Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Please choose the first option. Vote now, save yourself tomorrow.


1 posted on 08/23/2005 8:33:03 AM PDT by Alexander Rubin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last
To: Alexander Rubin
Do you believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the war began?

35.53 % - Yes. It's a much better place today.

28.94 % - Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.

27.84 % - No! It's worse than before.

7.69 % - Uncertain.

2 posted on 08/23/2005 8:40:56 AM PDT by Enterprise ("Islam is not a religion, but rather a means of world conquest" - ALAN BURKHART.COM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

Do you believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the war began?
39.15 %
Yes. It's a much better place today.
20.43 %
Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.
34.26 %
No! It's worse than before.
6.17 %
Uncertain.


3 posted on 08/23/2005 8:48:01 AM PDT by ConservativeStatement
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin
How in the world can I tell?

If I watch/listen to MSM (or Sadam), it's lots and lots worse.

If I pay attention to returning GI's, it's much better.

If I pay attention to GIs currently stationed there, it's much, much, much better.

Guess how I voted.

5 posted on 08/23/2005 8:50:50 AM PDT by LilDarlin (Being very feminine got me this far; it will get me the rest of the way, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

39.08 %
Yes. It's a much better place today.
16.23 %
Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.
40.20 %
No! It's worse than before.
4.49 %
Uncertain.


6 posted on 08/23/2005 8:52:27 AM PDT by bmwcyle (We broke Pink's code and found a terrorist message.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

exactly how many Iraqis are included in this poll?


9 posted on 08/23/2005 8:57:39 AM PDT by mmmRamen (i could use a clever tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin
Bump

Do you believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the war began?
37.45 %
Yes. It's a much better place today.
15.33 %
Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.
40.12 %
No! It's worse than before.
7.10 %
Uncertain.

11 posted on 08/23/2005 8:59:17 AM PDT by The_Victor (If all I want is a warm feeling, I can simply wet myself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

Do you believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the war began?
37.67 %
Yes. It's a much better place today.
15.52 %
Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.
37.76 %
No! It's worse than before.
9.05 %
Uncertain.


13 posted on 08/23/2005 9:05:54 AM PDT by sabatino28 (God save us all!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

Do you believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the war began?

38.63 % Yes. It's a much better place today.

15.63 % Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.

36.99 % No! It's worse than before.

8.76 % Uncertain.


14 posted on 08/23/2005 9:10:26 AM PDT by jenbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

It appears to let you vote repeatedly if you leave the site.


15 posted on 08/23/2005 9:11:42 AM PDT by conservativewasp (Liberals lie for sport and hate their country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

DUmmies are hammering it now. Oh well.


16 posted on 08/23/2005 9:13:46 AM PDT by conservativewasp (Liberals lie for sport and hate their country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin
Do you believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the war began?
46.66 %
Yes. It's a much better place today.
14.42 %
Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.
32.00 %
No! It's worse than before.

19 posted on 08/23/2005 9:22:44 AM PDT by MattMa ("Void of ideas, driven by hate, vote the Democratic Party in 2008")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

done - yes at 46%


20 posted on 08/23/2005 9:25:22 AM PDT by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GMMAC; Pikamax; Former Proud Canadian; Great Dane; Alberta's Child; headsonpikes; coteblanche; ...

Thanks for the ping Alexander.

Ping to action Canadian FReepers, and FRiends!


21 posted on 08/23/2005 9:30:21 AM PDT by fanfan (" The liberal party is not corrupt " Prime Minister Paul Martin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin; snidely whiplash III

46.08 - Yes, so far...


22 posted on 08/23/2005 9:36:35 AM PDT by fanfan (" The liberal party is not corrupt " Prime Minister Paul Martin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

Do you believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the war began?
45.77 %
Yes. It's a much better place today.
15.36 %
Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.
31.54 %
No! It's worse than before.
7.33 %
Uncertain.


23 posted on 08/23/2005 9:42:13 AM PDT by auntyfemenist (Show me your papers...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

FReeped

49.35 % Yes. It's a much better place today.

17.62 % Slightly better. But the number of casualties is an unacceptable price.

25.94 % No! It's worse than before.

7.09 % Uncertain.


26 posted on 08/23/2005 9:50:32 AM PDT by scott0347 (Commander of the 0347th Lancer Brigade, Operator of the Immaculate Steamroller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

Excellent call to Freep! Done!


27 posted on 08/23/2005 9:53:50 AM PDT by timsbella (Mark Steyn for Prime Minister of Canada!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin

Do you believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the war began?

54.64 % Yes. It's a much better place today.

19.00 % Slightly better.

18.50 % No!

7.86 % Uncertain.


30 posted on 08/23/2005 10:23:43 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin
No poll that allows self-selected respondents has any real validity. They only show the opinions of those who chose to respond. Internet polls at left-leaning sites will usually show a left-wing tilt. Vice-versa at right-leaning sites.

Only polls using random selection of respondents have any chance of being actually representative of the population at large. (Even with random selection, there are many, many ways that polls can be skewed.)

Sometimes media outlets will include a disclaimer to the effect that: "this is not a scientific poll". We are meant to read this dismissively -- i.e. "scientific" is a code word for "anal retentive". We are lead to think: "Who needs a poll collected by a bunch of clueless nerds wearing white lab coats."

Unfortunately, no matter how unrepresentative, skewed, biased, or otherwise misleading poll results are; they are widely quoted, and can have a profound effect on public opinion (the bandwagon effect). Media outlets know this -- and use these "unscientific" polls as instruments of propaganda. You will usually find a biased article, column or editorial in the same location as the poll -- just to help ensure that the poll numbers come out right.

Polls are a cheap way for media outlets to "generate news". They write a biased article, poll their readers, write another article about the poll, print selected letters to the editor, then write another article about reactions to the poll -- ad nauseam.

Election campaigns are transformed into horse races -- so much coverage is devoted to poll results that there is little space left for covering actual policy issues.

Freeping polls in left-leaning media is probably necessary to reduce the propaganda value of the polls. However, it is at best a defensive strategy. The whole concept of such polling needs to be discredited. Freepers should take every opportunity to point out the inherent weaknesses of self-selected polls.

Where poll results are favourable (say, after Freeping) -- don't crow about the numbers. Tell your liberal friends something like: "MSM polls are always biased and misleading. Even though this poll purports to show strong support for my side of (whatever debate), I am not going to cite the numbers (of course you just did -- but what the hey), because none of these polls is worth anything. I hope you remember this the next time a poll is skewed toward your side." Next time your liberal friend quotes some bogus poll; you can take the high ground, and remind him that poll results are meaningless. Then challenge him to a debate on actual facts, and issues.
32 posted on 08/23/2005 11:03:46 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alexander Rubin
No poll that allows self-selected respondents has any real validity. They only show the opinions of those who chose to respond. Internet polls at left-leaning sites will usually show a left-wing tilt. Vice-versa at right-leaning sites.

Only polls using random selection of respondents have any chance of being actually representative of the population at large. (Even with random selection, there are many, many ways that polls can be skewed.)

Sometimes media outlets will include a disclaimer to the effect that: "this is not a scientific poll". We are meant to read this dismissively -- i.e. "scientific" is a code word for "anal retentive". We are lead to think: "Who needs a poll collected by a bunch of clueless nerds wearing white lab coats."

Unfortunately, no matter how unrepresentative, skewed, biased, or otherwise misleading poll results are; they are widely quoted, and can have a profound effect on public opinion (the bandwagon effect). Media outlets know this -- and use these "unscientific" polls as instruments of propaganda. You will usually find a biased article, column or editorial in the same location as the poll -- just to help ensure that the poll numbers come out right.

Polls are a cheap way for media outlets to "generate news". They write a biased article, poll their readers, write another article about the poll, print selected letters to the editor, then write another article about reactions to the poll -- ad nauseam.

Election campaigns are transformed into horse races -- so much coverage is devoted to poll results that there is little space left for covering actual policy issues.

Freeping polls in left-leaning media is probably necessary to reduce the propaganda value of the polls. However, it is at best a defensive strategy. The whole concept of such polling needs to be discredited. Freepers should take every opportunity to point out the inherent weaknesses of self-selected polls.

Where poll results are favourable (say, after Freeping) -- don't crow about the numbers. Tell your liberal friends something like: "MSM polls are always biased and misleading. Even though this poll purports to show strong support for my side of (whatever debate), I am not going to cite the numbers (of course you just did -- but what the hey), because none of these polls is worth anything. I hope you remember this the next time a poll is skewed toward your side." Next time your liberal friend quotes some bogus poll; you can take the high ground, and remind him that poll results are meaningless. Then challenge him to a debate on actual facts, and issues.
33 posted on 08/23/2005 11:03:49 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson