I mean, publicly at least, people in relevant fields still disagree over "what consciousness is". I doubt it matters.
If we understand the mechanisms that gave rise to life on Earth, (even the series of coincidences for humanity), they can be simulated, understood, and replicated in any arbitrary medium. So yes, emotions as accurate to man's will be achieved by machines.
Given man's track record, however, when that happens, it's likely they will not have agreed upon the definitions, or will move the goalposts to exclude conscious/emotion-having/living robots. Those who don't care about definitions won't care.
So, more simply, we can't meaningfully communicate with non-humans. Whenever and whatever that happens with, a majority will attach to as conscious, be they human-imitations or organisms whose language barrier we've broken down and found to be as conversational as us.
Once robots design the robots, ...*shrugs*
As for these votey numbers, "agreement" is a positive emotion, "disagreement" is negative, so sure. It could also stand some changes.
I...hey, wait! Did you just asked me that to put up a philosophical crumple zone I'd crash into so it'd leave others more time to guess the answer to the OP before me?! *shakes fist*
"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it."