Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 63
  1. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #1  
    I really liked this map. It shows a state to state approval rating for Bush over a given amount of time. Watch as it just gets.................


  2. #2  
    Yeeehaaawwww!!!!
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Yeeehaaawwww!!!!
    Pssst....Your political bias is showing....

    I don't rejoice in any Pres numbers going so low, no matter if they are Rep, Dems, or Green. It is not good for the country. It means either:

    1) The Pres is reduced in his effectiveness.
    2) The general population is off target with their opinions.

    Again, no matter what it is not good for the country.

    Many of same concerns apply with a Pres that I don't agree with their politics is overly popular.
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Pssst....Your political bias is showing....

    I don't rejoice in any Pres numbers going so low, no matter if they are Rep, Dems, or Green. It is not good for the country...
    Hmmm....so is it your opinion that it's unpatriotic to admit to a pollster (much less to the public at large) that you disapprove of the job performance of a sitting President? I must say, I don't remember the Republicans holding their collective tongue (or even moderating their language) during President Clinton's administration.
    V > Vx > m505 > m515 > T/T > T3 > TC > 650 > 680
    <script type="text/javascript" src="http://download.skype.com/share/skypebuttons/js/skypeCheck.js"></script>
    <a href="skype:wwgamble?call"><img src="http://mystatus.skype.com/balloon/wwgamble" style="border: none;" width="150" height="60" alt="My Skype status" /></a>
  5. #5  
    I think he's implying that it's OK to dispprove but not to rejoice if the number's go down.
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  6. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Pssst....Your political bias is showing....

    I don't rejoice in any Pres numbers going so low, no matter if they are Rep, Dems, or Green. It is not good for the country. It means either:

    1) The Pres is reduced in his effectiveness.
    2) The general population is off target with their opinions.


    Again, no matter what it is not good for the country.

    Many of same concerns apply with a Pres that I don't agree with their politics is overly popular.
    Where is the option of the president being generally disapproved, because of the job he is doing? I mean jeez talk about political bias.
  7. #7  
    Political biases are like flatulance, its futile to try to pretend that you never have any. Its delusional to think your own don't stink. And it is obnoxious when you let them loose at every opportunity.
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 06/10/2006 at 01:59 PM.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Pssst....Your political bias is showing....
    My political bias? Yes of course, you're an intellectual moderate , I forgot.

    In any event, it was "YehaawWWW", as in the Beverly Hillbillies and the Dukes of hazzard, not Yippie!! as in, I am so happy.

    NOBODY is happy about the state our nation is in now, except (according to the map) perhaps those last few percent in Idaho & Utah.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    I think he's implying that it's OK to dispprove but not to rejoice if the number's go down.
    That was my take too.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    I think he's implying that it's OK to dispprove but not to rejoice if the number's go down.
    Yes that was exactly my point.
  11. #11  
    Wow. Those numbers move around a lot. At least outside of Utah and Massachusetts.
  12. #12  
    Who cares... W can't run again so how does it matter?

    The pathetic thing is that the Dems have such lousy prospective prediential candidates in 2008, that it's improbable that they could win the POTUS even if W is stinking up the polls...UGH....
    _________________
    aka Gfunkmagic

    Current device: Palm Pre
    Device graveyard: Palm Vx, Cassiopeia E100, LG Phenom HPC, Palm M515, Treo 300, Treo 600, Treo 650, Treo 700p, Axim X50v, Treo 800w



    Please don't PM me about my avatar. For more info go here.

    Restore your Pre to factory settings using webos doctor and follow these instructions
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Yes that was exactly my point.
    But your point seems pretty silly without a straw man to direct it toward. As you just heard me explain, nobody in this thread expressed joy.
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    Political biases are like flatulance, its futile to try to pretend that you never have any. Its delusional to think your own don't stink.
    lol
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by gfunkmagic
    The pathetic thing is that the Dems have such lousy prospective prediential candidates in 2008, that it's improbable that they could win the POTUS even if W is stinking up the polls...UGH....
    Yes, I think for Dems this is the real Inconvenient Truth. Although I think Gore is trying to ramp up for President... Clinton-style (Clinton talks about boxers vs briefs; Gore talks about doing nude scenes).
  15. #15  
    republicans think the democratic candidates are bad. this is an informative discussion!
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    republicans think the democratic candidates are bad. this is an informative discussion!
    Nope...BILL Clinton was a great candidate. I don't see anything like that now.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    republicans think the democratic candidates are bad. this is an informative discussion!
    Not to mention, skipping one election, and looking toward the next one.
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by dutchtrumpet
    Nope...BILL Clinton was a great candidate. I don't see anything like that now.
    lol

    now this is telling

    This is the OFF TERM ELECTION YEAR, yet republicans have already given up defending the current president, and have moved on to, "he wont be in office next term anyway", and "the democrats are just as bad".

    Do you remember THAT with Clinton? Or any recent president for that matter?
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    republicans think the democratic candidates are bad. this is an informative discussion!
    gfunk hasn't frequented OT enough for me to discern his politics. Or maybe I just missed it.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by dutchtrumpet
    Nope...BILL Clinton was a great candidate. I don't see anything like that now.
    Bill Clinton did not emerge as a candidate until during the 1992 primaries. Two years before the election, no one thought of him as a viable candidate. He was actually booed off the 1988 democratic convention stage.

    So what about the republican side? After you weed out the candidates that wouldn't pass muster with the social conservative crowd, like Giuliani, Powell and McCain, bozos like Dennis Hastert, Bill Frist or George Allen seem pretty pathetic to me.

    But my opinion is as worthless as yours or gfunkmagics, because the primaries are not going to be happening for another two years.

    Whatever happens, I am afraid that Dallas will probably not see such an economic boom like it has had under the Bush presidency. I was just there recently and was quite amazed at all of the multimillion dollar homes going up in Frisco and Castle Hills. If you like Bush or not, at least you can credit him with taking care of his peeps.

    Edit to note: I do not begrudge Dallas for enjoying a little prosperity. Actually I was there for a job interview and it seems like a nice place.
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 06/10/2006 at 03:45 PM.
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions