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.
The polls on impeachment haven't really moved. Nate Silvers 538 is one of the best aggregate polls out there (he warned people about Trump being within the margin of error in 2016) and it shows 50.8% approving Impeachment and Impeachment and removal and 45.3% disapproving. I don't see any collapse, it is actually at its highest point.
I disagree with his numbers especially given that even with the link you provided, every recent poll has impeachment under water among independents with the most recent polls having independents opposing impeachment and removal at higher than 50%.
Part of why I don't trust it is just how you got fooled just now, you are conflating impeachment with removal and then citing the numbers for only impeachment. They are not the same. Even according to Silver's numbers support for removal is 48.3%, not 50.8%....those two words of course meaning significantly different things.
I trust RCP's aggregate considerably more and that's what I was initially citing. The fact that Silver shows almost no change is a harsh indictment of the accuracy of his numbers. The numbers among Republicans and Democrats haven't really changed, sure, but the numbers among independents have changed greatly. from October to December the process of impeachment and removal had support by independents, by January they were under water in nearly every poll. If your polling shows no change overall, it means something is wrong with your process. Also, if you look at polls 538 does themselves, notice how often they are extreme outliers against the president.....their most recent has 12% support for removal....no other poll even comes close, it was done at the same time Gallup puts out a poll that shows 5% opposition for removal. It's pretty clear 538 has a bias, which is unavoidable, but it's why I don't trust their numbers.
More spin. Schiff prefaced that particular sequence saying explicitly it was a characterization of the conversation between trump and Zelensky. Sounds like what Bolton was trying to say when he called it a "DRUG DEAL". Sound familiar?
Here’s what Schiff said:
"Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates: ‘We've been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don't see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though.
And I'm going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of it. On this and on that.
I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people. I’m going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my attorney general Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him, trust me. You know what I’m asking and so I’m only going to say this a few more times, in a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.’
"This is, in sum and character, what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn't such a graphic betrayal of the President's oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there's nothing the president says here that is in America's interest after all."
Republicans said Schiff made it seem like he was reading directly from the readout of the call. Schiff repeatedly glanced down at the notes in front of him, and he did not make it clear which parts of his summary were exaggerated.
But Schiff also introduced the remarks as "the essence of what the president communicates" and described them as "in sum and character, what the president was trying to communicate."
I don't think anyone other than you and other never-Trumpers think the following sentence form's Schiff's statement accurately describes the call --- I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand ? Lots of it. On this and on that.
In just 2 hours, the Presidents legal team made Adam Schiff turn Ghost White
That happens to vampires when their blood count gets low !!! Shifty has sucked all the blood out of the issue and has to wait while the Presidents legal team gets done before he can feed again !!! Those bug eyes with that ghost white hue is a hideous sight but liberal media is in love with it !!!
Thanks to Joe Biden, we KNOW why we have foreign aid: So a corrupt politician has something to threaten to withhold when a foreign corruption prosecutor starts investigating his son's no-show $80,000/month "job".
I disagree with his numbers especially given that even with the link you provided, every recent poll has impeachment under water among independents with the most recent polls having independents opposing impeachment and removal at higher than 50%.
Part of why I don't trust it is just how you got fooled just now, you are conflating impeachment with removal and then citing the numbers for only impeachment. They are not the same. Even according to Silver's numbers support for removal is 48.3%, not 50.8%....those two words of course meaning significantly different things.
I trust RCP's aggregate considerably more and that's what I was initially citing. The fact that Silver shows almost no change is a harsh indictment of the accuracy of his numbers. The numbers among Republicans and Democrats haven't really changed, sure, but the numbers among independents have changed greatly. from October to December the process of impeachment and removal had support by independents, by January they were under water in nearly every poll. If your polling shows no change overall, it means something is wrong with your process. Also, if you look at polls 538 does themselves, notice how often they are extreme outliers against the president.....their most recent has 12% support for removal....no other poll even comes close, it was done at the same time Gallup puts out a poll that shows 5% opposition for removal. It's pretty clear 538 has a bias, which is unavoidable, but it's why I don't trust their numbers.
I said Impeached and Impeach and Remove combined, pay attention before you post. Here is the difference between Real Clear Politics and Nate Silver's 538. RCP takes poll data at face value...no adjustments....I have no problem with that. Here is how Nate's 538 aggregate is calculated
Quote:
How this works: FiveThirtyEight’s pollster ratings are calculated by analyzing the historical accuracy of each firm’s polls along with its methodology. Accuracy scores are adjusted for the type of election polled, the poll’s sample size, the performance of other polls surveying the same race, and other factors. We also calculate measures of statistical bias in the polls.
So he calculates if polls lean left or right through historical performance and then makes adjustments accordingly. In the RCP polling the left leaning ABC/Washington Post poll looks to be the main outlier at 51% No with a 6 point spread, that moved aggregate poll quite a bit. Are they picking up a trend or is this just an outlier??....we don't know yet. It's not showing up in 538...yet, so we need more time to tell. Nate Silvers primary agenda is to be accurate.
Shucks, I just wish he would’ve used official government employees to carry out his perfectly legal request, instead of Rudy Giuliani and a pair of bagmen now under indictment for other crimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Did you read the transcript? Trump was referring the matter to the AG.
I haven’t had the pleasure of seeing a “transcript” (no one has), but I’ve read the call summary. Trump referred the matter to Rudy and the AG, and the AG denied involvement. Weird.
But let’s play along with your fiction that this was all above-board. Why was Rudy talking to Ukraine in his capacity as Trump’s private attorney, and why did it involve Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman. None of those dudes work for Barr’s DOJ or Pompeo’s State Department.
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.
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.
