Languish.org

I know we had a similar poll that compared Obama to the oh-so-high benchmark of the Bush presidency, but I figured it'd be interesting to have a straight-up approval or disapproval poll on the job he's done thus far.

Yes.

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 11:42:59 AM
I know we had a similar poll that compared Obama to the oh-so-high benchmark of the Bush presidency, but I figured it'd be interesting to have a straight-up approval or disapproval poll on the job he's done thus far.

Do you remember the results of that poll?

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.beafields.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F05%2FOsama-bin-laden-dead1.jpg&hash=04801a5cfcfa2b2de6d2cc14384e1a87d78ee1f8)

Approval rate can be misleading.  You can disapprove Obama's performance while never contemplating anything but voting for him again in 2012.  I certainly think that Obama mishandled the Republican insanity unleashed on him, and failed to use it against them.  That made us all worse off, because his failure enabled the most destructive elements of our political system.

Quote from: Viking on April 19, 2012, 11:49:33 AM

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 11:42:59 AM
I know we had a similar poll that compared Obama to the oh-so-high benchmark of the Bush presidency, but I figured it'd be interesting to have a straight-up approval or disapproval poll on the job he's done thus far.

Do you remember the results of that poll?

I don't care about that poll ;)

Quote from: DGuller on April 19, 2012, 11:53:05 AM
Approval rate can be misleading.  You can disapprove Obama's performance while never contemplating anything but voting for him again in 2012.  I certainly think that Obama mishandled the Republican insanity unleashed on him, and failed to use it against them.  That made us all worse off, because his failure enabled the most destructive elements of our political system.

I'm not trying to infer electability (is that a word?).  I just want to know what Languish thinks in terms of simple approval or disapproval.  I have my own expectations as to the results & I'd like to see how that shakes out.

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 12:29:52 PM

Quote from: Viking on April 19, 2012, 11:49:33 AM

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 11:42:59 AM
I know we had a similar poll that compared Obama to the oh-so-high benchmark of the Bush presidency, but I figured it'd be interesting to have a straight-up approval or disapproval poll on the job he's done thus far.

Do you remember the results of that poll?

I don't care about that poll ;)

Not very flattering to "W" I take it.

Quote from: DGuller on April 19, 2012, 11:53:05 AM
Approval rate can be misleading.  You can disapprove Obama's performance while never contemplating anything but voting for him again in 2012.  I certainly think that Obama mishandled the Republican insanity unleashed on him, and failed to use it against them.  That made us all worse off, because his failure enabled the most destructive elements of our political system.

That's how it looks to me from the outside as well.

Quote from: Viking on April 19, 2012, 12:32:23 PM
Not very flattering to "W" I take it.

I guess not, but Dubya is irrelevant to what I want to find out here..

He was left a pretty bad situation and did alright, especially considering all the roadblocks put up by the opposition. This dirty foreigner approves.

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-mPE3PHReH4A%2FTyFfneEhMuI%2FAAAAAAAAAV4%2FN4hv7b6gcyE%2Fs1600%2FI_ride_inside.jpg&hash=dd8750e5f010341a1cd9281df5c27f3a099292d0)

Obama may suck, but Romney is a monster.

Not as good as we wanted him to be but far better than what the Republicans had to offer.  Can you imagine Caribou barbie in the White house as Vice President to a senile McCain! *shudder*

The current crop of Republicans is even more unhinged.



G.

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 12:42:40 PM

Quote from: Viking on April 19, 2012, 12:32:23 PM
Not very flattering to "W" I take it.

I guess not, but Dubya is irrelevant to what I want to find out here..

What did you want to find out?  That the board heavily frequented by foreigners would approve of Obama when over a candidate who's party is deeply out of synch with the rest of the industrialized world?

Disapprove.  Big time.  Can hardly stand to look at the guy these days.  But most of the things I disapprove of the Republicans will also do so it does not really matter much.

Quote from: Valmy on April 19, 2012, 12:52:38 PM
Disapprove.  Big time.  Can hardly stand to look at the guy these days.  But most of the things I disapprove of the Republicans will also do so it does not really matter much.

This.

Although for the rest of the shysters, I'd say I'm disappointed but not surprised by Obama's inability to get even his own party on board.

Uh oh, valmy's turning separatist :ph34r:

Quote from: Razgovory on April 19, 2012, 12:51:08 PM
What did you want to find out? 

First, I wanted to find out if the 'final' results (poll voting here usually tapers off after a couple days) match the % I had in my mind based on conversations involving Obama.

Secondly, I wanted to see how much the Republic of Languishia results skew from numbers inside the US. 

Just pure curiosity.  I don't really have a secret agenda here.

QuoteThat the board heavily frequented by foreigners would approve of Obama when over a candidate who's party is deeply out of synch with the rest of the industrialized world?

It's not about Romney, Dubya, or anyone else.  How hard is that for you guys to get through your heads?  It's about whether or not you approve of the job Obama has done. 

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 01:07:08 PM

QuoteThat the board heavily frequented by foreigners would approve of Obama when over a candidate who's party is deeply out of synch with the rest of the industrialized world?

It's not about Romney, Dubya, or anyone else.  How hard is that for you guys to get through your heads?  It's about whether or not you approve of the job Obama has done. 

Some people are unable to think without comparisons...analogies.

To some extent, approval must be relative.  In order to have a realistic assessment of someone's performance, you have to compare it against a realistic benchmark.  How likely is it that somebody else, from the same or another party, could've done a better job?

I don't think that's how most appeal answer approval questions. After all, if you think that realistically that everyone out there would do a shit job (and some perhaps worse, some perhaps slightly better), does that mean you approve of the current person in the role? :hmm:

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 01:07:08 PM

It's not about Romney, Dubya, or anyone else.  How hard is that for you guys to get through your heads?  It's about whether or not you approve of the job Obama has done.

You can't say someone is good or bad without an implicit comparison to something else or else the statement is meaningless.  If I were to say "Derspeiss is a good person", I am in fact saying that he is good in relation to my standard for human beings which is informed by my observation of other human beings.  While if I say "the sun is a good sun" it is not really that meaningful since I've never lived under another sun.

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 02:05:33 PM
I don't think that's how most appeal answer approval questions. After all, if you think that realistically that everyone out there would do a shit job (and some perhaps worse, some perhaps slightly better), does that mean you approve of the current person in the role? :hmm:

Yes.

I'm with Garbon.  This seems a lot of sophistic nonsense.

I approve.

Also not sure how I turned "people" into "appeal" :blush:

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 02:46:18 PM
Also not sure how I turned "people" into "appeal" :blush:

By removing one "e" and one "o", then adding in two "a"s.  After that you mixed all the letters up.

Quote from: DGuller on April 19, 2012, 02:02:15 PM
To some extent, approval must be relative.  In order to have a realistic assessment of someone's performance, you have to compare it against a realistic benchmark.  How likely is it that somebody else, from the same or another party, could've done a better job?

I'm simply asking if people here approve or disapprove of the job Obama has done.  If someone *has* to compare him to Bush or other past presidents in order to formulate an opinion, fine.  But to me it would come down to whether the president has advanced policies I agree with and think are important, how he has handled unexpected events, whether he has kept certain campaign promises, etc.

What I really don't understand is comparing him to Romney or other Republicans that have not held the office of President.  To me, that sounds like rationalizing.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 19, 2012, 02:09:40 PM
I'm with Garbon.  This seems a lot of sophistic nonsense.

I knew I should've turned off comments.

QuoteI approve.

That's all I asked for-- thank you.

Quote from: DGuller on April 19, 2012, 11:53:05 AM
Approval rate can be misleading.  You can disapprove Obama's performance while never contemplating anything but voting for him again in 2012. 

Indeed. Voted disapprove, sure as hell won't vote for Romney though.

I mildly disapprove of his job performance, but not enough to vote "disapprove" so I voted Jaronove.

Moar subtlety in polls, plz.

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 02:58:00 PM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 19, 2012, 02:09:40 PM
I'm with Garbon.  This seems a lot of sophistic nonsense.

I knew I should've turned off comments.

QuoteI approve.

That's all I asked for-- thank you.

Okay, really, wtf? Sheilbh and I agree that Dgul made ridiculous comments and you use this as an opportunity to act as though languish is your on private domain?  I don't think many of us really care what you asked for.

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 02:05:33 PM
I don't think that's how most appeal answer approval questions. After all, if you think that realistically that everyone out there would do a shit job (and some perhaps worse, some perhaps slightly better), does that mean you approve of the current person in the role? :hmm:

Approval has to depend on reasonable expectations, and reasonable expectations have to depend on what is actually achievable.  If no person can do better, then probably the current person's performance is a good gauge of what is achievable.  If that's not satisfactory, then you need to change the system rather than the person.

Quote from: DGuller on April 19, 2012, 03:15:04 PM

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 02:05:33 PM
I don't think that's how most appeal answer approval questions. After all, if you think that realistically that everyone out there would do a shit job (and some perhaps worse, some perhaps slightly better), does that mean you approve of the current person in the role? :hmm:

Approval has to depend on reasonable expectations, and reasonable expectations have to depend on what is actually achievable.  If no person can do better, then probably the current person's performance is a good gauge of what is achievable.  If that's not satisfactory, then you need to change the system rather than the person.

I don't like to settle for less. "Approving" mediocrity because most of the contenders were mediocre is pathetic and certainly not a system I'd like to adopt.

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 03:19:43 PM
I don't like to settle for less. "Approving" mediocrity because most of the contenders were mediocre is pathetic and certainly not a system I'd like to adopt.

Setting expectations that cannot be achieved can make you feel tough and demanding, but in actuality that would just make you an idiot.  I can be very demanding and set a goal of 10% annual GDP growth, and disapprove of any president who fails it, but what would my disapproval actually mean?  Nothing at all, obviously, since a question that always has one answer is a meaningless question and informs of nothing.

Quote from: DGuller on April 19, 2012, 11:53:05 AM
Approval rate can be misleading.  You can disapprove Obama's performance while never contemplating anything but voting for him again in 2012.

Oddly, I'm the exact opposite of that. 

Quote from: DGuller on April 19, 2012, 03:15:04 PM

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 02:05:33 PM
I don't think that's how most appeal answer approval questions. After all, if you think that realistically that everyone out there would do a shit job (and some perhaps worse, some perhaps slightly better), does that mean you approve of the current person in the role? :hmm:

Approval has to depend on reasonable expectations, and reasonable expectations have to depend on what is actually achievable.  If no person can do better, then probably the current person's performance is a good gauge of what is achievable.  If that's not satisfactory, then you need to change the system rather than the person.

I disapprove of his job because I think he could have done better, if he was a better President.

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 03:01:31 PM
Okay, really, wtf?

:hug:

QuoteSheilbh and I agree that Dgul made ridiculous comments and you use this as an opportunity

I think I missed that.  I thought he was talking about the poll.

Quoteto act as though languish is your on private domain? 

I was going to say this thread sorta is my domain, but it doesn't look like we have mod powers any more over threads we start.  Doesn't look like we can do the "poll only-- no comments" thing either, now that I've checked :(

Quote
I don't think many of us really care what you asked for.

Meanie  :cry:

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 03:35:42 PM

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 03:01:31 PM
Okay, really, wtf?

:hug:

QuoteSheilbh and I agree that Dgul made ridiculous comments and you use this as an opportunity

I think I missed that.  I thought he was talking about the poll.

Quoteto act as though languish is your on private domain? 

I was going to say this thread sorta is my domain, but it doesn't look like we have mod powers any more over threads we start.  Doesn't look like we can do the "poll only-- no comments" thing either, now that I've checked :(

Quote
I don't think many of us really care what you asked for.

Meanie  :cry:

Well if it helps, it appears Raz posted that he wanted to know what you wanted. :hug:

It's very easy, as Speesh pointed out, if you break it into discrete decisions and agree or disagree with the choices made.

It's not a grade for results, which it sounds like most of you whingers are trying to force it into.

Quote from: garbon on April 19, 2012, 03:01:31 PM

Quote from: derspiess on April 19, 2012, 02:58:00 PM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 19, 2012, 02:09:40 PM
I'm with Garbon.  This seems a lot of sophistic nonsense.

I knew I should've turned off comments.

QuoteI approve.

That's all I asked for-- thank you.

Okay, really, wtf? Sheilbh and I agree that Dgul made ridiculous comments and you use this as an opportunity to act as though languish is your on private domain?  I don't think many of us really care what you asked for.

I know :o

Given what Obama had to work with, he's done a good job; I approve.

There's room for improvement, but he performed about how I expected.

Ed Anger checklist:

Pro:

Had Osama killed
Killed a lot of brown people with drones

Con:

Doesn't know when to pull out of Karzai's butt
Michelle Obama's health food shit shrunk the size of Mars bars. BOO! HISS.

Slight Pro. Especially for a Democrat.

I don't think there's been a President that has accomplished as much as he has with as little as he has had to work with in the last 60 years.

Hell, even Reagan wasn't served such shit sandwich at the beginning.

APPROVED

Quote from: Berkut on April 19, 2012, 03:34:45 PM
I disapprove of his job because I think he could have done better, if he was a better President.

That's pretty much exactly where I am.  I think he could have been a great president, had he reined in his ego long enough to get some experience in how Washington worked before he made his bid.  As it is, he is a wasted opportunity.  He is a smart guy, and a likable guy, but he is in way over his head and, thus, a poor president.

As disappointed in him as a president as I am, I get the vibes he will be a worse ex-president, though.

Quote from: Ed Anger on April 19, 2012, 06:15:29 PM
Michelle Obama's health food shit shrunk the size of Mars bars. BOO! HISS.

They're trying to ban Snickers duo and kingsize chocolate bars over here too.  Bastards <_<

I actually sort of agree with Berkut and grumbler.  Until Teddy croaked, Obama definitely had a window of opportunity.  He didn't have nearly as much power as implied by the nominal super-majority, but still with some skill he could've made better use of what he had.  Unfortunately, that window of opportunity coincided with the learning curve that didn't have to be there had he been more experienced.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 19, 2012, 06:26:07 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on April 19, 2012, 06:15:29 PM
Michelle Obama's health food shit shrunk the size of Mars bars. BOO! HISS.

They're trying to ban Snickers duo and kingsize chocolate bars over here too.  Bastards <_<

At least you have decent Jaffa cakes over there. I tried Aldi's brand. Total meh.  :glare:

Me? I have to spend 3-5 bucks for a package.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 19, 2012, 06:26:07 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on April 19, 2012, 06:15:29 PM
Michelle Obama's health food shit shrunk the size of Mars bars. BOO! HISS.

They're trying to ban Snickers duo and kingsize chocolate bars over here too.  Bastards <_<

First they came for the jumbo Mars bars, but I said nothing.
Then they came for the king-sized Snickers, but I said nothing.
Then they came for the double-pack Reeses cups, but I said nothing.
Finally they came for my party bag of Kit Kats, and there were no more bloated confections left to eat. :(

Meh, Reagan always believed if you were gonna get it done, get it done the first year.

I do, however, blame him for letting the Democratic leadership on the Hill to run around like a bunch of teenyboppers with the parents out of town.  Should've punched Reid and Pelosi in the face.  You leave Congress alone to its own devices at your peril.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 19, 2012, 06:38:48 PM
Meh, Reagan always believed if you were gonna get it done, get it done the first year.

I do, however, blame him for letting the Democratic leadership on the Hill to run around like a bunch of teenyboppers with the parents out of town.  Should've punched Reid and Pelosi in the face.  You leave Congress alone to its own devices at your peril.

Obama did okay getting stuff through at the start, major health care reform plus a massive stimulus. He probably didn't dream of becoming president so he could push through a massive stimulus bill that kept the economy from collapsing but still condemned his term in office to stagnation and high levels of unemployment, but such is life when you follow GWB as president.

Whether he wins reelection or not, I think we have seen the last of major Obama legislation. These days you have a small window at the start of your term, and then the opposition derangement syndrome sets in and blocks everything. But then I don't think Romney plans on even trying to pass any major legislation.

Following GWB caused stagnation and lingering unemployment or the stimulus bill did?

:unsure:

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 19, 2012, 07:32:15 PM
Following GWB caused stagnation and lingering unemployment or the stimulus bill did?

:unsure:

He inherited a train wreck that wasn't easy to get back on the tracks and up to full speed. Getting us back to half speed is an achievement, but in the land of Ricky Bobby, we want to go fast.

Not great, but on the good side of OK, certainly better than the alternative.

The only things I cared about on Barry's electoral agenda he did not do.

Accordingly, I disapprove.

Is he worse than Bush?  No.  I rate him about equal to Booshitler.

Quote from: DGuller on April 19, 2012, 11:53:05 AM
Approval rate can be misleading.  You can disapprove Obama's performance while never contemplating anything but voting for him again in 2012.  I certainly think that Obama mishandled the Republican insanity unleashed on him, and failed to use it against them.  That made us all worse off, because his failure enabled the most destructive elements of our political system.

Plus one billion.

So I'm guessing at this point we pretty much have all the votes in.  Based on recent discussions here, my expectations were 70+% for "approve", so I was a little surprised that we ended up with only 62%.

With Obama "slow-jamming" student loans at UNC on Late Night, expect a bounce with the hipsters.

For all you Euros--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAFQIciWsF4

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 25, 2012, 11:10:36 AM
With Obama "slow-jamming" student loans at UNC on Late Night, expect a bounce with the hipsters.

For all you Euros--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAFQIciWsF4

That was painful to watch.

Quote from: derspiess on April 25, 2012, 11:45:32 AM

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 25, 2012, 11:10:36 AM
With Obama "slow-jamming" student loans at UNC on Late Night, expect a bounce with the hipsters.

For all you Euros--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAFQIciWsF4

That was painful to watch.

Want painful? Wait until Mittens does his opening monologue on SNL.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 25, 2012, 11:55:00 AM

Quote from: derspiess on April 25, 2012, 11:45:32 AM

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 25, 2012, 11:10:36 AM
With Obama "slow-jamming" student loans at UNC on Late Night, expect a bounce with the hipsters.

For all you Euros--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAFQIciWsF4

That was painful to watch.

Want painful? Wait until Mittens does his opening monologue on SNL.

That would also be painful-- at least it will if he just comes on & gives a stupid speech about legislation he wants to push through congress.  I'd rather watch Putin sing "Blueberry Hill" again than watch either of them do that on what it supposed to be a comedy show.

Now if they did it right, like Janet Reno's epic SNL appearance where she broke through a brick wall, we might have something.

That is one cool cat. :frog:

Quote from: derspiess on April 25, 2012, 11:45:32 AM

That was painful to watch.

Gotta go with derpie there, it was painful to watch. I know there were alot of students watching but the pandering to them by obama was pretty shameless.

God forbid the man actually believes in something right?

It's all about pandering and the lust for power. Right.

It's only pandering if you don't agree with the issue he is advocating for.

Quote from: sbr on April 26, 2012, 08:09:53 AM
It's only pandering if you don't agree with the issue he is advocating for.

Huh?  Politicians have said tons of stuff I agree with when they were pandering.  What does that have to do with it?

Quote from: sbr on April 26, 2012, 08:09:53 AM
It's only pandering if you don't agree with the issue he is advocating for.

I agree with him on the issue and I think it is pandering. Helping students of marginal means fund their education is good for everybody.

He's just reaching out to his demographic.  Sorta like Mittens stumping the Carmel Yacht Club.  No biggie.

Quote from: Zoupa on April 26, 2012, 04:13:55 AM
It's all about pandering and the lust for power. Right.

This pretty much sums up presidential politics.

Quote from: Viking on April 26, 2012, 08:17:58 AM

Quote from: sbr on April 26, 2012, 08:09:53 AM
It's only pandering if you don't agree with the issue he is advocating for.

I agree with him on the issue and I think it is pandering. Helping students of marginal means fund their education is good for everybody.

That's not exactly the issue though.  And the funny thing is that Republicans are on board with freezing the student loan interest rate, as long as it's paid for by an offset somewhere else.

Odd that Obama neglects to offer any suggestions as to where the money will come from.

I hate this question, it's far too sweeping in nature. I approve of some things he does, disapprove of some others.

Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 26, 2012, 09:31:56 AM
I hate this question, it's far too sweeping in nature. I approve of some things he does, disapprove of some others.

Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:53:42 AM

Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 26, 2012, 09:31:56 AM
I hate this question, it's far too sweeping in nature. I approve of some things he does, disapprove of some others.

Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

And by their nature involve the weighing up of things you approve and disapprove of :huh:

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 26, 2012, 09:56:36 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:53:42 AM

Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 26, 2012, 09:31:56 AM
I hate this question, it's far too sweeping in nature. I approve of some things he does, disapprove of some others.

Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

And by their nature involve the weighing up of things you approve and disapprove of :huh:

Seems an odd thing to hate.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 26, 2012, 09:56:36 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:53:42 AM

Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 26, 2012, 09:31:56 AM
I hate this question, it's far too sweeping in nature. I approve of some things he does, disapprove of some others.

Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

And by their nature involve the weighing up of things you approve and disapprove of :huh:

And if you don't see any appreciable difference between the two, you simply answer "neither" (Jaronove).  The whole thing isn't really that complicated.

But what if I approve of some things, and disapprove of other, but some of the things I approve of I only mildly approve of, but some of the things I don't approve of I really don't approve of, while still other things that I may approve or disapprove of strongly aren't really that important?

How do I balance my mild approval of his handling of Libya with my strong disapproval of his choice in ties?

And how does my approval of his historical actions fit into my opinion about his current actions? Should I weigh his decimation of dogs as youth more or less than his friendship with America hating religious fanatics?

The poll clearly needs a lot more options. Like 60 more.

Quote from: Berkut on April 26, 2012, 10:17:02 AM
But what if I approve of some things, and disapprove of other, but some of the things I approve of I only mildly approve of, but some of the things I don't approve of I really don't approve of, while still other things that I may approve or disapprove of strongly aren't really that important?

Don't overthink it.  If you can't fairly quickly come up with an overall approval or disapproval of the job he's done, then you Jaronove.

QuoteHow do I balance my mild approval of his handling of Libya with my strong disapproval of his choice in ties?

That's up to you.  To me, a choice in ties would not factor into what kind of job I think he's done as president, but if it's important to you, have at it.

QuoteAnd how does my approval of his historical actions fit into my opinion about his current actions? Should I weigh his decimation of dogs as youth more or less than his friendship with America hating religious fanatics?

Objectively, I don't think any of that has to do with your approval or disapproval of the job he's done as president.  If you're incapable of evaluating him as prez without factoring that stuff in, then so be it.  But the poll question did not ask about historical stuff-- just approval of the job he's done as President.

QuoteThe poll clearly needs a lot more options. Like 60 more.

And results from such a poll would be useless.

edit: Having said that, I may do a Rasmussen-style poll and ask for Strongly/Somewhat Approve/Disapprove, giving 5 possible options including Jaronove.

Quote from: Berkut on April 26, 2012, 10:17:02 AM
But what if I approve of some things, and disapprove of other, but some of the things I approve of I only mildly approve of, but some of the things I don't approve of I really don't approve of, while still other things that I may approve or disapprove of strongly aren't really that important?

How do I balance my mild approval of his handling of Libya with my strong disapproval of his choice in ties?

And how does my approval of his historical actions fit into my opinion about his current actions? Should I weigh his decimation of dogs as youth more or less than his friendship with America hating religious fanatics?

The poll clearly needs a lot more options. Like 60 more.

:lol:

Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:53:42 AM
Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

Indeed. And the standard is nothing like this poll.  :huh:

Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2012, 11:05:42 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:53:42 AM
Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

Indeed. And the standard is nothing like this poll.  :huh:

I'm not too sure Languish is designed to fit within a proper public policy analysis matrix.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 26, 2012, 11:08:46 AM

Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2012, 11:05:42 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:53:42 AM
Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

Indeed. And the standard is nothing like this poll.  :huh:

I'm not too sure Languish is designed to fit within a proper public policy analysis matrix.

:(

Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2012, 11:05:42 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:53:42 AM
Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

Indeed. And the standard is nothing like this poll.  :huh:

How's that?

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 26, 2012, 11:08:46 AM

Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2012, 11:05:42 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:53:42 AM
Approval ratings are pretty standard. :huh:

Indeed. And the standard is nothing like this poll.  :huh:

I'm not too sure Languish is designed to fit within a proper public policy analysis matrix.

I am quite sure that the design had no such purpose.  Luckily, that is irrelevant to the standard approval rating poll format.

In retrospect, though, I realize that, since this poll was intended only to inform Spicey as to the accuracy of his prejudices, it only needs to be as accurate as he feels necessary.  If it is too crude to inform anyone else; well, it wasn't intended to do that.  I withdraw my earlier criticism, and just note that I am sorry to have participated in this exercise.

I would hope that people interested in polling languish for the purposes of informing the poll-takers as well as the poll-creators will create a poll that has some subtlety and, thus, utility.  And I would hope that future languish poll-takers will look at polls like this one and just say, "no thanks; Homey don't play this game."

:D

I don't know. Is the glass half white or half black?

Quote from: derspiess on April 25, 2012, 11:59:24 AMI'd rather watch Putin sing "Blueberry Hill" again

I'd rather watch that than pretty much anything.

Quote from: derspiess on April 26, 2012, 09:09:47 AM
Odd that Obama neglects to offer any suggestions as to where the money will come from.

Pretty sure Obama has places he would suggest.  But that will be an area the Republicans refuse to transfer any money from, like the military or something, and then refuse.  Obama can then blame them and they will blame him and business as usual.