updated chung chart for bush approval?

Quoted message said:

I've been gone for a while. What does it look like now?

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approvalpolls.html
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/gross-vs-net.html
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approval-longview.png

Robert Chung said:

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approvalpolls.html

Looks like a long decsent in the TDF. I suppose it would be to much to
hope for any melted tar ?

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Quoted message said:

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approval-longview.png

Quoted message said:

Judging by popularity (there are many other criteria), Reagan and
Clinton were the best presidents. The others are pretty predictable,
except I'm surprised to see that Ford was that high at the end of his
term.

These are job performance (i.e., net approval) not popularity -- but
they're related. During the first part of his administration, GHWB had
higher job approval than Reagan. His 1992 drop is pretty close to the
definition of free fal". Clinton was the only guy whose highest high came
after his lowest low. Carter had a peak in between his two lows. That
Iran-Contra admission dropped Reagan overnight. The Monica Lewinsky
admission didn't affect Clinton nearly as much.

Robert Chung said:

These are job performance (i.e., net approval) not popularity -- but
they're related. During the first part of his administration, GHWB had
higher job approval than Reagan. His 1992 drop is pretty close to the
definition of free fal". Clinton was the only guy whose highest high came
after his lowest low. Carter had a peak in between his two lows. That
Iran-Contra admission dropped Reagan overnight. The Monica Lewinsky
admission didn't affect Clinton nearly as much.

Dumbass -

That's because, outside of the religious conservatives, no one gives a
damn about who does and doesn't get blowjobs in the Oval Office.

My beef with Clinton is that he got a bj from a Fattie instead of the
hot chicks that he undoubtedly would have had access to. Hillary's got
a big ass so maybe he likes that [censored].

At least Hillary's hotter than Barbara. She looked like George Sr.'s
mom. No wonder he got the rumoured mistress.

As for Iran-Contra: that was one of Reagan's actions (retreating after
the Beirut barracks bombing was the other) that gave rise to terrorism
against the US. Hezbollah got rewarded for taking hostages. He gave the
terrorists arms, for godssake. How wrong is that? Once again, Reagan
*rewarded* the terrorists.

No wonder OsamabL got the idea that the more we were attacked the more
we would retreat.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

I've been gone for a while. What does it look like now?

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approvalpolls.html
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/gross-vs-net.html
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approval-longview.png

If you loved America you'd see that the Emperor's new clothes are
exquisitely beautiful. If you squint a bit you can see the epaulets
gleaming in the sun.

Jay S. Hill said:

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

I've been gone for a while. What does it look like now?

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approvalpolls.html
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/gross-vs-net.html
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approval-longview.png

If you loved America you'd see that the Emperor's new clothes are
exquisitely beautiful. If you squint a bit you can see the epaulets
gleaming in the sun.

Sipping the Kellogg Brown and Root supplied Kool Aid really makes it
much clearer too.
Bill C

thanks!

Quoted message said:

thanks!

Two-termers:
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/two-termers.png

On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 09:01:43 -0700,

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

I've been gone for a while. What does it look like now?

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approvalpolls.html

What are the units on the y-axis? I assumed approval percentage,
but don't quite see how that could be negative.

--
Theodore (Ted) Heise <[email hidden]> Bloomington, IN, USA

In article <[email hidden]>,

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

thanks!

Two-termers:
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/two-termers.png

GWB better get off his ass if he's gonna catch Nixon in the next three
months! F***ing incompetent--he can't even get that right.

KP

Theodore Heise said:

Quoted message said:

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approvalpolls.html

What are the units on the y-axis? I assumed approval percentage,
but don't quite see how that could be negative.

For that plot, net approval ( = approval - disapproval)

You can see the difference between gross and net here:
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/gross-vs-net.html

This uses adjusted net, i.e, (a-d)/(a+d):
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approval-longview.png

One of the ways in which polls systematically differ is in the
other/undecided/don't know category, so in order to make reasonable
comparisons across polls (or create some sort of pooled measure) you ought
to do something to control for that. Net approval allocates it equally;
adjusted net (and measures based on the approval/disapproval ratio)
allocates it proportionally.

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:29:08 -0700,

Robert Chung said:

Theodore Heise said:

What are the units on the y-axis? I assumed approval percentage,
but don't quite see how that could be negative.

For that plot, net approval ( = approval - disapproval)

Quoted message said:

One of the ways in which polls systematically differ is in the
other/undecided/don't know category, so in order to make
reasonable comparisons across polls (or create some sort of
pooled measure) you ought to do something to control for that.
Net approval allocates it equally; adjusted net (and measures
based on the approval/disapproval ratio) allocates it
proportionally.

Great illustrations and explanations, thanks!

--
Theodore (Ted) Heise <[email hidden]> Bloomington, IN, USA

Not Chung charts, but provocative (not in the usual ED style, though)
nonetheless.

http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/worldmapper/index.html

Carl Sundquist said:

provocative (not in the usual ED style, though)

Sorry. This is the best I could do for today:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ewoud/cycling/vp.jpg

--
E. Dronkert

On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 00:48:46 +0200,

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Carl Sundquist said:

provocative (not in the usual ED style, though)

Sorry. This is the best I could do for today:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ewoud/cycling/vp.jpg

I enjoyed brwosing through your collection, Ewoud. Was that you
holding the rbr jersey?

http://www.heise.nu/RBR-TWH.JPG

--
Theodore (Ted) Heise <[email hidden]> Bloomington, IN, USA

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 16:36:08 -0500,

Carl Sundquist said:

Not Chung charts, but provocative (not in the usual ED style, though)
nonetheless.

http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/worldmapper/index.html

Fascinating, thanks!

--
Theodore (Ted) Heise <[email hidden]> Bloomington, IN, USA

Theodore Heise said:

I enjoyed brwosing through your collection, Ewoud. Was that you
holding the rbr jersey?

Yep, on an rbr meet with Bob.

--
E. Dronkert

Robert Chung said:

Two-termers:
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/two-termers.png

Are you familiar with Elliot wave theory? I've been watching the stock
market. I wonder if you "linked" the charts from term to term to term
in some way, if you could see if approval ratings followed ewt rules.

gym.gravity said:

Robert Chung said:

Two-termers:
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/two-termers.png

Are you familiar with Elliot wave theory? I've been watching the stock
market. I wonder if you "linked" the charts from term to term to term
in some way, if you could see if approval ratings followed ewt rules.

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/approval-longview.png

There's a theory that predicts when we're going to have an incompetent
president? You mean, other than the "November in years evenly divisible by
four" rule?