Fox News Poll:...Trump ratings down

transporter

Well-Known Member
Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

I'll post the picture since so many seem to have such difficulty with the English language:

139937

In the wake of two mass shootings, overwhelming and bipartisan majorities of voters favor background checks on gun buyers and taking guns from people who are a danger to themselves or others, according to the latest Fox News Poll. Two-thirds also support a ban on “assault weapons,” although that majority is largely driven by Democrats.

But asked to choose one or the other, voters would rather live in a country where gun ownership is legal than one where guns are banned.
...
Overall, 56 percent of voters disapprove of Trump’s performance, up from 51 percent in July. Record numbers of men (53 percent), white men (46 percent), and independents (64 percent) disapprove. His disapproval rating has only been higher once: 57 percent in October 2017.
...
Fifty-nine percent of voters are unhappy with the way things are going in the country. That’s higher than the 53 percent who were dissatisfied at Trump’s 100-day mark (April 2017). Among partisans, Republicans (73 percent) alone are satisfied, as most Democrats (86 percent) and independents (63 percent) are dissatisfied.
...
Most voters either disapprove (51 percent) of Trump’s tweeting or wish he would be more cautious (31 percent). Sixteen percent approve.


59% of people are unhappy with the way things are going??

This is from a Fox "News" poll???

That should tell the Republican Party that they should strongly consider "The Mooch's" advice and find a new candidate at the top of the ticket.
 

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
PREMO Member
Why does this come to mind?

139961


--- End of line (MCP)
 
Reactions: BOP

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

I'll post the picture since so many seem to have such difficulty with the English language:

View attachment 139937


59% of people are unhappy with the way things are going??

This is from a Fox "News" poll???

That should tell the Republican Party that they should strongly consider "The Mooch's" advice and find a new candidate at the top of the ticket.

Jsu this week I've seen or read about at least a dozen examples of former conservatives who cant stomach any more of Trumps divisiveness, racism and bigotry.

It's nice to see people finally waking up but also sad it took this long

 

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
PREMO Member
Jsu this week...
First, who's Jsu?

Second, are you just as keen to post articles about "lifelong Liberals" doing the same as they walk away from the Democrat Party?

After all, if we're trying to present a complete picture...? Right? Isn't that what we're trying to do?

--- End of line (MCP)
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
First, who's Jsu?

Second, are you just as keen to post articles about "lifelong Liberals" doing the same as they walk away from the Democrat Party?

After all, if we're trying to present a complete picture...? Right? Isn't that what we're trying to do?

--- End of line (MCP)

Feel free. Did i stop you from posting such?

Gurps once did and i showed him where the #demwalkaway was actually funded by the GOP.

If you want to present another side feel free. Otherwise you can just keep attacking me for doing things you cant be bothered to do like posting something relevant to the Op's discussion
 

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
PREMO Member
Feel free. Did i stop you from posting such?

Gurps once did and i showed him where the #demwalkaway was actually funded by the GOP.

If you want to present another side feel free. Otherwise you can just keep attacking me for doing things you cant be bothered to do like posting something relevant to the Op's discussion
Really? That's your reply?

The point of a mature discussion is to present relevant data. That means both sides. Statements that acknowledge that whatever issue is at hand/under discussion is generally more complicated than just presenting cheap canards.

You (& the OP) without fail choose to present one side only and then get all sanctimonious about it. If you want to troll and/or simply finger point, fine. But if you want to have a sustained, adult discussion post something that approximates the entirety/the complexity of the issue.

You (& the OP) without fail include "one last jab" in your comments. It's so passive-aggressive. That's what I respond to when I choose to troll you (& the OP); it's done to #mirror.

My preference, however, is to have a grown-up discussion as opposed to this middle school cafeteria-level stuff. Do I always stay true to what my preference is? Nope. But I try. You?

--- End of line (MCP)
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Really? That's your reply?

The point of a mature discussion is to present relevant data. That means both sides. Statements that acknowledge that whatever issue is at hand/under discussion is generally more complicated than just presenting cheap canards.

You (& the OP) without fail choose to present one side only and then get all sanctimonious about it. If you want to troll and/or simply finger point, fine. But if you want to have a sustained, adult discussion post something that approximates the entirety/the complexity of the issue.

You (& the OP) without fail include "one last jab" in your comments. It's so passive-aggressive. That's what I respond to when I choose to troll you (& the OP); it's done to #mirror.

My preference, however, is to have a grown-up discussion as opposed to this middle school cafeteria-level stuff. Do I always stay true to what my preference is? Nope. But I try. You?

--- End of line (MCP)
Ok. In this example where the OP posted a current poll from Fox news that shows Trumps approval rating slipping how exactly are you going to show both sides of that? Are you saying there is another poll that shows the opposite?
 
Last edited:

Rommey

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
59% of people are unhappy with the way things are going??
59%?? Looks like 56% to me. I know a 6 and a 9 look similar, but they are different.

This is from a Fox "News" poll???
Are you implying that somehow a FoxNews poll should show something different than what they polled? Are you implying they should skew their results to achieve a different result?
Just to point out the stunningly obvious: One poll is just a snapshot. BTW, the FoxNews poll mirrors the RealClear Politics average for the past 3 weeks, so if anything it aligns with other polling data.

So as usual, in your rush to be derisive and condescending, you start frothing at the mouth and don't realize just what kind of fool you look like. Now if you would at least engage in a discussion, your points might have some value and you might even convince people to see you side of things. But you prefer to be that guy who gets in a crowded elevator, farts, and gets off. Your discussion points are just as pertinent.
 
Last edited:

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
PREMO Member
Ok. In this example where the OP posted a current poll from Fox news that shows Trumps approval rating slipping how exactly are you going to show both sides of that? Are you saying there is another poll that shows the opposite?
Thank you for the reply.

I agree; can't show both sides of a poll (if I understand you correctly). But one can put the poll in context. For instance, Trump's polling numbers on any particular issue may be the result of the particular issue in question, but also his take on other issues. For example, RFLs. Or tariffs. Or his tweets. Or NATO. Or whatever. And, of course, polling cuts both ways. For example, Trump could be losing support by the Right for his initial take on RFLs, but gaining more of the Independents (or Democrats). What this means (in this example) is that his support on the Right could be plummeting, but "new" supporters among Independents and Democrats makes the numbers not look so bad. Yes, one could probably find the answer by reading the linked article, but that leads to my bigger point....

The bigger point is that the poll and the accompanying sarcasm amounts to nothing more than finger pointing/eye poking. What incentive has the OP given for anyone to explore further? To engage? The OP's posting history shows there's no value in it. Far easier to respond in kind.

There's a well-known principle in psychology that if you want people to see things your way (or at least, not in the way they are currently seeing it) honey works far better than vinegar. We know that to be true by numerous studies regarding mandatory, so-called "sensitivity training" events (regardless of the issue). People don't respond well to this stuff; in fact, post training event surveying consistently shows people's attitudes hardening against the subject matter in the aftermath of these sorts of events. And the more often the event, the longer the hardening lasts, the more resistant the opposition becomes. (The logic even applies to things like quitting smoking, weight loss, etc.!)

That's why the frequent (and far too casual) use of epithets these days (like "racist," "sexist," "homophobe," etc.) are counter-productive. The best way for someone to ensure no progress is made on an issue? Attack (stridently or frequently). Best way to try to find common ground? Show a willingness to deescalate and engage. Another model put it this way: "evolution, not revolution."

Sorry for the rambling. One last comment, though, before closing. Believe it or not, there have been quite few times I've agreed with your take on things. But the presentation didn't lend itself to an agreeing response. (As an aside, that's why in counseling we strive to change the tone of the discussion before we try to work with the "facts"; the "facts" will never matter if the discussion isn't in some way collaborative.)

For what it's worth.

Wishing you a very nice evening. Again, thanks for the reply.

--- End of line (MCP)
 
Last edited:
Reactions: BOP

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Thank you for the reply.

I agree; can't show both sides of a poll (if I understand you correctly). But one can put the poll in context. For instance, Trump's polling numbers on any particular issue may be the result of the issue in particular question, but also his take on other issues. For example, RFLs. Or tariffs. Or his tweets. Or NATO. Or whatever. And, of course, polling cuts both ways. For example, Trump could be losing support by the Right for his initial take on RFLs, but gaining more of the Independents (or Democrats). What this means (in this example) is that his support on the Right could be plummeting, but "new" supporters among Independents and Democrats makes the numbers not look so bad. Yes, one could probably find the answer by reading the linked article, but that leads to my bigger point....

The bigger point is that the poll and the accompanying sarcasm amounts to nothing more than finger pointing/eye poking. What incentive has the OP given for anyone to explore further? To engage? The OP's posting history shows there's no value in it. Far easier to respond in kind.

There's a well-known principle in psychology that if you want people to see things your way (or at least, not in the way they are currently seeing it) honey works far better than vinegar. We know that to be true by numerous studies regarding mandatory, so-called "sensitivity training" events (regardless of the issue). People don't respond well to this stuff; in fact, post training event surveying consistently shows people's attitudes hardening against the subject matter in the aftermath of these sorts of events. And the more often the event, the longer the hardening lasts, the more resistant the opposition becomes. (The logic even applies to things like quitting smoking, weight loss, etc.!)

That's why the frequent (and far too casual) use of epithets these days (like "racist," "sexist," "homophobe," etc.) are counter-productive. The best way for someone to ensure no progress is made on an issue? Attack (stridently or frequently). Best way to try to find common ground? Show a willingness to deescalate and engage. Another model put it this way: "evolution, not revolution."

Sorry for the rambling. One last comment, though, before closing. Believe it or not, there have been quite few times I've agreed with your take on things. But the presentation didn't lend itself to an agreeing response. (As an aside, that's why in counseling we strive to change the tone of the discussion before we try to work with the "facts"; the "facts" will never matter if the discussion isn't in some way collaborative.)

For what it's worth.

Wishing you a very nice evening. Again, thanks for the reply.

--- End of line (MCP)

Well you are certainly right about a lot of what you said.

I have personally seen many people on here say “well it pisses off the dems” or they are glad the “Libs are Crying”

I’m certainly no angel I have fallen into the the Us vs them mentally many times which is exactly what Trump and the GOP want.

They hope to divide the populace and to scare their supporters into believing they are u see attack and being invaded so they can control them through fear.

I know then when I call people dumb or stupid it only plus into that and makes it worse but it’s not always easy.

When someone takes the time like you are doing to discuss an actual issue and why they believe what they believe I think we can probably actually find some common ground or st least understand the other persons position and why they believe what they believe.


What drives me mad is people who parrot what they see on Fox News and don’t think critically about the slant and bus inherent in the reporting. I recognize the left wing media does the same but I don’t believe to the same degree.

Anyway. I Look forward to future discussions.

As to the poll I believe the OP was showing that Trumps base is eroding and it’s unlikely he will find new supporters
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

What drives me mad is people who parrot what they see on Fox News and don’t think critically about the slant and bus inherent in the reporting. I recognize the left wing media does the same but I don’t believe to the same degree.
You are kidding, right? There have been so many, including mine, posts, that are written with extremely articulated critical thought, and yet, you still will pound out your criticisms and name callings because you do not agree with what was posted, or could not get the person over to your side with agreement. There's a name for that .... hypocrite.
 

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
PREMO Member
(a) What drives me mad is people who parrot what they see on Fox News and don’t think critically about the slant and bus inherent in the reporting. I recognize the left wing media does the same but I don’t believe to the same degree.

(b) Anyway. I Look forward to future discussions.

(c) As to the poll I believe the OP was showing that Trumps base is eroding and it’s unlikely he will find new supporters
Really nice reply. I appreciated it. Thank you.

(a) I think this depends on what side of the aisle one is on. Folks on the Left will see more value/truth telling in outlets that are Left than Right (the reverse also being true). There are numerous reasons for this; most of which have at least some good logic behind it (herd comfort (e.g., safety in numbers), tribal affiliation (we all need to belong to a team and this is the team that makes me feel the most comfortable), & "conflict/bad news sells better than peace/good news"are three dynamics that all have been well-supported in research). For me, the take-away is the same regardless of the reason: recognize this dynamic and try to find ways to look past it in order to keep the discussion going. There's no guarantee that there'll be agreement, because sometimes the best we can hope for is to limit the intensity of the disagreement. At least, that's what I try to do (not always successful).

(b) Me, too.

(c) Could be. We'll see, I guess.

Cheers!

You are kidding, right? There have been so many, including mine, posts, that are written with extremely articulated critical thought, and yet, you still will pound out your criticisms and name callings because you do not agree with what was posted, or could not get the person over to your side with agreement. There's a name for that .... hypocrite.
Let's say this is true; that "There have been so many, including mine, posts, that are written with extremely articulated critical thought, and yet, you still will pound out your criticisms and name callings." If I may be so blunt, how does flinging "hypocrite" out there help fix this/change this? I don't think it does as it seem you are doing exactly what you're commenting on. In any event, I bet it does nothing to persuade Sapidus to engage (never mind, change opinion to see your point of view). It wouldn't if it were me.

Sapidus and I were having just this discussion (i.e., about presentation and engagement). Perhaps you caught the tail end of it so the post caught you by surprise (if so, may I ask you to scroll up and read the back and forth?). Anyway, we're discussing adjusting tone/approach (and the difficulty in doing so). Glad for you (others?) to join in....

Cheers #2!

--- End of line (MCP)
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

Let's say this is true; that "There have been so many, including mine, posts, that are written with extremely articulated critical thought, and yet, you still will pound out your criticisms and name callings." If I may be so blunt, how does flinging "hypocrite" out there help fix this/change this? I don't think it does as it seem you are doing exactly what you're commenting on. In any event, I bet it does nothing to persuade Sapidus to engage (never mind, change opinion to see your point of view). It wouldn't if it were me.

Sapidus and I were having just this discussion (i.e., about presentation and engagement). Perhaps you caught the tail end of it so the post caught you by surprise (if so, may I ask you to scroll up and read the back and forth?). Anyway, we're discussing adjusting tone/approach (and the difficulty in doing so). Glad for you (others?) to join in....

Cheers #2!

--- End of line (MCP)
Yeah, I know. I understand the context of your conversation with him. But I had to call 'ole Sappy out here. In another thread, no matter how well thought out, how well articulated, the responses were, from myself, and others, Sappy just couldn't keep from name calling, attacking, and putting down any poster because the responses didn't align with his view of the subject. I typically do not engage him for the very reason he cannot be engaged with. But, thought I'd do it for the experience by answering and commenting in a forthright manner attempting to even write as nuanced as I could to get my meaning across. He is not persuadable. To no avail. To him, I am a bigot and should mind my own business. Hence calling him a hypocrite.

Discussing tone and approach, not being political, is kinda a neutral subject. Anyone can engage Sappy, but if the positions are of a different views than his, watch out. Heck, he may even be an ANTIFA type of fella relative to some of the vitriol he spews.

Didn't mean to interfere. By the way, there are many here that communicate pleasantly and respectfully, sometimes fun egging others on for a jibe or two, and yet have differing opinions. It's a natural and learned way for all to get along, live and let live, or to agree to disagree. Sappy has yet to rise to such societal standards.
 
Top