DescentBB

Since you made such a big deal about Obama topping the list I figured we might look at the other end of it.

Hillary Clinton ranks last on U.S. 'most admired' list, behind Rush Limbaugh, Bush

WOW behind two of the most hated conservative in to country today. I'm sure she's a shoe in for the presidency with a popularity like that

wow.....I dunno what list that is, CUDA, but on the one I linked a while back, she was the LEADING woman on the list....

I don't doubt the novelty of a female president.

Doode, there are only 2 women on the list. Her and Oprah and you can guess whos leading whom

must be a different list, because my link had a whole list of women.

https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/01/1 ... son-world/

look at the american list

different list. Mine was reflective of the views of Americans,and only Americans. The one in that article reflects views of people around the world. The lead paragraph states that fact.

Didnt read it did you. I said look at the AMERICAN list. That one is a poll of only Americans

If you look at the world list, Hillary falls to 27th STILL behind GW

Weird, I didn't see any potential republican presidential candidates on that list. And why is Obama so high up there? He's the goshdarn anti-christ. They should double-check their methodology, something must be wrong.

vision wrote: And why is Obama so high up there? He's the goshdarn anti-christ.

That's probably why he is. It's almost like the devil is behind him. (Figure of speech since I'm an atheist.)

callmeslick wrote:different list. Mine was reflective of the views of Americans,and only Americans. The one in that article reflects views of people around the world. The lead paragraph states that fact.

Why don't you just link your damn list instead of referring to it constantly.

Scroll down to view the 30 most admired people in the world and Britain, followed by the top ten from every country polled...

that shows me he didn't read the article. He claims he read the first paragraph........ Well that line was at the bottom of the first paragraph..

CUDA wrote:because it's the same list

My bad

Wood, that is an assumption. I couldn't find another one. But that was also the point.

I find it interesting that 2 of the top 10 in Russia are Madonna, and Edward Snowden, not really 2 of the most upstanding people in the world. IMHO

CUDA wrote:I find it interesting that 2 of the top 10 in Russia are Madonna, and Edward Snowden, not really 2 of the most upstanding people in the world. IMHO

Waits for sigma to chime in.

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:different list. Mine was reflective of the views of Americans,and only Americans. The one in that article reflects views of people around the world. The lead paragraph states that fact.

Why don't you just link your damn list instead of referring to it constantly.

I did, two weeks ago.

edit--here, I'll do the work of posting it again. Mine was Gallup's annual end of year poll:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2 ... d/4249593/

CUDA wrote:because it's the same list

no it isn't.....please see link. Oh, and I'll take Gallup's demographics and sample size over that list you cite, any day. Still, good of you to assume, and make snarky comments off your(incorrect) assumption. I see the usual suspects jumped right in to celebrate the snark with you!

I though you didnt put stock in single polls. You've said it MANY times. Thats why you always point to real clear for averages. Suddenly when a single poll points in your favor you're all over it and discounting the one thats not.

more hypocrisy?

and the irony of being lectured by you on "snarky" comments is comical. Cant handle it when it come back at you. Obviously

CUDA wrote:I though you didnt put stock in single polls.

I don't....I merely posted the original one for amusement purposes and stated that, rather clearly.

You've said it MANY times. Thats why you always point to real clear for averages. Suddenly when a single poll points in your favor you're all over it and discounting the one thats not.

actually, the only things I pointed out on your contribution was 1) it wasn't the SAME poll, as you tried to infer and 2) it was a small sample size.

more hypocrisy?

more experience interpreting polls.......but, then again everything that ruffles your shorts becomes hypocrisy these days, ainna?

and the irony of being lectured by you on "snarky" comments is comical. Cant handle it when it come back at you. Obviously

if that is your best comeback, you aren't even rising to deserving 'snarky' as a description. 'Lame' will suffice.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:different list. Mine was reflective of the views of Americans,and only Americans. The one in that article reflects views of people around the world. The lead paragraph states that fact.

Why don't you just link your damn list instead of referring to it constantly.

I did, two weeks ago.

edit--here, I'll do the work of posting it again. Mine was Gallup's annual end of year poll:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2 ... d/4249593/

Curious how Bush is the 2nd most admired man...ahead of Billy Bob Clinton.

polls are but snapshots, as I've said before, of a single moment when the poll is taken. It could be that Bill Clinton is/was just not in the forefront of the respondents minds. As CUDA pointed out, I really don't put a LOT of stock in polls beyond trends and sometimes interesting insights into the human thought process. Of course, he would then call me a hypocrite for posting one, or critiquing another, but that's just life.....