Just 24% give the president favorable ratings of his performance in handling the war in Iraq, but confidence in Congress is significantly worse – only 3% give Congress positive marks for how it has handled the war. This lack of confidence in Congress cuts across all ideologies. Democrats – some of whom had hoped the now Democrat-led Congress would bring an end to the war in Iraq – expressed overwhelming displeasure with how Congress has handled the war, with 94% giving Congress a negative rating in its handling specifically of that issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

you've been gone (it was explained that you were busy), FHKY, we have already done this one.

Ron 

The Times and CBS News conducted a poll from July 9 to July 17 with 1,554 adults, mostly about Senator Hillary Clinton. There were a few questions about the other presidential candidates, about President George W. Bush and about the war, but most of the poll was about Clinton.

The polling took place during a week when Congress was debating the war; the Bush administration issued a report saying the Iraqi government had failed to meet many of the benchmarks it was supposed to meet; and prominent Republicans were distancing themselves from Bush on Iraq.

In the poll, The Times and CBS News asked: ''Looking back, do you think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, or should the United States have stayed out?''

Forty-two percent of those polled said the United States did the right thing, and 54 percent said the United States should have stayed out of Iraq. The last time the question was asked, in May, 35 percent said taking military action against Iraq was the right thing and 61 percent said the United States should have stayed out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

LOL, no prob at all.  I understand busy with other interests.

Um, yeah, that pretty much says that polling is shit, which I have maintained as a position all my life (having quite a bit to do with cooking numbers)

You buy the assumption, you buy the deal.

I don't buy the assumptions.

And, 1551 people?  What does that mean, it is ludicrous to take such adumbrate data and excrete it as significant datum. People have a fascination for numbers, but they rarely understand the utility.

Here is one for you, some days back a pamphlet was put out for drunk school (many years ago), that said 55% of all people driving age drink.
few pages later, it said (amongst other ignominious data and ratios) that 50% of all accidents are alcohol RELATED.

When I pointed out that this was only significant in that it would tend to depict drinking drivers as more careful than the the population at large---------

Well, you see where this is going.............

Ron 

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

They are still interesting to play with and talk about though ... 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

Superior people talk about principles, average people talk about events, inferior people talk about other people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

Superior people talk about principles, average people talk about events, inferior people talk about other people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

LOL, no prob at all.  I understand busy with other interests.

Um, yeah, that pretty much says that polling is shit, which I have maintained as a position all my life (having quite a bit to do with cooking numbers)

You buy the assumption, you buy the deal.

I don't buy the assumptions.

And, 1551 people?  What does that mean, it is ludicrous to take such adumbrate data and excrete it as significant datum. People have a fascination for numbers, but they rarely understand the utility.

Here is one for you, some days back a pamphlet was put out for drunk school (many years ago), that said 55% of all people driving age drink.
few pages later, it said (amongst other ignominious data and ratios) that 50% of all accidents are alcohol RELATED.

When I pointed out that this was only significant in that it would tend to depict drinking drivers as more careful than the the population at large---------

Well, you see where this is going.............

Ron 

lol!

Classic!

Yeah, numbers and statistics can "prove" or "disprove" just about anything, depending on what you want them to do, and how much you want to massage them.

They are still interesting to play with and talk about though ... 

Firm

quote:

ORIGINAL: losttreasure

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

Superior people talk about principles, average people talk about events, inferior people talk about other people.

FirmhandKY is talking about the enjoyment derived from presenting statistics in a manner to support or disprove one's position.   Sounds like a principle to me in that it is a professed rule of action or conduct.

You, on the other hand, appear to be talking about other people.

Hmmm...