PDA

View Full Version : Gallup: Obama's Job Approval for 2013 was 80.8% !



EE_
28th January 2014, 06:08 PM
Gallup: Obama's Job Approval for 2013 in Washington, D.C. Was 80.8%
January 27, 2014 - 9:48 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Terence P. Jeffrey
Subscribe to Terence P. Jeffrey RSS 185 248
Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.), Sen. Chuck Schumer (D.-N.Y.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R.-S.C.) in the House chamber before the Feb. 12, 2013 State of the Union Address. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

(CNSNews.com) - If you want to live among people who approve of the job Barack Obama is doing as president, you should move to Washington, D.C.

That is the result of Gallup's polling on Obama's job approval in 2013, which showed that 80.8 percent of the residents of the District of Columbia approved of the job he was doing as president.

Obama's next highest approval rating was in Hawaii, according to data released today by Gallup. In 2013, 61.3 percent of the people in that state--where Obama attended high school--approved of the job he was doing.

Obama's third highest approval--57.0 percent--came in Maryland, which borders Washington, D.C., and encompasses many Washington suburbs.

Obama's lowest approval was in Wyoming, where only 22.5 percent said they approved of the job he was doing.

His second lowest approval was in West Virginia--which borders Maryland and is not far from D.C. There, only 25.1 percent said they approved of the job Obama is doing.

Obama' third lowest approval was in Utah, where 27.3 percent said they approved of the job he was doing.

Here, according to Gallup's polling for 2013, are the twelve jurisdiction where Obama had the highest approval, and the twelve where he had the lowest approval.

Top 12 Jurisdictions for Obama's Approval:

1. District of Columbia, 80.8%

2. Hawaii, 61.3%

3. Maryland, 57.0%

4. Rhode Island, 56.7%

5. New York, 56.7%

6. Vermont, 56.6%

7. Massachusetts, 56.5%

8. New Jersey, 56.4%

9. California, 55.8%

10. Connecticut, 55.1%

11. Delaware, 54.4%

12. Illinois, 53.7%

Bottom 12 Jurisdictions for Obama's Approval:

1. Wyoming, 22.5%

2. West Virginia, 25.1%

3. Utah, 27.3%

4. South Dakota, 31.7%

5. Idaho, 32.1%

6. Oklahoma, 32.1%

7. Montana, 33.1%

8. Alaska, 33.5%

9. Arkansas, 34.9%

10. Kentucky, 35.1%

11. Kansas, 35.1%

12. North Dakota, 35.5%

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/gallup-obamas-job-approval-2013-washington-dc-was-808#

osoab
28th January 2014, 06:21 PM
A lot of crazy crackers in D.C.


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/11000.html





People QuickFacts
District of Columbia
USA





http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125212.htm)
White alone, percent, 2012 (a)
42.9%
77.9%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI225212.htm)
Black or African American alone, percent, 2012 (a)
50.1%
13.1%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI325212.htm)
American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent, 2012 (a)
0.6%
1.2%



http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI425212.htm)
Asian alone, percent, 2012 (a)
3.8%
5.1%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI525212.htm)
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent, 2012 (a)
0.2%
0.2%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI625212.htm)
Two or More Races, percent, 2012
2.5%
2.4%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI725212.htm)
Hispanic or Latino, percent, 2012 (b)
9.9%
16.9%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI825212.htm)
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent, 2012
35.5%
63.0%




I also don't get the two different categories for "White alone" I mean I understand it, but why are they lumped and then un-lumped?

mick silver
29th January 2014, 06:52 AM
this is goat shit , made up numbers just like every thing else

Sparky
29th January 2014, 01:34 PM
A lot of crazy crackers in D.C.


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/11000.html





People QuickFacts
District of Columbia
USA





http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125212.htm)
White alone, percent, 2012 (a)
42.9%
77.9%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI225212.htm)
Black or African American alone, percent, 2012 (a)
50.1%
13.1%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI325212.htm)
American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent, 2012 (a)
0.6%
1.2%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI425212.htm)
Asian alone, percent, 2012 (a)
3.8%
5.1%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI525212.htm)
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent, 2012 (a)
0.2%
0.2%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI625212.htm)
Two or More Races, percent, 2012
2.5%
2.4%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI725212.htm)
Hispanic or Latino, percent, 2012 (b)
9.9%
16.9%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/img/infoicon.gif (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI825212.htm)
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent, 2012
35.5%
63.0%




I also don't get the two different categories for "White alone" I mean I understand it, but why are they lumped and then un-lumped?

The first five categories are mutually exclusive, i.e. they add up to 100%. Then, they ask about Hispanic and Latino, which is a subset of White. The last category tries to identify those who identify themselves as only White, but not Hispanic and Latino, and with no other race (Black, Asian, or Other) mixed in.

So, Hispanic/Latino plus WhiteOnlyNotHispanic should nearly be equal to WhiteOnly. But it doesn't, because some people who identify themselves as Hispanic/Latino may also have some other race mixed in, which would qualify them for the Hipanic/Latino category but not for the WhiteOnly/NotHispanic category. Simple, right?

osoab
29th January 2014, 03:33 PM
The first five categories are mutually exclusive, i.e. they add up to 100%. Then, they ask about Hispanic and Latino, which is a subset of White. The last category tries to identify those who identify themselves as only White, but not Hispanic and Latino, and with no other race (Black, Asian, or Other) mixed in.

So, Hispanic/Latino plus WhiteOnlyNotHispanic should nearly be equal to WhiteOnly. But it doesn't, because some people who identify themselves as Hispanic/Latino may also have some other race mixed in, which would qualify them for the Hipanic/Latino category but not for the WhiteOnly/NotHispanic category. Simple, right?

I added the percentages. I knew they didn't jive.

What I don't get is why the decide to build up the "white" population and then break it down to "white-non hispanic" and "hispanic". Looks more like political shenanigans in a way. They are fudging their numbers for some reason.

mick silver
30th January 2014, 07:57 AM
how come no one i know ever gets a call to vote for stuff like this

Cebu_4_2
30th January 2014, 08:17 AM
how come no one i know ever gets a call to vote for stuff like this

Me neither Mick, no one I know was ever called either, not even friends or friends.

Blink
30th January 2014, 04:51 PM
how come no one i know ever gets a call to vote for stuff like this

You already know the answer mick. They are made up numbers to convince people to think a certain way........