As I’ve read and understood everything you’ve said, and you’ve shown several times you don’t even read and or understand your own cites, much less what others write, as I started to read your post #166, I nearly stopped here:

‘JPT Read my post @ 156:’

I did stop dead here:

You might find this brief glossary of terms commonly used in statistical analysis of data useful: Trend is a long-term movement in a time series…

You, who believed/believes that a trend can be discerned from as little as 2 points, now presume to start to lecture me on statistics. This given the whole point of my original post trying to force David s into an understanding of how little standalone approval polls mean vs trends.

So, didn’t read the rest. You tumbled into the David S, Steve P, etc Bozo filter so didn’t even scan it.

Here’s a link.

Here’s another another link.

So this ‘information’ was distributed to other states. And, as I understand it the Minnesota police forces were ‘briefed’ on this internal threat.

I guess this is the same sort of ‘mentality’ that realitychiq manifested here recently, i.e., people who disagree with me are a threat to my very life….and therefore, they must be ‘dealt with’….

“I take great care to reveal as little as possible about myself here because several here have made comments stating that they think all Obama supporters (and/or Democrats) should be killed, and I believe they mean it.” — realitychiq

Who ARE these ‘gutless wonders’? And why are they ‘projecting’ so?

A christian would rather slit their own throat than commit ‘murder’. But realitychiq and the likes of Pat J, haven’t a clue.

So….

….instead of ‘learning’ anything about their alleged opponents, they make this s— up and then, in due time, they’ll use it as an excuse to justify their own ‘actions’.

As I said in an earlier comment….”Watch this and compare it against future ‘engagements’.”

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. I’ll wager that some aspiring psychologist could do a great dissertation on this…..

….as it was, in the words of the immortal Dickens,”….It was the best of times and it was the worst of times.” But it WAS ‘memorable’.

“Don’t be ridiculous. I have no desire to hurt you ‘even to the point of death’.” — realitychiq

Watch this and compare it against future ‘engagements’. I think it will prove truly useful and informative.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Deeds Not Words -- Credo of 22d Infantry Regiment....wherein I once had the honor of commanding a company of infantry....]

“What ia a REAL Christian anyway? Pelto sure doesn’t sound Catholic.” — Pat J

….you don’t know, shame on you.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. There are Roman Catholics who are REAL christians. I know because I have good friends amongst them.

On the other hand there are people who call themselves ‘christians’ from all denominations who are just telling lies.

You can recognize them by the difference between what they say about God and what they do.

For example…..

Ted Kennedy and other reputed Roman Catholics who support abortion on demand…..

Getting a ‘clue’ here?

Read my post @ 156:

“I can’t determine (and neither can you or the other one) if a significant number of the 60 something million people who voted for Obama on Nov 4 2008 now disapprove of his performance because I do not know how most people voted. This critical piece of information cannot be extracted from polls measuring only approval or disapproval ratings. A poll would have to be taken in which the specific question, “Did you vote for Obama in Nov and, if so, do you now approve or disapprove of his performance?” was asked. I am not aware of any such poll. If YOU are, then please send the link.”

You might find this brief glossary of terms commonly used in statistical analysis of data useful:

Trend is a long-term movement in a time series. It is the underlying direction (an upward or downward tendency) and rate of change in a time series, when allowance has been made for the other components.

It can be helpful to model trend using straight lines, polynomials etc.

Extrapolation is when the value of a variable is estimated at times, which have not yet been observed. This estimate may be reasonably reliable for short times into the future, but for longer times, the estimate is liable to become less accurate.

The data I cited was obtained from various Gallup polls, which I think are fairly reliable but certainly not perfect (because no poll is perfect). Some of these are tracking polls so the numbers have changed slightly since first cited. If you prefer another poll, then please provide the link(s).

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113968/Obama-Initial-Approval-Ratings-Historical-Context.aspx

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116845/Obama-Approval-Equal-Better-Bush-Clinton.aspx

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113770/Bush-Presidency-Closes-34-Approval-61-Disapproval.aspx

I’ve voted in more than ten presidential elections, am registered as an Independent and have been for decades, although I sometimes register in one major party or another in order to vote in the primaries. It appears we both voted against Clinton in 92, and both voted for him in 96 while holding our noses. I did not vote for Bush in either 2000 or 2004. It appears you did, which suggests you should take some ‘personal responsibility for your mistakes’. Unless you want to argue that the Bush Presidency was without mistakes (although I think most people would disagree with you).

Chuck

Don’t be ridiculous. I have no desire to hurt you ‘even to the point of death’. I think you are projecting again.

You can reveal anything you like about yourself. But I take great care to reveal as little as possible about myself here because several here have made comments stating that they think all Obama supporters (and/or Democrats) should be killed, and I believe they mean it.

As you well know, I spent a great deal of time trying to explain biochemistry, molecular biology, cancer research and metabolic control of cancer cell growth to you because you revealed that your mother-in-law had stage IV cancer. I looked up papers, including review articles that are somewhat easier to comprehend and sent you the links. You never once thanked me for doing that for you. You just continued to attack me because it was clear I was voting for Obama. Why did you do that?

I do find it extraordinarily hypocritical of you to attack others with whom you disagree, but feign offense and indignation if others say anything negative about (or simply disagree with) you. Obama is supporting scientific research, and not just ‘green’ technology, but also biomedical research to find more effective and less deleterious treatments for cancer and other diseases. As someone with a loved one with cancer, one would think you might agree somewhat with that.

Now, will you please explain basic statistics to JPT? Because I suspect you do understand whereas JPT doesn’t seem to get it, but may be more willing to listen to someone who clearly did NOT vote for Obama.

‘Now that we are all on the same page about trends in approval ratings, let’s compare some recent data.’

No…now that YOU’RE on the same page (I notice the 2 points make a trend, wait, you said a line, no, wait, you meant to say a line, no, wait, the discussion was about trend…you’ll just ignore getting pawned and continue to lecture. That about right??

‘Clinton’s approval:disapproval…’

Cite. And be careful because I think I already know and you’ve blown it again.

‘GW Bush’s approval:disapproval rating when he entered office was 57:25…’

Again, cite.

‘Obama’s approval:disapproval…’

Cite. And be careful because I won’t let you cherry pick the poll you favor nor misplace the ratio of independents/democrats/republicans. (Hint for the first two also)

‘So – in response to your question, which I shall now paraphrase – Do I think people that voted for Obama on Nov 4 now disapprove of his performance?’

Do not paraphrase. It was clear enough, and this is not the clear meaning. You do not seem to be able to grasp that the question was about the trend for performance in office – clearly and unequivocally stated as such, not the election. The election mention was just a baseline (actually a trap for david s) to illustrate the difference between the election david s (and yourself) can’t seem to understand is no longer germane to Obama’s performance in office. It was a trap that I revealed as such by saying that the electorate that voted is not the same as the subset that bothers answering polls nor does it equate in ratio (not just numbers, so be careful trying to claim otherwise because you’ll step all over your own ‘data’ if you do).

‘Well, I still don’t know because that is still an invalid comparison.’

No, really?

‘I will allow you to erroneously extrapolate the data to draw your own kooky conclusions.’

You’ve blown your cites by erroneously extrapolating from data that you did not and still do not understand supports the other side of the debate. How can you possibly think you’d be taken seriously at this point. You should have cut your losses and stopped digging when you blew the very first cite you posted. Now you’re going to go back into lecture mode? About data?

Here’s a cluebat. I’ve been around a while. I’ve voted in 10 presidential elections. 3 were for incumbents. One was for a sort of incumbent – Ford. Always as an Independent – never been registered in a political party. Am a touch on the conservative side of moderate, but never enough to vote conservative by the slate nor even republican. Vote the person, not the party. For example did not vote for Clinton the first time – voted for the better choice in my opinion. Did vote for Clinton the second time for the same reason. Was a toss up between Gore and Bush until the very end when the media push for Gore disgusted me so much I went Bush. Would not have voted for a dishonest shill like Kerry for dog catcher, not matter what his party.

Why do I tell you this? I find the ‘Get over it’ mantra childish in the extreme. Because it’s irrelevant to me how much Obama won by just as it has been every other president no matter that I cast a winning vote or a losing vote. Doesn’t matter in the slightest. What matters to me is the leadership, ethics, honesty, intelligence, and candor shown when the winner owns the oval office. Not all have had the full gamut of those qualities, but no one’s perfect, (for example Clinton’s lack of ethics were painfully apparent after 4 years yet I still voted for him the second time around) but a solid subset is required. Your boy lacks all of the qualities I consider necessary for an effective chief executive of this country. And without owning at least a subset of those qualities, it is only to be expected that he will do more harm than good in most of his decisions. And without owning at least a subset of those qualities he cannot be respected nationally or internationally and will do more harm than good in that arena also.

And those are the metrics for performance in office. And a lot of people are coming to the same conclusion – more and more over time. And THAT is what is indicative by the trending of Obama’s approval rating.

And as I’ve already said, you (and everyone like you with no sense of history or personal responsibility for your mistakes) are whistling past the graveyard. Rising numbers of people are willing to accept that they were snookered by a snake oil salesman. You’re stuck on stupid.

….through ownership of the so-called ‘mainstream media’.

I suspect that this proposed Revitalization Act for the media has a back-door for control of any media that accept it.

Look at how Obama just ‘fired’ the CEO of General Motors.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out....]

P.S. I also see how a number of financial institutions that initially accepted TARP are having buyers’ remorse…..and considering giving the money back…..