Do you think a President should govern by polls?

[jwoodie]

Demwits do. How about the rest of you?

 

[GaryDog]

Do you even know what you mean by that?

 

[pismoe]

course NOT JWoodie !!

 

[JakeStarkey]

jwoodie is just spouting and pouting. The OP makes no sense in the real world.

 

[my2¢]

Only in situations where I agree with the polls.

 

[whitehall]

One of the symptoms of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Didn't the polls say that Hillary would win in a landslide? Now the pollsters create a scenario for borderline insane lefties to think they are going to reverse the results of the election and the freaking idiots eat it up like pablum.

 

[jwoodie]

Do you even know what you mean by that?

Let me explain it to you: As evidenced by the majority of "progressive" posters on this forum, high poll numbers are the greatest achievement by which they think politicians should be evaluated. For example, they believe that pretending that NK, Iran and ISIS pose no threat to the U.S. or its allies was a positive achievement because it produced higher poll numbers than pointing out the dangers of those policies. Rational people should be concerned about this short-sighted approach, whereas Demwits are only interested in winning the next popularity contest.

 

[GaryDog]

One of the symptoms of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Didn't the polls say that Hillary would win in a landslide? Now the pollsters create a scenario for borderline insane lefties to think they are going to reverse the results of the election and the freaking idiots eat it up like pablum.

Most reliable polling (like 538, Gallup, etc.) had Hillary up by 5 points, nationwide, in the general election. She won by 2 points. The polling was within the margin of error.

Just because polls were wrong at some point in time doesn't render them wrong forever. Hell, even Trump believes that, as he cherry-picks polls that make him look good.

 

[JakeStarkey]

One of the symptoms of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Didn't the polls say that Hillary would win in a landslide? Now the pollsters create a scenario for borderline insane lefties to think they are going to reverse the results of the election and the freaking idiots eat it up like pablum.

She did win the PV in a landslide, but you must not have heard.

 

[GaryDog]

Do you even know what you mean by that?

Let me explain it to you: As evidenced by the majority of "progressive" posters on this forum, high poll numbers are the greatest achievement by which they think politicians should be evaluated. For example, they believe that pretending that NK, Iran and ISIS pose no threat to the U.S. or its allies was a positive achievement because it produced higher poll numbers than pointing out the dangers of those policies. Rational people should be concerned about this short-sighted approach, whereas Demwits are only interested in winning the next popularity contest.

Nah, let me explain it to YOU: It's Trump who insists on governing by polls, because he spends most of his time fighting the poll numbers ("This is fake news! WAAA!") that make him look bad, and propping up the poll numbers ("YAY, check out Rasmussen...I'd STILL beat Hillary in the popular vote [guess what, dumbass, you didn't the first time]"

I, and most Democrats, don't give a shit about his polling, or whether he governs in accordance with it. It's his feckless foreign and domestic policies, and his asinine statements that are unnerving.

 

[GaryDog]

Do you even know what you mean by that?

Let me explain it to you: As evidenced by the majority of "progressive" posters on this forum, high poll numbers are the greatest achievement by which they think politicians should be evaluated. For example, they believe that pretending that NK, Iran and ISIS pose no threat to the U.S. or its allies was a positive achievement because it produced higher poll numbers than pointing out the dangers of those policies. Rational people should be concerned about this short-sighted approach, whereas Demwits are only interested in winning the next popularity contest.

And one more thing, moron: He just said he's keeping his wonderfully inept press secretary because "He gets great ratings. People tune in."

Donald Trump thinks success as president is defined by "ratings." So who's governing by polls now?

 

[Indeependent]

Demwits do. How about the rest of you?

If they didn't, the Democratic Party would vanish.

 

[BlindBoo]

Gee I don't know, I'll have to wait until Gallop tells me what we think about that!

 

[jwoodie]

She did win the PV in a landslide, but you must not have heard.

 

[JakeStarkey]

She did win the PV in a landslide, but you must not have heard.

OH, you did hear.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Demwits do. How about the rest of you?

Kind of a difficult question. Elections & primaries are essentially polls so in that aspect a president created the poll with his position & as a result governs by it. Then subsequent polls on those same positions come up.

But just sticking your finger in the wind? No

 

[jwoodie]

I, and most Democrats, don't give a shit about his polling

Then why do you Dems keep bringing it up?

 

[GaryDog]

I, and most Democrats, don't give a shit about his polling

Then why do you Dems keep bringing it up?

Because it gets "great ratings" from you snowflake Trumpanzees.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You, nit wit, brought it up. jwoodie, please.

 

[jknowgood]

Bill Clinton ran his presidency on polls