ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

Obama Poll Watch -- November, 2016

[ Posted Wednesday, December 7th, 2016 – 18:06 PST ]

The Lame-Duck Honeymoon

President Obama is on track to end his second term in office with higher job approval than he began it, back in January of 2013. Call it the third (or lame-duck) honeymoon, if you will. Obama saw record job approval in November, measured both monthly and daily, and tied his daily low for job disapproval (previously set February 24, 2013). After a very strong October, Obama charted an even stronger November in public opinion polls. Let's take a look at the new chart for this month to see all of this.

Obama Approval -- November 2016

[Click on graph to see larger-scale version.]

November, 2016

After gaining 1.2 points in October, Obama's average monthly job approval rose at exactly the same rate in November, which put him at 52.9 percent approval for the month -- beating the 52.7 percent record high he set at the very beginning of his second term. Obama's disapproval rating improved even more -- after falling a single point in October, Obama's job disapproval monthly average fell 1.4 points in November, putting him at 44.0 percent disapproval. The trend was clear all month long, with no reversal in his daily average's improvement.

As this column series winds down (only two more to go after this one!), monthly analysis becomes rather pointless. All presidents usually get a bounce upwards during the lame-duck period at the end of their term, and Obama is no exception. Partly this is due to people exhausted over the years-long presidential contest, partly it is due to people looking forward not backward, and partly it is due to people giving Obama the benefit of the doubt on his way out the door. Even George W. Bush got a tiny bump upwards in the polls in his final months in office (although that's relative to his record-low ratings for almost his entire second term -- Bush rose from a dismal 25.3 percent approval before the 2008 election to reach only 29.3 percent approval in his final month in office).

So, really, the only political analysis necessary for Obama's final months is "people are already missing him, before he's even gone." That's all that really needs to be said, at this point.

 

Overall Trends

The overall trend, obviously, is up. Barack Obama is going to have his most-improved year ever, at this point that much is just about guaranteed. At the end of last December, Obama was at only 43.7 percent average monthly job approval, and 51.6 percent disapproval -- a total of 7.9 percent "underwater." In the past eleven months, his job approval has improved a whopping 9.2 points, while his disapproval fell 7.6 points. He's now 8.9 percent above water and setting second-term records. Almost every one of the months in 2016 were positive for Obama, with only two real setbacks -- both of which he easily overcame the following month.

Obama not only charted his best second-term monthly average job approval in November, he also had the best daily average of his second term as well. For three days at the end of the month, Obama was at 54.0 percent approval -- noticeably up from the 52.7 percent high-water mark he set the previous month. Before that, Obama's best showing was right after his inauguration, when he was at 52.5 percent in January of 2013. Obama also tied his lowest second-term job disapproval daily average last month, matching the 42.3 percent mark he charted in February, 2013.

Below is an expanded chart of Obama's entire second term. He's visibly doing better than he even did during his second honeymoon, right after being sworn in for the second time.

Obama (detail)

[Click on graph to see larger-scale version.]

As you can clearly see, Obama has been having a fantastic 2016. With only two months left of data to chart, Obama is almost certain to end up in a very positive place with the public at the end. His job approval may not continue to rise quite as steeply in the final two months, but then again it might even accelerate.

Of the four previous presidents who served two full terms since modern polling became available, Obama seems likely to join the three who ended their terms in positive territory (Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, and Dwight D. Eisenhower), and thus avoiding being lumped in with the only two-term president to end up deep in negative numbers (George W. Bush).

The other presidents from the polling era have a more mixed record, but none of them served a full two terms. Jimmy Carter served a single term, but ended up with negative numbers. George H. W. Bush also served only four years, but got such a big post-election bounce (after Clinton won) that he wound up in positive territory.

The rest of the presidents served fractional terms. Richard Nixon served about a term and a half, but then resigned in disgrace with job approval ratings slightly worse than George W. Bush's, at the end. Gerald Ford served a half a term, and Lyndon Johnson served about a term and a quarter, but both men ended up in an unusual place (there were a lot more "undecided" responses, back then) -- below a majority of 50 percent, but with job approval still above water compared to job disapproval. And finally, John F. Kennedy was struck down three-quarters of the way through his first term, and ended with positive ratings.

Viewed historically, Barack Obama's job approval with the public is nowhere near the best ever (Clinton holds this record, followed by Reagan and Eisenhower), but a lot better than many previous presidents can claim. As we approach the end, more and more people are feeling a lot better about the past eight years, when put in historical context.

 

[Obama Poll Watch Data:]

Sources And Methodology

ObamaPollWatch.com is an admittedly amateur effort, but we do try to stay professional when it comes to revealing our sources and methodology. All our source data comes from RealClearPolitics.com; specifically from their daily presidential approval ratings "poll of polls" graphic page. We take their daily numbers, log them, and then average each month's data into a single number -- which is then shown on our monthly charts here (a "poll of polls of polls," if you will...). You can read a much-more detailed explanation of our source data and methodology on our "About Obama Poll Watch" page, if you're interested.

Questions or comments? Use the Email Chris page to drop me a private note.

 

Obama's Second Term Statistical Records

Monthly
Highest Monthly Approval -- 11/16 -- 52.9%
Lowest Monthly Approval -- 11/13 -- 41.4%

Highest Monthly Disapproval -- 12/13 -- 54.0%
Lowest Monthly Disapproval -- 1/13 -- 42.6%

Daily
Highest Daily Approval -- 11/(25,26,29)/16 -- 54.0%
Lowest Daily Approval -- 12/2/13 -- 39.8%

Highest Daily Disapproval -- 12/2/13 -- 55.9%
Lowest Daily Disapproval -- 2/24/13, 11/(27,28)/16 -- 42.3%

 

Obama's Second Term Raw Monthly Data

[All-time high in bold, all-time low underlined.]

Month -- (Approval / Disapproval / Undecided)
10/16 -- 52.9 / 44.0 / 3.1
10/16 -- 51.7 / 45.4 / 2.9
09/16 -- 50.5 / 46.4 / 3.1
08/16 -- 51.3 / 44.9 / 3.8
07/16 -- 49.6 / 46.7 / 3.7
06/16 -- 50.0 / 46.2 / 3.8
05/16 -- 48.8 / 47.3 / 3.9
04/16 -- 48.6 / 47.2 / 4.2
03/16 -- 48.4 / 47.4 / 4.2
02/16 -- 46.3 / 49.6 / 4.1
01/16 -- 45.5 / 50.2 / 4.3
12/15 -- 43.7 / 51.6 / 4.7
11/15 -- 44.4 / 51.3 / 4.3
10/15 -- 45.3 / 50.0 / 4.7
09/15 -- 45.6 / 50.3 / 4.1
08/15 -- 44.7 / 50.4 / 4.9
07/15 -- 45.7 / 50.0 / 4.3
06/15 -- 44.6 / 50.7 / 4.7
05/15 -- 45.4 / 50.0 / 4.6
04/15 -- 45.2 / 49.9 / 4.9
03/15 -- 44.9 / 50.8 / 4.3
02/15 -- 45.4 / 50.1 / 4.5
01/15 -- 44.8 / 50.5 / 4.7
12/14 -- 42.4 / 52.8 / 4.8
11/14 -- 42.0 / 53.4 / 4.6
10/14 -- 42.1 / 53.4 / 4.5
09/14 -- 41.5 / 53.5 / 5.0
08/14 -- 41.6 / 53.0 / 5.4
07/14 -- 41.8 / 53.6 / 4.6
06/14 -- 42.4 / 53.4 / 4.2
05/14 -- 44.0 / 51.7 / 4.3
04/14 -- 43.4 / 52.1 / 4.5
03/14 -- 42.9 / 52.8 / 4.3
02/14 -- 43.3 / 52.3 / 4.4
01/14 -- 42.7 / 52.7 / 4.6
12/13 -- 41.9 / 54.0 / 4.1
11/13 -- 41.4 / 53.9 / 4.7
10/13 -- 44.2 / 50.8 / 5.0
09/13 -- 43.9 / 50.8 / 5.3
08/13 -- 44.4 / 50.2 / 5.4
07/13 -- 45.3 / 49.2 / 5.5
06/13 -- 46.5 / 48.5 / 5.0
05/13 -- 48.3 / 46.9 / 4.8
04/13 -- 48.6 / 46.8 / 4.6
03/13 -- 48.5 / 46.3 / 5.2
02/13 -- 51.1 / 43.1 / 5.9
01/13 -- 52.7 / 42.6 / 4.7

 

Second Term Column Archives

[Oct 16], [Sep 16], [Aug 16], [Jul 16], [Jun 16], [May 16], [Apr 16], [Mar 16], [Feb 16], [Jan 16], [Dec 15], [Nov 15], [Oct 15], [Sep 15], [Aug 15], [Jul 15], [Jun 15], [May 15], [Apr 15], [Mar 15], [Feb 15], [Jan 15], [Dec 14], [Nov 14], [Oct 14], [Sep 14], [Aug 14], [Jul 14], [Jun 14], [May 14], [Apr 14], [Mar 14], [Feb 14], [Jan 14], Dec 13], [Nov 13], [Oct 13], Sep 13], [Aug 13], [Jul 13], [Jun 13], [May 13], [Apr 13], [Mar 13], [Feb 13], [Jan 13]

 

First Term Data

To save space, the only data and statistics listed above are from Obama's second term. If you'd like to see the data and stats from Obama's first term, including a list of links to the full archives of the Obama Poll Watch column for the first term, we've set up an Obama Poll Watch First Term Data page, for those still interested.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Cross-posted at The Huffington Post

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

66 Comments on “Obama Poll Watch -- November, 2016”

  1. [1] 
    michale wrote:

    Obama actually having good poll numbers doesn't bother me as much as it used to.. :D

    248

  2. [2] 
    michale wrote:
  3. [3] 
    neilm wrote:

    That's exactly why I have trouble believing Obama's poll numbers..

    We know. You live in the bubble world where the lies in this article are treated as facts.

  4. [4] 
    michale wrote:

    We know. You live in the bubble world where the lies in this article are treated as facts.

    Unless you have facts to say that these statements are not facts, they stand as facts...

    For example..

    "Securing the historic Paris climate agreement."

    Did Obama secure the Paris climate agreement?? No. He couldn't because it wasn't submitted to Congress..

    "Securing the Trans-Pacific Partnership."

    Did Obama secure the TPP?? No, he did not..

    "Ending combat missions in Afghanistan and Iraq."

    Did Obama end combat missions in the TOPs??? No, he did not..

    ""Closing Guantanamo Bay."

    Did Obama close the prison? No he did not.

    And so on and so on and so on...

    What you call my "bubble" is reality...

    Speaking of BUBBLES

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKOb-kmOgpI

    Now THAT is funny!!! :D

    :D

  5. [5] 
    neilm wrote:

    You don't get to hold Obama to goals you invented or goals that the Republicans deliberately blocked for anti-American reasons when you won't even list three goals with metrics you hold Trump to.

  6. [6] 
    michale wrote:

    Obama opening up Cuba??

    Cuba’s Surge in Tourism Keeps Food Off Residents’ Plates
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/08/world/americas/cuba-fidel-castro-food-tourism.html

    Doesn't seem to be going well for Cubans...

    But, who cares about them.. As long as the Democratic Party agenda line is toe'ed, who CARES about the suffering of the locals... :^/

    252

  7. [7] 
    neilm wrote:

    As the Carrier deal comes apart, and less than 800 jobs are actually affected out of the 2,400, more Carrier employees are saying Trump "lied his ass off".

  8. [8] 
    neilm wrote:

    Doesn't seem to be going well for Cubans...

    I've got a Bridge in Brooklyn for you bubble boy.

  9. [9] 
    michale wrote:

    As the Carrier deal comes apart, and less than 800 jobs are actually affected out of the 2,400, more Carrier employees are saying Trump "lied his ass off".

    TRUMP IS TOAST-esque prediction #136

    I've got a Bridge in Brooklyn for you bubble boy.

    As with all yer so-called "facts".... it ain't :D

    253

  10. [10] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    What do you think of the 21st Century Cures Act?

    This is a piece of legislation that has been in the works for quite some time now and, passed the House with a big majority and the Senate on Monday in an overwhelmingly bipartisan 94-5 vote.

    The opposition to the bill included the usual suspects, Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, demonstrating how they despise the art of compromise. Oh, I'm sorry, it wasn't compromise, said Senator Warren. It was extortion. What a joker!

    By the way, did you see any of the Senate tribute to Vice President Biden? Here it is, ICYMI ...
    https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4635697/us-senate-pays-tribute-vice-president-biden

  11. [11] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    It's only about two and half hours long.

    And, the really amazing part is that Biden didn't say much!

    I can't believe I just made a joke about that. Maybe that means I'm beginning to come to terms with how this great man has been treated so shabbily by everyone for so long ... maybe ...

  12. [12] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    What do you think of the 21st Century Cures Act?

    This is a piece of legislation that has been in the works for quite

    I think it's a perfect example of the fact that, sometimes, our government DOES work...

    It's a perfect example of Right & Left ignoring partisan ideology and doing what's right for the American people..

    As to the legislation itself, from what I have read, it seems to be a worthwhile endeavor..

    Just the fact that it has nearly universal bi-partisan support shows that...

    It's only about two and half hours long.

    And, the really amazing part is that Biden didn't say much!

    I can't believe I just made a joke about that. Maybe that means I'm beginning to come to terms with how this great man has been treated so shabbily by everyone for so long ... maybe ...

    I can say with utter conviction that, if Biden had run, it would be entirely likely that DEMOCRATS would have taken control of the government...

    254

  13. [13] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    I can say with utter conviction that, if Biden had run, it would be entirely likely that DEMOCRATS would have taken control of the government

    Well, you know, Biden hasn't ruled out another run at the presidency and, only half-jokingly ...

    Indeed, more than one US senator during the Biden tribute held out hope that he is not done with elected office.

    In any event, whatever Biden chooses to do in the future, in addition to leading the cancer moonshot in Beau's name, he will always be a strong voice for the promise of America.

  14. [14] 
    michale wrote:

    Well, you know, Biden hasn't ruled out another run at the presidency and, only half-jokingly ...

    If Trump keeps even HALF his promises, Democrats are going to have to have a helluva candidate to win..

    I dunno if Biden could do it then...

    In any event, whatever Biden chooses to do in the future, in addition to leading the cancer moonshot in Beau's name, he will always be a strong voice for the promise of America.

    Agreed..

    255

  15. [15] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If Trump keeps even HALF his promises, Democrats are going to have to have a helluva candidate to win..

    Precisely.

  16. [16] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    In other words, and all other factors being equal, I don't think any other Democrat could match his ability to 'do it'!

  17. [17] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Good gods, have I just started the 2020 campaign!!!???

  18. [18] 
    michale wrote:

    Good gods, have I just started the 2020 campaign!!!???

    Heh Yep..

    And may the gods have mercy on yer soul!!!! :D

    256

  19. [19] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Oh, indeed!

  20. [20] 
    John M wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    "Good gods, have I just started the 2020 campaign!!!???"

    Biden for 2020!!! After one term of Trump, I think we are going to need him!!!!

  21. [21] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Yes ... I think so, too, John.

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    By the way, a Biden administration in 2020 would do wonders for Obama's poll numbers, too ... in more ways than one, even. :)

  23. [23] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I think I just found a new coping mechanism for the next four years ... or less, who knows?

  24. [24] 
    michale wrote:

    Biden for 2020!!! After one term of Trump, I think we are going to need him!!!!

    I predict after 4 years of Trump, 60% of Weigantians will vote Trump.. :D

    257

  25. [25] 
    michale wrote:

    Biden for 2020!!! After one term of Trump, I think we are going to need him!!!!

    Are you saying that it's the Democratic Party's intent to make Trump a one-term President by opposing EVERYTHING Trump says and does??

    :D

    259

  26. [26] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Not at all, Michale.

    That's a page out of the Republican playbook.

    No, I expect the Democrats to work with the new president wherever and whenever they can.

  27. [27] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm also beginning to think that the new president will stay in touch with his direct predecessor going forward, consulting together on issues of critical importance to the US and to the world.

  28. [28] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I hope President Trump is a different sort of fellow in that regard than his congressional Republican colleagues, in other words ...

  29. [29] 
    neilm wrote:

    I'm also beginning to think that the new president will stay in touch with his direct predecessor going forward, consulting together on issues of critical importance to the US and to the world.

    You mean like he did with Taiwan? Really?

  30. [30] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    No, not really.

  31. [31] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You think Trump and Obama discussed Taiwan?

  32. [32] 
    michale wrote:

    Not at all, Michale.

    That's a page out of the Republican playbook.

    Well, you should know that many on the Left are advocating exactly that..

    DON'T work with Trump... Don't help Trump in ANY way..

    OBSTRUCT, OBSTRUCT, OBSTRUCT....

    I am sure there are more than a few Weigantians who feel the same way....

    No, I expect the Democrats to work with the new president wherever and whenever they can.

    I expect so to.. But there are quite a few Democrats who will excoriate them...

    You think Trump and Obama discussed Taiwan?

    I doubt it... Trump had the Taiwan plan set weeks ago... Maybe even before he won the election...

    Obama is a Go Along To Get Along kind of POTUS.... Trump isn't..

    262

  33. [33] 
    neilm wrote:

    No, not really.

    Am I being obtuse and missing your sarcasm? If so, sorry.

  34. [34] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You mean like he did with Taiwan? Really?

    I just wasn't sure what you meant by bringing up Taiwan. I doubt Obama and Trump had a chance to discuss Taiwan ...

  35. [35] 
    michale wrote:

    Anyone think Michelle Obama is still proud of her country?? :D

  36. [36] 
    neilm wrote:

    DON'T work with Trump... Don't help Trump in ANY way..

    Not a good idea. We are currently going thru a post-factual, child-like behavior political era. We can afford to because we haven't faced any real threats for over 15 years so we can tolerate un-American activities, such as refusing to do anything to help the current president for political gain (e.g. ignoring the Supreme Court nominee, announcing on day one to make him a one term president, etc.).

    But the world is an unpredictable place, and we might find that we need to have qualified people with adult capabilities and realize how short Trump and his feel good cronies are.

    At that point, when the populace is looking for adults, they will remember Obama and Kerry, Hillary and Biden, and the power will swing back.

    To try to out-childish the Republicans may feel good in the short term, but is counter productive in the long term. And beneath us.

    That doesn't mean that we shouldn't point out the childishness of tweeting about SNL, the venality and hypocrisy concerning infrastructure spending, the fiscal irresponsibility of more tax cuts for the wealthy, the 0.1% pandering of repealing inheritance taxes, etc. - it may seem that pointing out the pathetic carries no weight at the moment with Trump supporters, but the chance of over reach is very high (e.g. Ohio's latest foray into restricting women's rights, the odious voter suppression laws, etc.) and the potential for incompetence (Trump, Carson, Flynn, Priebus) would be funny if it weren't so serious (at least to the people who take America seriously).

  37. [37] 
    michale wrote:

    , such as refusing to do anything to help the current president for political gain

    Such as siding with Al Qaeda against Bush for political gain...

    Let me help you..

    "Well, that's different"

    It always is.. :^/

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:
  39. [39] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:
  40. [40] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Such as siding with Al Qaeda against Bush for political gain...

    Wow, that's a Whopper of a stinkin' lie. Where'd you get that from, Alex Jones?

  41. [41] 
    michale wrote:

    Such as siding with Al Qaeda against Bush for political gain...

    Wow, that's a Whopper of a stinkin' lie. Where'd you get that from, Alex Jones?

    No.. From the facts of the era...

    Democrats opposed Bush's domestic surveillance programs. Al Qaeda opposed Bush's domestic surveillance programs..

    When Obama came into power, continued AND increased those exact domestic surveillance programs, Democrats supported Obama to the hilt...

    Ergo, the ONLY reason Democrats opposed the programs under Bush was for political gain...

    Nuttin but facts as far as the eye can see...

    265

  42. [42] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Re: Obama's polling - I think I can confidently predict that Obama's numbers will continue to rise for at least the next year, as the immensity of the awful mistake of the Trump presidency sinks in.

    After all, here's a man who promises jobs, then picks a Burger CEO as labor secretary. A man who promises justice, then picks a racist as Attorney General (at this rate, I expect his pick for Surgeon General to be Michele Bachmann).

    In sum, looking at Trump's picks so far (and he's just getting started), I think I can confidently dub the next administration The "Deconstruction Presidency". We'll see how that plays out in the whiny hinterland.

  43. [43] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Democrats opposed Bush's domestic surveillance programs. Al Qaeda opposed Bush's domestic surveillance programs..

    C'mon, you could do better than to make the most basic error in logical thinking. False equivalency is the road to Wonderland, dude.

  44. [44] 
    michale wrote:
  45. [45] 
    michale wrote:

    C'mon, you could do better than to make the most basic error in logical thinking. False equivalency is the road to Wonderland, dude.

    By all means... Explain the error..

    Democrats were HYSTERICAL about Bush's domestic surveillance programs. They screamed POLICE STATE to the high heavens..

    When Obama continued and INCREASED those programs, the SAME Democrats were, "kewl"....

    So, tell me the fault in my logic...

  46. [46] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    So, tell me the fault in my logic...

    Aw shit, I'm gonna have to explain it..

    Explain as you would (to) a child.
    - Sarris, Galaxy Quest

    Okay - just because A and B agree on C, doesn't mean that A and B are thinking about C in the same way. Therefore, the fact that A and B happen to agree is a coincidence, but is not logical evidence that the two share a common point of view.

    For instance: Trump has said that he wants to rebuild the infrastructure that's crumbling around us. Eight years ago, Obama presented a bill that would have started that effort. Does that mean that Trump supports Obama? No. They just happen to have reached the same conclusion about infrastructure development for very different reasons.

    Okay, I admit that I lost my ability to explain things to children years ago.

  47. [47] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Thanks so much for the heads-up on Biden's visit to Ottawa. I wish I was free to travel during that time but I'm afraid it won't be in the cards.

  48. [48] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, it doesn't sound like there will be much of public side to this trip so I'll be happy to watch the proceeding on TV.

    Thanks again, Chris!

  49. [49] 
    neilm wrote:

    Interesting take from a friend who follows China.

    China have a lot of dodgy investments, particularly in commercial property (e.g. the empty cities) and propping up the SOEs. They also have a bubble in their residential property market, and their people treat the stock market like a casino.

    Their problem is that there is an unstated deal between the people and the party - the people will get richer every year and the party keep hold of power.

    The speculation is that Xi will use Trump to create a financial crisis that the whole world blames on Trump, allowing deflation of the Chinese economy without Beijing being seen as responsible.

    My buddy thinks this is unlikely, Beijing is really scared of a downturn and the public reaction, but says to watch for any attempt by Beijing to prod Trump into more 'unfortunate' tweets and actions.

  50. [50] 
    neilm wrote:

    @realDonaldTrump
    @nickspencer wins the Internet this week:

    Intersting how the U.S. sells Taiwan billions of dollars of military equipment but I should not accept a congratulatory call.

    @nickspencer

    Yeah man, international diplomacy is weisd. You shoule read up on it before you get us all killed with your fucking twitter account.

  51. [51] 
    neilm wrote:

    @nickspencer wins the Internet this week:

    @realDonaldTrump

    Interesting how the U.S. sells Taiwan billions of dollars of military equipment but I should not accept a congratulatory call.

    @nickspencer

    Yeah man, international diplomacy is weird. You should read up on it before you get us all killed with your fucking twitter account.

  52. [52] 
    neilm wrote:

    OK, this is performance art.

    Trump is going to produce the Celebrity Apprentice and be President on the side.

  53. [53] 
    michale wrote:

    Okay - just because A and B agree on C, doesn't mean that A and B are thinking about C in the same way. Therefore, the fact that A and B happen to agree is a coincidence, but is not logical evidence that the two share a common point of view.

    And yet, you accused Trump of being in bed with Putin just because they think about C the same way..

    You see your problem??

    You want to apply my logic when it can slam the Right, but you want to deny that exact same logic when it goes against the Left..

    You can deny the FACTs all you want.

    But the FACT is that Democrats and Al Qaeda were on the same page when it came to Bush's domestic surveillance programs.. This is fact...

    And Democrats did it *SOLELY* and COMPLETELY for partisan gains...

    This is fact..

    @Nick..

    Yeah man, international diplomacy is weird. You should read up on it before you get us all killed with your fucking twitter account.

    What kind of fucking moron believes that a twitter account can get people killed?? :D

    I mean, honestly. This nick guy must be a total douche to believe that any world leader could be provoked to war by a tweet... :D

    268

  54. [54] 
    neilm wrote:

    What kind of fucking moron believes that a twitter account can get people killed?? :D

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38231532

    You kind of moron, Michale.

  55. [55] 
    michale wrote:

    I mean, honestly. This nick guy must be a total douche to believe that any world leader could be provoked to war by a tweet... :D

    Or a twit.. :D heh

  56. [56] 
    neilm wrote:

    A clip from one of the best British comedies that is sweeping India at the moment after the 90% positive poll in favor of the Government's currency change.

    https://youtu.be/G0ZZJXw4MTA

  57. [57] 
    neilm wrote:

    This is fact..

    Only in your bubble World where you interpret everything through your extreme right wing lenses.

  58. [58] 
    michale wrote:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38231532

    You kind of moron, Michale.

    Did anyone die??? No..

    Was it a tweet?? No..

    Other than these facts, yer spot on. :D

    But ya know what. I agree with you. Twitter is the cause of too much violence and death.

    We should ban Twitter.. Or at least require registration and insurance.. :D

    Only in your bubble World where you interpret everything through your extreme right wing lenses.

    Yea, that's what you keep saying.. Of course, not offering up ANY facts to support it..

    Like the FACT that I voted for Obama in 2008...

    As has been aptly proven beyond ANY doubt, in 2016.... It was ya'all and the entirety of the Left Wingery who were in a bubble.. The bubble where Hillary actually had a chance to become President....

    272

  59. [59] 
    neilm wrote:

    Six dumb wars, let's hope we don't get a seventh, e.g. The War of Donald's Tweets

    http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/6-wars-fought-for-ridiculous-reasons

  60. [60] 
    neilm wrote:

    A stopped clock is right twice a day Michale. You guessed right once in two years, don't get overwhelmed by your omnipotence.

  61. [61] 
    neilm wrote:

    Man, Nick Spencer's joke really got under your skin. Subconsciously you are starting to realize what a mistake Trump is.

  62. [62] 
    neilm wrote:

    Four years of cognitive dissonance as Michale tries to convince himself by convincing us Trump isn't a buffoon. Should be fun to watch this get more and more shrill.

    Reminds me of a very interesting psychology experiment from the 1950's

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails

  63. [63] 
    michale wrote:

    Four years of cognitive dissonance as Michale tries to convince himself by convincing us Trump isn't a buffoon.

    I don't HAVE to convince myself of anything..

    Would a "buffoon" been able to dispatch more than a dozen fine upstanding Republicans?? No...

    Would a "buffoon" been able to defeat the BIGGEST and MEANEST political juggernaut in the history of the world?? No...

    I mean, look at the FACTS...

    If Trump is a "buffoon" what does that say about the Party that LOST to that "buffoon" so completely and utterly???

    What does that say about the PEOPLE who supported that Party that lost to that "buffoon" so completely and utterly???

    Doesn't say anything good....

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails

    And yet, whose "prophecy" was it that failed so completely, so utterly, so... EPIC-LY???

    I'll give you a hint.. It wasn't my prophecy.... My prophecy was dead on ballz accurate up to AND including the EXACT Electoral College score. :D

    Man, Nick Spencer's joke really got under your skin. Subconsciously you are starting to realize what a mistake Trump is.

    Whatever you have to believe to make it thru your day...

    NickSpencer is obviously a douche who doesn't know his arse from a hole in the ground... :D As evidenced by the fact that he supported a total and complete LUSER... :D

    273

  64. [64] 
    michale wrote:

    A stopped clock is right twice a day Michale. You guessed right once in two years,

    Actually, I "guessed" right approx 638 times.. That's all the times ya'all came up with the "TRUMP IS TOAST" prediction.. :D

    don't get overwhelmed by your omnipotence.

    Too late... :D That ship has sailed, my friend.. :D

    277

  65. [65] 
    neilm wrote:

    Guessing the same thing 638 times is the same as guessing it once. Now gloating about it 638 times and still having a thin skin over a joke tweet makes you just like your idol.

  66. [66] 
    michale wrote:

    Guessing the same thing 638 times is the same as guessing it once.

    Making a claim 638 times that turned out to be WRONG EACH AND EVERY TIME is worse.. :D

    I mean how many times do you have to be wrong???

    I would have thought, after the first 500 times of being WRONG, ya'all would kind of mellow yer hysterical predictions... :D

    Now gloating about it 638 times and still having a thin skin over a joke tweet makes you just like your idol.

    So, we agree.. Nick Spencer is a joke...

Comments for this article are closed.