Despite What You May WANT To Believe. Liking Obama is Now The Minority Opinion

[Martin]

But based on what evidence? You're not viewing objectively whatsoever. To provide an accurate assessment you have to see both sides of the coin. If the Rasmussen polls didn't agree with your view, you wouldn't have used them. A constructive argument has two sides and you make an informed decision upon the evidence presented. You present one side, so no informed decision will be made.

[Locke4God]

No you're missing the key factor here.

Rasmussen is the most accurate poll. It has had the last few elections within half a point. It's not biased in other words. I'm viewing it completely objectively because Rasmussen is objective, and the evidence I'm basing my statement on is the poll itself. You were asking for a 2nd side, but what I've shown you is what's happening. There is no 2nd side to it. This is what is going on.

Now sure I want him to and think he should lose, but the data is accurate. There isn't a 2nd side to the data. It is what it is.

[Martin]

No you're missing the key factor here.

Rasmussen is the most accurate poll. It has had the last few elections within half a point. It's not biased in other words. I'm viewing it completely objectively because Rasmussen is objective, and the evidence I'm basing my statement on is the poll itself. You were asking for a 2nd side, but what I've shown you is what's happening. There is no 2nd side to it. This is what is going on.

Now sure I want him to and think he should lose, but the data is accurate. There isn't a 2nd side to the data. It is what it is.

But you're missing MY key factor. Data can be interpreted in as many different ways as you want it to! The fact is that you're quoting one source, where as you need a variety. I don't mind if you don't like Obama - that's your opinion. But your arguing your opinion and coming up with a source to back it. My objection is that the source you've chosen supports that - and it would make more sense if you can at least find some support for that source. A different website that also agrees, or perhaps something not necessarily online. Data can be manipulated - and the only way it's going to happen one way or the other is at the ballot.

As far as slowing the economic downturn - you cannot say that Mitt will be any different until he is potentially elected. This is a GFC that no-one seems to have really anticipated (with the exception of perhaps Australia but even then, their banks are still weathering a storm) and the IMF wholly endorse American fiscal policy as it stands. Not to mention, the New Deal was spending your way out of recession: and although it only delayed the problem, the only way America recovered from that crisis was the Second World War. So what gives? What would be your answer? That's the real debate here - you don't like stimulus, but what do you suggest?