Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

50% of Democrats disapprove of Obama

TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 1:55:45 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

Where you getting this? His approval across all is about 46% right now.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 1:57:49 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

http://www.gallup.com...
Yea, he is at 45% right now. You just pulling that from your a$$?
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 2:00:27 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

So.... Among democrats he is running a 86% approval rating.

I ask again, where did you come up with your nonsense number from?
UtherPenguin
Posts: 3,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 2:16:28 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 2:00:27 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

So.... Among democrats he is running a 86% approval rating.

I ask again, where did you come up with your nonsense number from?

86% dissaproval rating?! Wow, I shouldn't be suprised really. Of course the American people would not approve a Kenyan-born, communist moose-limb as President.
"Praise Allah."
~YYW
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 3:16:02 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
You sir are bad at reading.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
NeoInTheMatrix
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 12:19:13 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 1:57:49 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

http://www.gallup.com...
Yea, he is at 45% right now. You just pulling that from your a$$?

55% of Americans certainly are not approving of him.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 3:36:19 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 12:19:13 PM, NeoInTheMatrix wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:57:49 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

http://www.gallup.com...
Yea, he is at 45% right now. You just pulling that from your a$$?

55% of Americans certainly are not approving of him.

Look at the actual poll.

Want some intresting reading look at our last presidents back to Reagan for where he lines-up
IntellectVsSpirit5000
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 7:12:26 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 3:36:19 PM, TBR wrote:
At 12/22/2015 12:19:13 PM, NeoInTheMatrix wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:57:49 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

http://www.gallup.com...
Yea, he is at 45% right now. You just pulling that from your a$$?

55% of Americans certainly are not approving of him.

Look at the actual poll.

Want some intresting reading look at our last presidents back to Reagan for where he lines-up

Speaking of interesting reading...
IntellectVsSpirit5000
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 7:13:31 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
The Tribune reported Hayes agreed to take a look at the documentation and called almost immediately.

"There is something wrong with this," Hayes said.

Hayes produced a 40-page report in which he says "based on my observations and findings, it is clear that the Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate, but a digitally manufactured document created by utilizing material from various sources."

"In over 20 years of examining documentation of various types, I have never seen a document that is so seriously questionable in so many respects. In my opinion, the birth certificate is entirely fabricated," he says in the report.

Investigator Douglas J. Hagmann of the Northeast Intelligence Network reported this month that in October an affidavit was filed in a court case, under seal, that purportedly identifies the creator of the Obama birth certificate.

He said Douglas Vogt, an author and the owner and operator of a scanning business who also has an accounting background, invested over two years in an investigation of the authenticity of document.

Vogt, along with veteran typesetter Paul Ivey, conducted "exhaustive research of the document provided to the White House Press Corps on April 27, 2011 " not the online PDF, a critical distinction that must be understood," Hagmann said.

"Using their combined experience of 80 years in this realm, they conducted extensive examinations of the 'copy' that was used as the basis for the PDF document. They acquired the same type of equipment that was used back in the late 1950s and early 1960s in an attempt to recreate the document presented as an 'authenticated copy' proving the legitimacy of Barack Obama. Instead, they found 20 points of forgery on that document and detail each point of forgery in the affidavit," wrote Hagmann.

"Even more interesting, Mr. Vogt claims to have identified the 'signature' of the perpetrator, or the woman who created the forged document, hidden within the document itself. Her identity, in addition to the identity of other conspirators and their precise methods are contained in a sealed document supplementing the public affidavit."

Grounds for impeachment

Last month, WND columnist Christopher Monckton wrote that the controversy he calls "Hawaiigate" should be "the central ground of impeachment."

"First, the dishonesty is shameless and in your face. Mr Obama's advisers, once they realized the 'birth certificate' was as bogus as a $3 bill, knew that if they simply went on pretending that $3 bills are legal tender the hard-left-dominated news media would carefully and continuously look the other way, pausing occasionally to sneer at anyone who pointed out that, in this constitutionally crucial respect, the 'president' has no clothes," Monckton wrot
IntellectVsSpirit5000
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 7:13:53 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
The Tribune reported Hayes agreed to take a look at the documentation and called almost immediately.

"There is something wrong with this," Hayes said.

Hayes produced a 40-page report in which he says "based on my observations and findings, it is clear that the Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate, but a digitally manufactured document created by utilizing material from various sources."

"In over 20 years of examining documentation of various types, I have never seen a document that is so seriously questionable in so many respects. In my opinion, the birth certificate is entirely fabricated," he says in the report.

Investigator Douglas J. Hagmann of the Northeast Intelligence Network reported this month that in October an affidavit was filed in a court case, under seal, that purportedly identifies the creator of the Obama birth certificate.

He said Douglas Vogt, an author and the owner and operator of a scanning business who also has an accounting background, invested over two years in an investigation of the authenticity of document.

Vogt, along with veteran typesetter Paul Ivey, conducted "exhaustive research of the document provided to the White House Press Corps on April 27, 2011 " not the online PDF, a critical distinction that must be understood," Hagmann said.

"Using their combined experience of 80 years in this realm, they conducted extensive examinations of the 'copy' that was used as the basis for the PDF document. They acquired the same type of equipment that was used back in the late 1950s and early 1960s in an attempt to recreate the document presented as an 'authenticated copy' proving the legitimacy of Barack Obama. Instead, they found 20 points of forgery on that document and detail each point of forgery in the affidavit," wrote Hagmann.

"Even more interesting, Mr. Vogt claims to have identified the 'signature' of the perpetrator, or the woman who created the forged document, hidden within the document itself. Her identity, in addition to the identity of other conspirators and their precise methods are contained in a sealed document supplementing the public affidavit."

Grounds for impeachment

Last month, WND columnist Christopher Monckton wrote that the controversy he calls "Hawaiigate" should be "the central ground of impeachment."

"First, the dishonesty is shameless and in your face. Mr Obama's advisers, once they realized the 'birth certificate' was as bogus as a $3 bill, knew that if they simply went on pretending that $3 bills are legal tender the hard-left-dominated news media would carefully and continuously look the other way, pausing occasionally to sneer at anyone who pointed out that, in this constitutionally crucial respect, the 'president' has no clothes," Monckton wrote.
IntellectVsSpirit5000
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 7:14:55 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
The Tribune reported Hayes agreed to take a look at the documentation and called almost immediately.

"There is something wrong with this," Hayes said.

Hayes produced a 40-page report in which he says "based on my observations and findings, it is clear that the Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate, but a digitally manufactured document created by utilizing material from various sources."

"In over 20 years of examining documentation of various types, I have never seen a document that is so seriously questionable in so many respects. In my opinion, the birth certificate is entirely fabricated," he says in the report.

Investigator Douglas J. Hagmann of the Northeast Intelligence Network reported this month that in October an affidavit was filed in a court case, under seal, that purportedly identifies the creator of the Obama birth certificate.

He said Douglas Vogt, an author and the owner and operator of a scanning business who also has an accounting background, invested over two years in an investigation of the authenticity of document.

Vogt, along with veteran typesetter Paul Ivey, conducted "exhaustive research of the document provided to the White House Press Corps on April 27, 2011 " not the online PDF, a critical distinction that must be understood," Hagmann said.

"Using their combined experience of 80 years in this realm, they conducted extensive examinations of the 'copy' that was used as the basis for the PDF document. They acquired the same type of equipment that was used back in the late 1950s and early 1960s in an attempt to recreate the document presented as an 'authenticated copy' proving the legitimacy of Barack Obama. Instead, they found 20 points of forgery on that document and detail each point of forgery in the affidavit," wrote Hagmann.

"Even more interesting, Mr. Vogt claims to have identified the 'signature' of the perpetrator, or the woman who created the forged document, hidden within the document itself. Her identity, in addition to the identity of other conspirators and their precise methods are contained in a sealed document supplementing the public affidavit."

Grounds for impeachment

Last month, WND columnist Christopher Monckton wrote that the controversy he calls "Hawaiigate" should be "the central ground of impeachment."

"First, the dishonesty is shameless and in your face. Mr Obama's advisers, once they realized the 'birth certificate' was as bogus as a $3 bill, knew that if they simply went on pretending that $3 bills are legal tender the hard-left-dominated news media would carefully and continuously look the other way, pausing occasionally to sneer at anyone who pointed out that, in this constitutionally crucial respect, the 'president' has no clothes," Monckton wrot
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 7:31:18 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 7:13:53 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
The Tribune reported Hayes agreed to take a look at the documentation and called almost immediately.

"There is something wrong with this," Hayes said.

Hayes produced a 40-page report in which he says "based on my observations and findings, it is clear that the Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate, but a digitally manufactured document created by utilizing material from various sources."

"In over 20 years of examining documentation of various types, I have never seen a document that is so seriously questionable in so many respects. In my opinion, the birth certificate is entirely fabricated," he says in the report.

Investigator Douglas J. Hagmann of the Northeast Intelligence Network reported this month that in October an affidavit was filed in a court case, under seal, that purportedly identifies the creator of the Obama birth certificate.

He said Douglas Vogt, an author and the owner and operator of a scanning business who also has an accounting background, invested over two years in an investigation of the authenticity of document.

Vogt, along with veteran typesetter Paul Ivey, conducted "exhaustive research of the document provided to the White House Press Corps on April 27, 2011 " not the online PDF, a critical distinction that must be understood," Hagmann said.

"Using their combined experience of 80 years in this realm, they conducted extensive examinations of the 'copy' that was used as the basis for the PDF document. They acquired the same type of equipment that was used back in the late 1950s and early 1960s in an attempt to recreate the document presented as an 'authenticated copy' proving the legitimacy of Barack Obama. Instead, they found 20 points of forgery on that document and detail each point of forgery in the affidavit," wrote Hagmann.

"Even more interesting, Mr. Vogt claims to have identified the 'signature' of the perpetrator, or the woman who created the forged document, hidden within the document itself. Her identity, in addition to the identity of other conspirators and their precise methods are contained in a sealed document supplementing the public affidavit."

Grounds for impeachment

Last month, WND columnist Christopher Monckton wrote that the controversy he calls "Hawaiigate" should be "the central ground of impeachment."

"First, the dishonesty is shameless and in your face. Mr Obama's advisers, once they realized the 'birth certificate' was as bogus as a $3 bill, knew that if they simply went on pretending that $3 bills are legal tender the hard-left-dominated news media would carefully and continuously look the other way, pausing occasionally to sneer at anyone who pointed out that, in this constitutionally crucial respect, the 'president' has no clothes," Monckton wrote.

Nice redirection.
imabench
Posts: 21,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 11:18:09 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 1:55:45 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

Where you getting this? His approval across all is about 46% right now.

Yeah intellect is a complete dumba** if you havent figured that out already
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 11:19:21 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 11:18:09 PM, imabench wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:55:45 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/22/2015 1:47:37 AM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
See above

Where you getting this? His approval across all is about 46% right now.

Yeah intellect is a complete dumba** if you havent figured that out already

No. Just getting to know the guy. Thinking you are right. How hard is it to look up the current polls?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2015 11:57:13 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Polls mean nothing if you support a party whose agenda consists of regulating the stupidity of the public for their own welfare. (that's both parties)
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2015 12:05:53 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/22/2015 11:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
Polls mean nothing if you support a party whose agenda consists of regulating the stupidity of the public for their own welfare. (that's both parties)

Come-on. Polls do mean something. They represent feelings of the respondents. Because in this case, the OP was just completely wrong doesn't mean all polling is worthless.