Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-15-2009, 03:42 AM
 
Location: Missouri
3,645 posts, read 4,918,422 times
Reputation: 768

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Why would a poll showing Obama, a man who was just elected, having the "nations" trust be surprising? Its his to lose, not the need to gain.. If he didnt have it, he wouldnt have been elected..
Not quite true really. My cat could have been elected when you consider the choices. There were no real choices at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-15-2009, 06:39 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 63,992,474 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
Who said it was "surprising"?
No need to remind me the nation trusts him.
It's your Obamabashing Rightwing buddies on this board that need to hear it.

Us folks that voted him in know full well he has the nations's trust.

Ken
Those that voted for Bush also had trust in him, those who voted for McCain had his trust, even those who supported Hitler, had his trust.. Not sure the whole meaning of the thread other than that people have trust in who they vote for.. Yippee...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2009, 07:21 PM
 
1,319 posts, read 1,614,421 times
Reputation: 404
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Those that voted for Bush also had trust in him, those who voted for McCain had his trust, even those who supported Hitler, had his trust.. Not sure the whole meaning of the thread other than that people have trust in who they vote for.. Yippee...
People who voted for McCain probably didn't trust him - they just didn't want the Democrats to win...

I'm not at all sure that most Germans who voted for Hitler trusted him - that is a huge stretch...

So - I think your premise that people 'trust' those they vote for is a bit simplistic and erroneous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2009, 03:51 AM
 
Location: Missouri
3,645 posts, read 4,918,422 times
Reputation: 768
Moderator cut: quoted post has been deleted
What is funny is that people really believe that those polls are taken honestly. Anyone that believes polls shows how much of a fool they are. But hey, that particular one is all for illegalls so, what would one expect.

Last edited by katzenfreund; 04-18-2009 at 08:38 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2009, 06:24 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 59,660,138 times
Reputation: 24860
I voted for Obama and approve of the direction is is taking our country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2009, 07:47 AM
 
Location: The land where cats rule
10,908 posts, read 9,536,708 times
Reputation: 3602
Quote:
Originally Posted by HubbleRules View Post
People who voted for McCain probably didn't trust him - they just didn't want the Democrats to win...

I'm not at all sure that most Germans who voted for Hitler trusted him - that is a huge stretch...

So - I think your premise that people 'trust' those they vote for is a bit simplistic and erroneous.
So basically you are saying that what you think on a subject is more valid than what anyone else thinks, thus must be fact.

No problem with logical thinking or ego here.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2009, 07:32 AM
 
Location: South Florida
956 posts, read 1,232,570 times
Reputation: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Why would a poll showing Obama, a man who was just elected, having the "nations" trust be surprising? Its his to lose, not the need to gain.. If he didnt have it, he wouldnt have been elected..
This premise is actually incorrect. Obama wasn't elected on trust, he was elected on "change". Change to what people didn't know ... they simply knew they didn't want same old same old and I suppose you could follow that with they trusted Obama to make change.

What they unfortunately did not consider was ..... change to what? This is a common problem for people looking for change, they assume it will be change for the better.

And we have yet to find out if that is true. But Obama always had my "trust" he would bring about change, the reason I didn't vote for him was my concern for the change he would deliver. So far my instincts have been right on target.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
Who said it was "surprising"?
No need to remind me the nation trusts him.
It's your Obamabashing Rightwing buddies on this board that need to hear it.

Us folks that voted him in know full well he has the nations's trust.

Ken
It's not surprising at all because the majority of Americans believe in giving their President the benefit of the doubt and trust him until he proves he can't be trusted.

You folks who voted for him really ought to just sit back for a minute and see how all this plays out and stop pontificating for a moment. On the surface it appears that Obama cannot actually be trusted because he leaned toward the middle when he campaigned to get the moderate Republican and Independent vote, but so far he's showing us he's far to the left. This is angering many people who voted for him because he basically ran on a lie.

I'm neither an Obamabasher nor a rightwing buddy of anyone, but I sure lean more to the right than the left. I think it's a little too early in the Obama presidency to be going out on a limb touting how trustworthy he is.

I'm sure you know that for every "rightwing nut" out there, there sits a "leftwing nut". Extremism in any form is not good for this nation. It's unfortunate that Janet Napolitano and the Obama administration isn't aware of that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2009, 08:17 AM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,182,754 times
Reputation: 6552
Quote:
Originally Posted by HubbleRules View Post
People who voted for McCain probably didn't trust him - they just didn't want the Democrats to win...

I'm not at all sure that most Germans who voted for Hitler trusted him - that is a huge stretch...

So - I think your premise that people 'trust' those they vote for is a bit simplistic and erroneous.
So according to you conservatives only vote party line? Are you saying Democrats don't? In my area Democrats will re-elect the same corrupt politician over and over rather than cross party lines.
Look up Wilkes-barre, Scranton Pa. Only because the FBI got involved is there any change about to happen. I hope they investigate Paul Kanjorski while they are at it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2009, 08:34 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,768 posts, read 40,902,683 times
Reputation: 62071
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
Rasmussen is constantly skewed v. other polls... I prefer Real Clear Politics, where they run down all the major polls.
I chose to follow Rasmussen because they, along with Pew, most accurately predicted the 2008 presidential results.

Texas on the Potomac: The List: Which presidential polls were most accurate?

The worst were these:

CBS
Gallup
Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby
CBS/Times
Newsweek
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2009, 09:17 AM
 
Location: The Planet Mars
2,159 posts, read 2,578,142 times
Reputation: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
So according to you conservatives only vote party line? Are you saying Democrats don't? In my area Democrats will re-elect the same corrupt politician over and over rather than cross party lines.
Look up Wilkes-barre, Scranton Pa. Only because the FBI got involved is there any change about to happen. I hope they investigate Paul Kanjorski while they are at it.
I said nothing remotely comparable to what you are implying...

I guess you have a reading impediment???

Do me a favor - don't ever consider being a professional critic - because you'd always be saying someone said 'A' when they clearly said 'B'...

That kind of spin gets old very very quickly - and makes the one doing it look like a total stooge and mental lightweight...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:34 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top