone but you though, did it?

 No, but I would bet my bottom dollar that had the polls shown Biden's numbers back up to July levels, it would have come up.   


DaveSchmidt said:

Smedley said:

Seems odd that in a Rose garden thread, the highly germane topic of presidential approval rating wouldn't come up unless I brought it up.    

Odd that a topic wouldn’t come up unless someone who thought it was germane brought it up? 

 Yes I am quite the odd duck, perhaps off my rocker even, in thinking that a presidential approval rating is relevant to a rose garden discussion. 

538 has the number permanently installed on the top right, above the fold, and updates it multiple times per day. Have you clapped back at Nate on twitter for focusing on such insipidity?


Smedley said:

DaveSchmidt said:

Smedley said:

Seems odd that in a Rose garden thread, the highly germane topic of presidential approval rating wouldn't come up unless I brought it up.    

Odd that a topic wouldn’t come up unless someone who thought it was germane brought it up? 

 Yes I am quite the odd duck, perhaps off my rocker even, in thinking that a presidential approval rating is relevant to a rose garden discussion. 

538 has the number permanently installed on the top right, above the fold, and updates it multiple times per day. Have you clapped back at Nate on twitter for focusing on such insipidity?

 wow. a site devoted to polling focuses on polling.

That must be meaningful.


Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

Seems odd that in a Rose garden thread, the highly germane topic of presidential approval rating wouldn't come up unless I brought it up.    

it didn't come up again so soon from anyone but you though, did it?

 No, but I would bet my bottom dollar that had the polls shown Biden's numbers back up to July levels, it would have come up.   

 but none of that happened.


I don't quite understand this argument with Smedley about Biden's approval rating.  It is a cause for concern.  Not a cause for panic, just yet, but a cause for concern.  


drummerboy said:

Smedley said:

DaveSchmidt said:

Smedley said:

Seems odd that in a Rose garden thread, the highly germane topic of presidential approval rating wouldn't come up unless I brought it up.    

Odd that a topic wouldn’t come up unless someone who thought it was germane brought it up? 

 Yes I am quite the odd duck, perhaps off my rocker even, in thinking that a presidential approval rating is relevant to a rose garden discussion. 

538 has the number permanently installed on the top right, above the fold, and updates it multiple times per day. Have you clapped back at Nate on twitter for focusing on such insipidity?

 wow. a site devoted to polling focuses on polling.

That must be meaningful.

has anyone here questioned the validity of polls in measuring voters attitudes in the moment?  I haven't.

The question (now asked and answered ad nauseam) is whether any of us are personally concerned by those numbers more than a year ahead of the midterms.  And the answer remains "no."  For me, I'm concerned, but not about a number.  For example, I'm concerned Congress won't pass any of Biden's legislative priorities.  And for a human being living in the United States, isn't whether or not those bills pass infinitely more relevant than a number posted on Fivethirtyeight.com?  And isn't the fate of those bills more important in determining the outcome of the next election than an approval rating today?


tjohn said:

I don't quite understand this argument with Smedley about Biden's approval rating.  It is a cause for concern.  Not a cause for panic, just yet, but a cause for concern.  

 as I've responded many times now, I'm not concerned with a metric, I'm concerned with the events that will influence it.


ml1 said:

tjohn said:

I don't quite understand this argument with Smedley about Biden's approval rating.  It is a cause for concern.  Not a cause for panic, just yet, but a cause for concern.  

 as I've responded many times now, I'm not concerned with a metric, I'm concerned with the events that will influence it.

Actually, I am concerned for the reasons you set forth in the previous post - a Congress that can get nothing done.   Climate change is going to impact every aspect of our lives for the rest of this century and we have to work to respond to the problem.  But that isn't really happening.


Smedley said:

 there is zero expectation of movement of other posters' opinions. At least, I have zero expectation of this.

As far as your question -- I guess, but new polls and new articles about polls come out all the time, and I don't see why they wouldn't be fair game to discuss, even if some people don't like the information that is presented. 

It’s not that people don’t like the number, it’s that the number is just a reflection of other things.

Discussing those things is is interesting. Merely fretting about a number without attributing reasons behind it and suggestions to improve it is a waste of everyone’s time.

Why is the approval rating low? Let’s talk about that and what might be done.

Right?


drummerboy said:

Smedley said: 

538 has the number permanently installed on the top right, above the fold, and updates it multiple times per day. Have you clapped back at Nate on twitter for focusing on such insipidity?

 wow. a site devoted to polling focuses on polling.

That must be meaningful.

There is that. 

And sure, Smedley: If Nate posted on MOL, which I follow, in wonderment why nobody besides you and him here was interested in the polling, I might give a reply a go.


ml1 said:

has anyone here questioned the validity of polls in measuring voters attitudes in the moment?  I haven't.

question


tjohn said:

 So, I read the article.  And I lost brain cells in the process.

Still, Mtierney, you do understand that the article is 100% innuendo, right?

What about allegations based in fact that Trump attempted the greatest crime against the American people since the founding of the nation?

 She has strong anti-corruption inclinations. She's been very clear that any corruption not directly advancing the personal fortunes of someone she votes for is way out of bounds.


jimmurphy said:

Smedley said:

 there is zero expectation of movement of other posters' opinions. At least, I have zero expectation of this.

As far as your question -- I guess, but new polls and new articles about polls come out all the time, and I don't see why they wouldn't be fair game to discuss, even if some people don't like the information that is presented. 

It’s not that people don’t like the number, it’s that the number is just a reflection of other things.

Discussing those things is is interesting. Merely fretting about a number without attributing reasons behind it and suggestions to improve it is a waste of everyone’s time.

Why is the approval rating low? Let’s talk about that and what might be done.

Right?

 Fair enough. IMO there are two primary reasons for Biden's underwater approval rating. (1) Given that his decline is most pronounced among independents, I think there is some perception that Biden is veering too far left, and that his presidency has been a bait-and-switch, ie he ran as a centrist but he's governing as a liberal.  And the other issue is (2) real questions about the competence of the administration (e.g. Afghanistan) and the leadership of the president himself. On that last point, for example, I think given the size and importance of BBB, Biden should be out there all the time talking about it in great detail and giving town hall and pressers to sell the plan. Obama would be doing that. But instead, Biden's pretty much invisible and there is a leadership vacuum. Not going there as to why that is, but suffice to say that many people expect more from the president. 

As far as what might be done -- not sure about that right now, but this is a start.

Why do you think the approval rating is underwater?


Smedley said:


Why do you think the approval rating is underwater?

 Covid.


How would that be? Biden has gone from +10 to -5 as covid improved. 


Smedley said:

How would that be? Biden has gone from +10 to -5 as covid improved. 

 My kids still aren't vaccinated. I'm still wearing a mask indoors. In a couple of months the whole family is about to get on a plane to the midwest, so I get to look forward to the stress of being in a metal tube breathing other people's air for several hours, then navigating the tricky family politics of avoiding national politics while insisting that, sorry, if you're kids aren't masked they're not playing with mine and, don't take it personally, but please don't stand too close. And of course buying Christmas presents while the supply chains remain snafu'd shoud be fun.

Yeah, I'd say we're not quite to a place where we can expect to see national leaders reap the political benefits of defeating the pandemic yet.


Smedley said:

How would that be? Biden has gone from +10 to -5 as covid improved. 

 did you even read the fivethirtyeight article you linked to?  There are answers to that and other potential reasons for the decline in Biden's approval.  Maybe pay attention to more than the summary number on Nate's home page.


Actually I stand corrected, Biden went from +10 to -5 as Covid worsened, but then he has stayed at -5 as Covid improved.

Yeah I can maybe see some covid fatigue as a factor weighing on the approval rating. But I don't see it as a primary factor. Kids are back in school which is huge.  


PVW said:

Smedley said:


Why do you think the approval rating is underwater?

 Covid.

 I think it’s the vaccine mandates, and Afghanistan all around the same time. 


ml1 said:

Smedley said:

How would that be? Biden has gone from +10 to -5 as covid improved. 

 did you even read the fivethirtyeight article you linked to?  There are answers to that and other potential reasons for the decline in Biden's approval.  Maybe pay attention to more than the summary number on Nate's home page.

 Well believe it or not I have my own opinions and perspectives which is what I thought I would share in answer to Jim M. and subsequently. Should I have just copied and pasted the 538 article as my response?


Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

How would that be? Biden has gone from +10 to -5 as covid improved. 

 did you even read the fivethirtyeight article you linked to?  There are answers to that and other potential reasons for the decline in Biden's approval.  Maybe pay attention to more than the summary number on Nate's home page.

 Well believe it or not I have my own opinions and perspectives which is what I thought I would share in answer to Jim M. Should I have just copied and pasted the 538 article as my response?

 so you take the top level number as gospel, but then refuse to look at the underlying data that explains that number? Instead, you just make sh!t up?

ok


Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

How would that be? Biden has gone from +10 to -5 as covid improved. 

 did you even read the fivethirtyeight article you linked to?  There are answers to that and other potential reasons for the decline in Biden's approval.  Maybe pay attention to more than the summary number on Nate's home page.

 Well believe it or not I have my own opinions and perspectives which is what I thought I would share in answer to Jim M. and subsequently. Should I have just copied and pasted the 538 article as my response?

I'd have thought since it was you who brought the article into the discussion you might reference it on some level, even if it was to say you disagreed with it.  Because your response to PVW suggests you're questioning his conclusion, even though it corresponds pretty well with what was in the article that you posted.


Ml1 and db: why do you think Biden's ratings have gone and stayed underwater? And perhaps even follow up w something on what can be done about it, as Jim M suggested. 

All I've heard from you so far is "unfair media coverage of Afghanistan". Gotta do better than that. 

It's easy to just s--- on what I say all the time, and dismiss what MSM says, but as the smartest guys in the room, that must get boring for you. How about offering some real substance and value-add rather than defer then criticize, lather rinse repeat.  


Also, time and polling results have moved on ...

nohero said:

Smedley said:

The potshot king. Hello. 

Well you know, besides me, Nate Silver and the Quinnipiac pollsters must really hate Biden. What other conclusion can be drawn from their recent blasphemous publishing?

Or, maybe the Quinnipiac poll is an outlier and/or captured a momentary blip. At least, according to this politics guru - 

 


ml1 said:

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

How would that be? Biden has gone from +10 to -5 as covid improved. 

 did you even read the fivethirtyeight article you linked to?  There are answers to that and other potential reasons for the decline in Biden's approval.  Maybe pay attention to more than the summary number on Nate's home page.

 Well believe it or not I have my own opinions and perspectives which is what I thought I would share in answer to Jim M. and subsequently. Should I have just copied and pasted the 538 article as my response?

I'd have thought since it was you who brought the article into the discussion you might reference it on some level, even if it was to say you disagreed with it.  Because your response to PVW suggests you're questioning his conclusion, even though it corresponds pretty well with what was in the article that you posted.

 The whole premise of your gotcha attempt, even with the whiz-bang italics, is ridiculous. 

I can believe the top-line poll, which is a cold hard number, and have my own opinions on what's behind the numbers, which is the part with some speculation and guesswork involved.   


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.