pos 'pubs being complete pieces of crap

[Rage Against the McKee]

I'm a registered republican because I live in Kansas and want to vote against Kobach for governor. I really don't see myself voting republican in any general election in the near future, though.

oh, oops.  i just called you a former republican in another thread.  you can correct that if you still consider yourself to be a republican in any sense greater than as a formality required for ballot access.

I really don't consider myself to be a republican.

[I_have_purplewood]

You can't appeal to Republicans/POS's with facts, stats, science, etc. It's just not their thing.

So if you're a Republican you're a POS?  Interesting.  The poll that I found polled 1,511 people in 50 states people that were over 18.  Yep, that has to be accurate. 

[I_have_purplewood]

So we are back to feels instead of data, and I'm the one with zero credibility... 

Show me the data.  Just like I told Chum, the poll that I found only polled 1,511 people.  Do you think that's a worthy consensus?

[sys]

The poll that I found polled 1,511 people in 50 states people that were over 18.  Yep, that has to be accurate. 

purplewood, there is a robust literature on sampling that can inform any concerns you may have on the ability of a sample to approximate the population from which the sample is drawn.

[star seed 7]

Yes, that is enough of a sample size

[I_have_purplewood]

The poll that I found polled 1,511 people in 50 states people that were over 18.  Yep, that has to be accurate. 

purplewood, there is a robust literature on sampling that can inform any concerns you may have on the ability of a sample to approximate the population from which the sample is drawn.

Sys, thank you for pointing this out.  I will make sure that I read as much as possible on polling.  Will there be any articles on inaccuracies of said samplings?

[LickNeckey]

The poll that I found polled 1,511 people in 50 states people that were over 18.  Yep, that has to be accurate. 

purplewood, there is a robust literature on sampling that can inform any concerns you may have on the ability of a sample to approximate the population from which the sample is drawn.

https://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

[DQ12]

to be fair, when i first learned about that sample size stuff, it surprised me too. 

but gallup samples that amount of people about every two weeks and it's remained relatively consistent throughout his presidency.  his low was about 77% in December.  if his true approval among republicans is closer to 50 or 60 percent (like i presume IHPW and Wacky think), how is that explained? is this some strange coincidence that's been occurring twice a month for the last year and a half?  you would think that if the true number is closer to 50 or 60 percent at least one of the 1500 person polls would reflect that. 

[star seed 7]

Or it would come back at 10 percent sometime since polls are so flukey

[sys]

Sys, thank you for pointing this out.  I will make sure that I read as much as possible on polling.  Will there be any articles on inaccuracies of said samplings?

you can find innumerable papers discussing sampling problems.

[sys]

there is actually a robust literature detailing how photographs capture static visual representations of...  eh, eff it.  ignorance is a choice.


https://twitter.com/katierogers/status/1009489413188079616

[star seed 7]

kdub fully supporting family separation is why i have zero doubt the 90 percent approval trump enjoys from republicans is very real.

[Yard Dog]

I think your opinion of the polling system will be driven by your own perception. If you love Trump, you will be psyched by those approval rating percentages, thus admitting they are a good measurement. But a week later if the same company puts out polling numbers that say something you disagree with you suddenly doubt their validity.

It is driven by our desire to be correct, but also to be part of the consensus. It is comforting to be a part of the majority.

There is also mystery around something we don't comprehend that makes polling even more hazy. If you don't understand the math / formulas / etc. behind the process it can appear easily manipulated. No one would doubt that Kim Jong Un, Xi Jinping, or Vladimir Putin purposefully manipulate polling to say what they want it to say. So, dependent on your trust of the source you can start to believe in a broader conspiracy to mislead the public. If anything Trump (cleverly or accidentally) has convinced his base to completely distrust any and all media. So, because an American president can't manipulate the poll numbers he has instead successfully convinced A LOT of people the polls are inaccurate or manipulated by his enemies.   

[star seed 7]

Yeah, those people are stupid

[sys]

it's kinda weird people aren't required to take statistics courses.  in the course of daily life, an elementary knowledge of statistics is much more useful than an elementary knowledge of algebra, calculus, etc.

[CHONGS]

I thought stats was required at k state. 

[DQ12]

i never took a stats class and look at how great i turned out!

[mocat]

I never took stats, and I invented the snowbrag

[mocat]

Would have loved to take stats instead of, say, chem II

[420seriouscat69]

I got an A+ in stats

[sys]

I thought stats was required at k state.

maybe for a bs, but not a ba?  i was thinking more of in hs, tho.

[CHONGS]

I thought stats was required at k state.

maybe for a bs, but not a ba?  i was thinking more of in hs, tho.

I would be strongly in favor of having a stats class in high school.  Maybe in place of algebra 2?

[Trim]

I thought stats was required at k state. 

Sort of.

http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=905.msg53757#msg53757

[catastrophe]

Stats are still highly susceptible to manipulation. But yes, people would do better to understand how some samples are better than others.

I personally have found algebra pretty useful fwiw.

[Yard Dog]

I took college calculus in high school so I didn't take any math classes at KState while pursuing my BFA.