44
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
44 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
65 readers
5 users here now
@politics on kbin.social is a magazine to share and discuss current events news, opinion/analysis, videos, or other informative content related to politicians, politics, or policy-making at all levels of governance (federal, state, local), both domestic and international. Members of all political perspectives are welcome here, though we run a tight ship. Community guidelines and submission rules were co-created between the Mod Team and early members of @politics. Please read all community guidelines and submission rules carefully before engaging our magazine.
founded 1 year ago
There is no way that 53% is correct. Is everyone really that fucking dumb
here's the actual poll
they sampled an incredibly small sample size. It's extremely easy to get fucked up results from assuming that you can make a poll representative of Americans as a whole. Like. where I live... most people in the state want him locked up (or you know. burned at the stake.)
and that assumes the poll wasn't meant to get this result (for example polling in ways that get maybe more conservative democrats. or people simply lying and saying they're democrats.)
Actually the sample size checks out. I love it when people see "Smol number not as big as big number, therefore sample size bad" and I am going to pull a very elitist argument here and say that people at Harvard University likely know more about polling than you do, just saying.
Small sample size is fine when it's representative of the population. Trying to extract nationwide sentiment, a very diverse thing, off a small size is unlikely to be very representative.
Except the numbers work out, and studies have made very very sweeping generalizations based on much smaller sample sizes of much larger demographics (for example the 1 in 5 myth comes from a study that had less than 100 respondents). This study is a dream compared to those.
Just because studies have made sweeping statements, doesn't mean they're right. I could say I've got the longest member I'm the world based on a study I conducted in my basement, but it doesn't change reality.
Where did I say making sweeping statements equals correctness? Man people are getting so emotional over this because it turns out the majority don't agree with them. Guess it shreds the narrative that they're the majority.
What's the margin of error reported for that question?
Oh my gawd! You have the *longestz member?? Based on an actual study??
Call Rolling Stone!
Not enough people took a statistics class in school and it shows.
I imagine with the safe-spacification of college statistics is no longer a required elective in many programs.
It's kind of ironic you've gone from defending Harvard to shitting on colleges in a span of just two comments.
Typically anyone with an anime girl profile pic is going to be a nut job in some way or another.
The fact that people who still do take stats classes likely know what they're talking about is not contradictory to the point that these classes may no longer be required in most degrees. Hope this helps! Try not to blow a head gasket trying to process this info.
Also ironic that I was the one person who defended your original comment.
Sounds like someone who definitely went to college and knows the typical graduation requirements
Dumbest fucking take. Can’t even imagine what was going through your head as you were writing that.
For your own sake, seek out better friends and media.
https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2023-06-16/poll-majority-says-trump-should-drop-out-of-presidential-race
A sample size of 2090, as in this study, is large enough to bring the margin of error down to 2%.
Furthermore, there is no need to speculate about who they polled, because this information is available. Questioning the results of the poll is as unreasonable as 2020 Trump supporters questioning every poll that showed Biden with an advantage.
The section that says "Results were weighted for age within gender, region, race/ethnicity, marital status, household size, income,
employment, education, political party, and political ideology where necessary to align them with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online." kinda sticks out to me, too.
Yeah, that admission kind of makes me pause when considering the results. There should have been a page of the published poll that better described how this was taken. For instance, doing just a LAN line poll skews poll results considerably.
But it's only the beginning of the fed case against Trump, so I'm sure opinion will change.
That's how all reputable election polling was done in 2020. For example, if you take a random sample that happens to be 52% men and 48% women, it is completely appropriate to overweight the women's responses to match their actual percentage in the US, 50.5%.
In fact, in the 2020 election there was a bunch of Trump supporters who had the same doubts as you, and they would "unskew" polls with 52% men responding to give them 52% of the final weighting. Lo and behold, their "unskewed" polls showed Trump in the lead. But the proof of the method is in the election results...
2090 is not a small sample size.
That's a normal sample size for polls. Unfortunately, people are this dumb.
Most polls are conducted with a political agenda, so they don’t really care…. Especially because it’s incredibly uncommon for people to actually look.
I mean, I tend to bet on the average person's stupidity. So I'd answer yes?
Dems continuously win the popular vote, which means 0 Republicans would say no to this and some Dems would say yes? I'm not buying that.
Agreed. This poll is hard to believe. There was another one last week saying a majority agreed with the indictment. There’s lies, dammed lies, and polls.
Take this with a grain of salt. A pollster can come up with any results they want if they ask the question carefully.
This is almost certainly something put out by Trump’s team to manipulate public opinion. It’s bullshit and not worth anyone’s energy.
Harris Polls has been described as " when Harvard Poll meets Fox News" and "cherrypicks to advance agendas". Just like when looking into bias of news sources, it's important to look into the bias of polling sources.
It seems like you're thinking of this article, which is talking about Fox News misrepresenting a Harris poll, and the Fox "journalists" cherry-picking to fit an agenda. That article isn't criticizing Harris, which mostly over exaggerated Democrat victory in the 2020 elections. Not saying they're not biased, but it seems like you may have misunderstood a source?
I replied to a different comment linking that article, so I'll copy it here:
It's the people they poll. Do you have a landline for them to call? Do you answer calls from randos on your cell?
Me either.
They're polling a bunch of ancient people sitting around watching daytime TV.