By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trumps Approval Outpace Reagan, Clinton and Carter

 

Do you Approve of President Trump?

Yes 42 39.62%
 
No 59 55.66%
 
In the middle. 5 4.72%
 
Total:106
Machiavellian on 15 August 2018
irstupid said:

Also most of those things the voters all knew about when voting him in. Do you think anyone gives a flying fuck he slept with a porn star? Or the sexual assault (he says women let him do whatever cause he is famous). While disguisting, not something we didn't all assume is true of him and ALL of famous people. Also a bit hypocritical when many of the hugely outspoken people of him end up having way worse sexual assault stuff in their closet.

 

I can definitely say, I do not care if Trump slept with a porn star, cheated on his pregnant wife or any of his sexual disposition.  What I will say is that when you have a man who has cheated on every wife he has had, then you have to wonder about his character.  What I do care about is the constant lying even when faced with facts showing he is lying.  Its like a slap in the face when a person feels he can just lie to you constantly and because you support some of his policy you are to accept it.

Anytime you excuse someone who will lie to you constantly about everything big or small, you have to judge them on that part of their character.  I have been around griffers throughout my life and one thing you come away with when dealing with them is that they constantly lie all the time. They will always tell you want you want to hear and will constantly stab you in the back when the opportunity comes.  Trump history in business is an open book on such practices.  His famed negiotionating ability is a minefield of broken contracts or reneging on deals.

The way I see it, just because I might support the policy of politician does not mean I will just turn a blind eye to their character, moral compass or intelligence level to do a job.  I highly doubt if Trump would hire himself for the Job of president for how, inexperienced he is at politics and incompetent on the simplest of issues.



Around the Network
irstupid on 15 August 2018
Machiavellian said:
irstupid said:

Also most of those things the voters all knew about when voting him in. Do you think anyone gives a flying fuck he slept with a porn star? Or the sexual assault (he says women let him do whatever cause he is famous). While disguisting, not something we didn't all assume is true of him and ALL of famous people. Also a bit hypocritical when many of the hugely outspoken people of him end up having way worse sexual assault stuff in their closet.

 

I can definitely say, I do not care if Trump slept with a porn star, cheated on his pregnant wife or any of his sexual disposition.  What I will say is that when you have a man who has cheated on every wife he has had, then you have to wonder about his character.  What I do care about is the constant lying even when faced with facts showing he is lying.  Its like a slap in the face when a person feels he can just lie to you constantly and because you support some of his policy you are to accept it.

Anytime you excuse someone who will lie to you constantly about everything big or small, you have to judge them on that part of their character.  I have been around griffers throughout my life and one thing you come away with when dealing with them is that they constantly lie all the time. They will always tell you want you want to hear and will constantly stab you in the back when the opportunity comes.  Trump history in business is an open book on such practices.  His famed negiotionating ability is a minefield of broken contracts or reneging on deals.

The way I see it, just because I might support the policy of politician does not mean I will just turn a blind eye to their character, moral compass or intelligence level to do a job.  I highly doubt if Trump would hire himself for the Job of president for how, inexperienced he is at politics and incompetent on the simplest of issues.

How is Trump's lying any different than any other politicians. 

Every single politician in the world you can find a video of him/her saying something and then another video of them saying the exact opposite.

They all are big liars and do whatever they can to continue to get elected and get money from lobying or other sources. No politician leaves office poor, or if they do they somehow are millionaires in no time later, such as the Clintons.

The point remains the same. Trump is wearing a mud suit. We all knew what he was when he got elected and he wasn't hiding behind some spotless record, perfect smiling face. No, he was Trump. He is still Trump. Nothing has changed.



Heavenly_King on 15 August 2018

He is doing a great job, so not surprise there.



Open World-Survival-Game Days Gone

Smartie900 on 15 August 2018
NightlyPoe said:
Smartie900 said:
He'll most likely get elected for a second term. The US election cycle is like a pendulum and will continuously shift back and forth between the 2 parties. Anything bad that happens during Trump's administration will be used as ammo by the Democrats to discredit the Republicans and this exact cycle will repeat for continuous years with the Republicans trying to discredit the Democrats. This same exact cycle's been going on for over 25 years and it's not going to change anytime soon.

More than 25 years.  Since Eisenhower won in 1952, it's been almost like clockwork that the out of power party would win two terms in a row and then be out for two more years.  If someone made a prediction in 1944 that Democrats would win the next two elections only to be followed by a Republican winning two and then have the parties swap the White House every eight years thereafter, that person would have successfully predicted the party that won every single race since WWII with the lone exception of Reagan defeating Carter in 1980.

That's 18 out of 19 presidential elections.

Didn't George H.W. Bush win an election right after Reagan's 2 terms? Besides that, you're pretty dead on.



 

 

AngryLittleAlchemist on 15 August 2018
DarthMetalliCube said:

Wow, it's almost like the mainstream media completely blows things out of proportion and relies and sensationalism to get ratings. The media has a major trust problem and are very much out of touch with a large chunk of America, and data like this proves it. If anything, they're probably working against their own cause by crying wolf so many times. Hell, I don't even like Trump, but the media's constant hysterics and fear mongering about him to attempt to brainwash people (while nothing around me and anyone I know has remotely changed in a negative way in the last 2 years) constantly causes me to second guess my dislike for the man and question their agendas.

A lot of people seem to be completely on one side of the fence or another when it comes to Trump. He's either a savior of America and a God Emperor or he's the literal Devil and Hitler rolled into one. I tend to hold this crazy notion that the reality is somewhere in the middle. Trump is merely a sleazy business man who is probably too egotistical for his own good, Xenophobic, and somewhat naive in certain areas, but I honestly believe he also does want what's best for the country and may be able to help economically. And while he's got a myriad of flaws and is rough around the edges, the his negative attributes are blown insanely out of proportion by the media and the suckers that buy everything the say hook line and sinker.

What are the qualifications for being part of the "mainstream media"? Because as far as I can tell, the single most mainstream source of news is Fox News, a channel which does nothing but sensationalize and blow things out of proportion in favor of Trump with few exceptions. Yet I do not see a single portion of your comment that addresses this. 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/may/7/lowest-rated-show-fox-news-outperforms-cnns-best/

https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/q1-2018-ratings-fox-news-remains-no-1-on-cable-television/360865

So I suppose it's about time you start talking about how Fox is being disingenuous with their portrayal of Trump? I can already hear it: "But I don't like Fox News either!" "I don't support what they are doing either!" "I have a very logical and balanced position!" Well, start speaking it then. You aren't making a point by regurgitating the obvious. 

So the mainstream media isn't trustworthy. What about the alternative media? Infowars? The Young Turks? Michael Moore? Dinesh D'Souza? Sure, once you go through dozens of sites and sources you might find something that seems "unbiased" or "balanced", but even those news sources are only agreeable because of your own biases. The most popular alternative media sources are, guess what, almost always extremists. How about this: MEDIA in general almost always portrays things in an exaggerated or skewed light. 

On the topic of "The media has a major trust problem and are very much out of touch with a large chunk of America, and data like this proves it." 

Let's look at the past couple of average approval ratings (according to Wikipedia): 

Trump: 45.5%

Obama: 47.9% 

G.W. Bush: 49.4% 

Clinton: 55.1%

G.W.H. Bush: 60.9%

In a country where there are only really two parties which can win a presidential election, both of which propagandize themselves as the complete opposite of one another, is there really much cross-representation between the two different political parties for the news media to take advantage of? Sure, it would be great if a news organization was worth taking that risk, but the highest approval rating average is still missing about 40% of the country, and that was all the way back in the early nineties before many of the most prevalent social issues of today became front and center. No matter what way you slice it, "the media" as well as the political parties are always going to be "out of touch with a large chunk of America". 

In other words, I don't think most of what is said in this comment is really that well thought out. It's great that people are aware of the over-dramatizing of Trump, as it has certainly gotten somewhat annoying, but it's not really a complex observation to make, and a lot of people who make it stop at that conclusion and don't try at all to make any further observations on what the root problem is. 



Around the Network
jason1637 on 15 August 2018

Interesting that the poll on this thread is basically the same as Trumps approval/disapproval.



Final-Fan on 16 August 2018
o_O.Q said:
Megiddo said:

When Obama took office the unemployment was 7.8%. It peaked at 10%. When Obama left office unemployment was at 4.8%. That means Obama cut employment by 3% from when he took office and by over 5% from the peak of the financial crisis he inherited.

When Trump took office the unemployment was 4.7%. It is now 3.9%. That means Trump has cut unemployment by .8%, far less than president Obama.

I know math is hard, but man, you gotta make that effort! Otherwise you just look like an idiot.

"I know math is hard, but man, you gotta make that effort! Otherwise you just look like an idiot."

"When Trump took office the unemployment was 4.7%. It is now 3.9%. That means Trump has cut unemployment by .8%, far less than president Obama."

the guy comparing ~1 and a half years to ~8 years is criticising my math skills lmao

hopefully when trump's two terms are up he'll cut unemployment down to 0.0001%

Oh, you think he's exposed his lack of thought on the subject?  Let me educate you. 

First off, it seems weird to me to measure the the cut in unemployment in Obama's term by the metric of eight years when unemployment definitely didn't peak on Day 1 of his presidency, but whatever.  Let's go ahead and give that one to you for now.  Stack the example in Trump's favor. 

So if unemployment during Obama's presidency maxed out at 10%, and dropped to 4.7% by the end of his term, that's a drop of 5.3%.  So the cut in unemployment was 5.3% for Obama and 0.8% for Trump.  But it's true that this is across different amounts of time. 

One and a half years for Trump, you say?  How much bigger is 8 compared to 1.5?  Coincidentally, it's 5.3 times bigger.  So if you multiply Trump's cut in unemployment by 5.3, you get ... 4.3%.  Less than Obama.  Remember, this is with the time factor stacked in Trump's favor. 

Now, people could object that it's not a fair comparison because realistically speaking there's a limit to how far unemployment can actually drop (0% unemployment is basically impossible), but that's not relevant to the claim that unemployment has dropped faster under Trump, which is demonstrably false.  (Clearly, since I just demonstrated it.)   



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

o_O.Q on 16 August 2018
Final-Fan said:
o_O.Q said:

"I know math is hard, but man, you gotta make that effort! Otherwise you just look like an idiot."

"When Trump took office the unemployment was 4.7%. It is now 3.9%. That means Trump has cut unemployment by .8%, far less than president Obama."

the guy comparing ~1 and a half years to ~8 years is criticising my math skills lmao

hopefully when trump's two terms are up he'll cut unemployment down to 0.0001%

Oh, you think he's exposed his lack of thought on the subject?  Let me educate you. 

First off, it seems weird to me to measure the the cut in unemployment in Obama's term by the metric of eight years when unemployment definitely didn't peak on Day 1 of his presidency, but whatever.  Let's go ahead and give that one to you for now.  Stack the example in Trump's favor. 

So if unemployment during Obama's presidency maxed out at 10%, and dropped to 4.7% by the end of his term, that's a drop of 5.3%.  So the cut in unemployment was 5.3% for Obama and 0.8% for Trump.  But it's true that this is across different amounts of time. 

One and a half years for Trump, you say?  How much bigger is 8 compared to 1.5?  Coincidentally, it's 5.3 times bigger.  So if you multiply Trump's cut in unemployment by 5.3, you get ... 4.3%.  Less than Obama.  Remember, this is with the time factor stacked in Trump's favor. 

Now, people could object that it's not a fair comparison because realistically speaking there's a limit to how far unemployment can actually drop (0% unemployment is basically impossible), but that's not relevant to the claim that unemployment has dropped faster under Trump, which is demonstrably false.  (Clearly, since I just demonstrated it.)   

"First off, it seems weird to me to measure the the cut in unemployment in Obama's term by the metric of eight years when unemployment definitely didn't peak on Day 1 of his presidency, but whatever.  Let's go ahead and give that one to you for now."

but i didn't? he did? i in response expressed how asinine it is to compare ~1.5 years to ~8 years

 

"One and a half years for Trump, you say?  How much bigger is 8 compared to 1.5?  Coincidentally, it's 5.3 times bigger.  So if you multiply Trump's cut in unemployment by 5.3, you get ... 4.3%"

again this is an asinine comparison... you really expect that employment rates are going to follow a constant progression?

 i personally wouldn't be surprised if unemployment rates followed an EXPONENTIAL decrease moving forwards with time until trump finally slays that dragon once and for all sword and shield in hand

 

"but that's not relevant to the claim that unemployment has dropped faster under Trump"

under the same time period its a fact and not just a fact but an indisputable fact



numberwang on 16 August 2018

Trump is more popular than most NATO country leaders

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/07/11/trump-is-more-popular-than-most-nato-country-leaders-who-think-re-better-than-is.html



numberwang on 16 August 2018
SpokenTruth said:
Number of jobs created by year:

2012 - 2.19 million
2013 - 2.33 million
2014 - 3.11 million
2015 - 2.74 million
2016 - 2.24 million
2017 - 2.05 million

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

More jobs were lost in total, labor participation did decline from 2000 to 2015.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labor-force-participation-rate