This would probably be an axiomatic notion of probability, as it places the approval of past presidents with the current president. If it were taken from the perspective of whether or not President Obama will be elected for a second term, though, it could be seen as subjective probability statistics.
This article approaches probability axiomatically. The scientists first estimated how many of the fragments of satellite would burn up on reentry based on their size. Then, for the components they expect survived the reentry, they determined the probability that they would hit any populated area and cause damage. They reasoned that since most of the planet's surface is water, there is a greater probability for the satellite debris to land in the ocean rather than on land.
The data is empirical, although the validity of the claims may not be that soild. They took the latest poll results for each state and translated them into probabilities.
This is empirical because it uses data from 1200 adults in two different areas. Though it might be subjective because not everyone tells the truth about cheating at anything
Totally subjective. Fighter gambling stats are based partially on numbers, and mostly on what will make UFC the most money. If the stats were legitimate, which they're not, then it would be axiomatic (assuming they just use the discrete values of wins to losses)
Shows the odds of the Boston Red Sox making the playoffs as the season goes on and then in the final days of the collapse. Most of this data is empirical probability
"Beau's caretakers at the Yellow River Game Ranch in Lilburn say he has a 94 percent accuracy rating..."
I'd say this is an example of subjective probability.