485
submitted 1 year ago by Geert@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] skulblaka@kbin.social 49 points 1 year ago

a plurality

Yeah, about ten guys who were bought and sold by Russia and a couple thousand other folks that fell for their con. By no means a majority and also by no means a reasonable stance.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -3 points 1 year ago

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/04/politics/cnn-poll-ukraine/index.html

Which sources: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23897329-cnn-ukraine-poll

No... page 10&11 clearly states that you're wrong. It's effectively a 50/50 split on Ukraine war with an actual majority 45/55 split saying no more funding.

[-] Prandom_returns@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

These polls are as idiotic as the Brexit Referendum was.

People have no fucking clue what's going on and they answer by their "gut feeling". So it's all down to the way the question is formed.

And it's not a "yes" or "no" type of situation either.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -1 points 1 year ago

So your argument is what exactly? That the poll is flawed... so there isn't a majority or plurality? You realize that both for and against could have been answering by their "gut feeling"... a 50/50 split kind of proves the point that it's not just a few thousand like was claimed.

Of course if you have a better source showing that Americans are happy with spending more money in Ukraine that's of higher quality I'm all ears.

[-] jarfil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

A 50/50 split also kind of proves that the answers are as thought out as a coin toss...

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -1 points 1 year ago

So all 50/50 splits are coin toss decisions and not devisive topics? That's a hot take. Especially with n=1000+ polls.

[-] jarfil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Polls with a 50/50 split, are a poll structural fail. It means the questions are too ambiguous, and the poll didn't control for it. A split of 40/40 with 20% "undecided"? That would be a credible divisive poll. A 50/50? No way.

From the source you cited: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23897329-cnn-ukraine-poll

Look at the "trends" section on page 3, "not sure" between 7% and 14%, those are credible numbers. Now look at pages 10&11, 0% to 1% "no opinion"? That's BS.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -2 points 1 year ago

So there's trends, meaning that these question (or types of questions) before weren't a problem... But magically... now it's a problem? And you have no other resources to corroborate your stance (since I asked for a better one and you've failed to provide).

But now, since it's a much more divisive topic... it's ALL over the media... talked about nearly every day from both sides... You think that the 7-14% wouldn't diminish at all? Hell giving you the 14% doesn't change the equation we're looking at here... It's still a Plurality, just not a straight majority. But even at 45/55 I wouldn't call it a straight majority.

It's funny because the pg 12 shows 2-5% "Don't know" responses. and page 9 shows up to 3%. But that's not the point... Even if we take the sampling error rate AWAY from the "anti-Ukrainian aid" side of this debate and give it to the "pro-Ukranian aid" outright... It's STILL a plurality at the very least and still a slim majority at that. 49% vs 51%... Even if we double or triple or quadruple that error rate to 39%... it's STILL a large amount of Americans (certainly qualifying for "Plurality") who feel that additional monetary aid isn't warranted. But the real litmus test is reading the questions yourself. Really don't see how
"15a. Do you think Congress should or should not authorize additional funding to support Ukraine in the war with Russia? " is ambiguous.

My point all along is that Plurality is a correct term here, yet was downvoted to hell... And even being absurdly generous to your argument we still see that's accurate. If you can find BETTER data then I'm all ears. But up to this point you haven't... and quite frankly your arguments were weak as we can see that even skewing the data in your favor MANY times over, it's still accurate to say that a plurality of Americans do not want to spend more money over there.

And before you start claiming I have some bias. I'm a dual citizen and hold a Polish citizenship. I'm not a stranger to Russia bullshit. But even Poland, who took in MILLIONS (doing well more than any other country) of refugees is starting to wear down and refuse aid to Ukraine.

[-] Prandom_returns@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

My argument is that linking a shitty poll that paint the issue in black or white does nothing to help to paint the picture of public opinion on the russia's attack on Ukraine and how people feel about it.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -2 points 1 year ago

Can you show how the poll is misrepresenting it as a black/white issue?

Do you have ANY better statistical resource?

[-] Prandom_returns@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Can you show how the poll is misrepresenting it as a black/white issue? I can, but you don't seem to be genuinely interested, so I'm not going to waste my time.

Do you have ANY better statistical resource? No, but sometimes no resource is of more quality than a misleading poll.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 0 points 1 year ago

I can, but you don’t seem to be genuinely interested, so I’m not going to waste my time.

Sounds like that's a no then...

No, but sometimes no resource is of more quality than a misleading poll.

If you can provide any evidence that it's misleading... I'll take it. But you've failed to do so and continue to whinge about it even though you've got nothing better to replace the poll as evidence.

[-] Prandom_returns@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

I don't respond well to sealioning, my dear random keyboarder.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 0 points 1 year ago

You don't respond well at all... When asked for anything to defend your stance, you got bumpkiss nothing.

[-] Prandom_returns@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

I've already "defended my stance" (debate lord lol), but you failed to comprehend it. So I'm not going chew it up for you. If you're not smart to discern a good poll from a shit one, there's not much thinking I can do for you.

I'm sure you can find polls on facebook that will prove (to you) that 5G causes covid.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I didn't fail to comprehend anything. You claimed a poll was shitty... And have no alternative data. You can't claim a poll is shitty without either providing evidence of a flaw (you didn't) or having a better quality poll (you didn't). You didn't defend anything. You just claimed something with no source or evidence.

When I asked you to provide EITHER piece you needed to substantiate your claim.

I can, but you don’t seem to be genuinely interested, so I’m not going to waste my time.

Which on the internet is effectively the same as you have nothing.

I’m sure you can find polls on facebook that will prove (to you) that 5G causes covid.

Wow, now I know you're dumb. I don't need polls in that case because science says otherwise. You know with actual studies. You don't poll on facts, you poll on feelings or actions. However in this case we're literally talking about how people feel and thus need polls. Now if your argument was how many people feel that 5G causes COVID... then yes. But that wouldn't make you sound like a moron for making the comparison now wouldn't it? You know... since it's exactly the same premise.

[-] Prandom_returns@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago
[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You came out of nowhere and shoved your statement into my conversation with someone else. You're truly a moron. You're the seal. In case you forgot I was communicating in response to @skulblaka and you butted your fat ass into the conversation. Don't be mad at me that you have no evidence to back your stance.

[-] Prandom_returns@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Debate lord in shambles after unsuccessful sealioning More polls at 12.

this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
485 points (96.9% liked)

World News

39021 readers
979 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS