Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
You clearly do. You said you think they're undersampling low density areas. So just want to know what you consider to be accurate sampling.I wrote no such thing.
I don't care what samples they take.Polls cannot help but oversample populations with higher population density.Basically, every poll is taken from areas where the population is most dense."Mr Biden said the result showed "the majority of Americans agree that women should have access to abortion". - Evidently, the BBC thinks like Biden (for shame), that Kansans represent all of citizens of the US.Doesn’t basically every poll show that Americans are largely pro choice?
In fairness, he's not entirely wromg.
Random sampling means there is a higher chance of getting someone from a high dense area vs a low one. Tho you can adjust polls so they do random sampling of target regions to minimize that problem. But only so many people you should poll per area and if the area has like 1,000 people, well... No need to poll more than one or two.
But a city with a few million? Need to poll a several hundred.
I’m not sure Lackey’s point is fair because he is asserting that polls over sample people living in cities without any evidence.
Just curious, what sample should they take?
Like lets say a county has 9,000 people. What sample of them, of a state with a population of 3 million, should be taken to be fairly sampled?
It seems double speak has struck again?Basically, every poll is taken from areas where the population is most dense.That’s a yes, isn’t it?
The areas where the population is less dense are often the areas where the population is most dense…
Polls cannot help but oversample populations with higher population density.Basically, every poll is taken from areas where the population is most dense."Mr Biden said the result showed "the majority of Americans agree that women should have access to abortion". - Evidently, the BBC thinks like Biden (for shame), that Kansans represent all of citizens of the US.Doesn’t basically every poll show that Americans are largely pro choice?
In fairness, he's not entirely wromg.
Random sampling means there is a higher chance of getting someone from a high dense area vs a low one. Tho you can adjust polls so they do random sampling of target regions to minimize that problem. But only so many people you should poll per area and if the area has like 1,000 people, well... No need to poll more than one or two.
But a city with a few million? Need to poll a several hundred.
I’m not sure Lackey’s point is fair because he is asserting that polls over sample people living in cities without any evidence.
Congratulations on affirming my use of the word, "basically."Basically, every poll is taken from areas where the population is most dense."Mr Biden said the result showed "the majority of Americans agree that women should have access to abortion". - Evidently, the BBC thinks like Biden (for shame), that Kansans represent all of citizens of the US.Doesn’t basically every poll show that Americans are largely pro choice?
I don't think that is entirely true. From Pew:
Most of our U.S. surveys are conducted on the American Trends Panel (ATP), the Center’s national survey panel of over 10,000 randomly selected U.S. adults. ATP participants are recruited offline using random sampling from the U.S. Postal Service’s residential address file. Respondents complete the surveys online using smartphones, tablets or desktop devices. We provide tablets and data plans to adults without home internet.
Our surveys are representative of the entire adult population of the United States and accurately account for the full population’s diversity by age, gender, race and ethnicity, region, and socioeconomic factors such as education levels, household income and employment status.
Basically, every poll is taken from areas where the population is most dense."Mr Biden said the result showed "the majority of Americans agree that women should have access to abortion". - Evidently, the BBC thinks like Biden (for shame), that Kansans represent all of citizens of the US.Doesn’t basically every poll show that Americans are largely pro choice?
Obviously Kansas doesn't represent America. It's much worse than that. Kansas represents the part of America that would theoretically be all for repealing anything that would keep abortion legal.Would you care to elucidate?
Yes! More baby murder!The BBC has a definite problem with maintaining syllogism throughout this article.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62402625
It sounds like an overall aging population was denied normally routine follow-up visits that could have prevented further deaths.It doesn't sound like these were visits to the ER in the sense of "I think I might be having a heart attack", but something else. Certainly many elective procedures were postponed.During the lockdowns and restrictions, many clinics, medical centers, and hospitals were closed to people needing regular visits to such places for many different types of ailments.How has anyone been denied the opportunity to go to the hospital in the US due to the response to the pandemic?There is a very small uptick in deaths from heart disease during the pandemic both from those with or having had covid being weaker and less able to survive a heart attack and from people being reluctant to go to the hospital or clinic when experiencing symptoms due to fears of contracting covid.How about being plain old denied the opportunity to go to the hospital due to the unnecessary lockdowns and restrictions.
Both my sister and my brother-in-law were denied such visits during the near entirety of 2020.
Cementing the concept no one is to trust you, especially?Why indeed?Why would you bother to offer advice online if no one is to trust it?I didn't have any adverse side effects.
...
Simply put: there's no evidence to this women even works at a doctor's office, much less is sick.
There is also no evidence from you about your experience with the vaccine. Pro-vaxxers admit to acting dishonestly to push their agenda.
True.
So my advice is to trust nothing online. Not even things you support.
Think about it. Use your brain.
Why would you bother to offer advice online if no one is to trust it?I didn't have any adverse side effects.
...
Simply put: there's no evidence to this women even works at a doctor's office, much less is sick.
There is also no evidence from you about your experience with the vaccine. Pro-vaxxers admit to acting dishonestly to push their agenda.
True.
So my advice is to trust nothing online. Not even things you support.
During the lockdowns and restrictions, many clinics, medical centers, and hospitals were closed to people needing regular visits to such places for many different types of ailments.How has anyone been denied the opportunity to go to the hospital in the US due to the response to the pandemic?There is a very small uptick in deaths from heart disease during the pandemic both from those with or having had covid being weaker and less able to survive a heart attack and from people being reluctant to go to the hospital or clinic when experiencing symptoms due to fears of contracting covid.How about being plain old denied the opportunity to go to the hospital due to the unnecessary lockdowns and restrictions.
There is a very small uptick in deaths from heart disease during the pandemic both from those with or having had covid being weaker and less able to survive a heart attack and from people being reluctant to go to the hospital or clinic when experiencing symptoms due to fears of contracting covid.How about being plain old denied the opportunity to go to the hospital due to the unnecessary lockdowns and restrictions.
I wrote exactly what I wrote, as did you.Are you saying that it's perfectly legal for Trump to continue using the presidential seal at his golf course even when federal law says that it isn't?Reporting that a criminal complaint exists is not scamming anyone. You really struggle with factual content vs what your easily outraged persona believes.But it is another example of Trump's character and flagrant disregard for the law.^The effects of three-card monte journalism are demonstrated right here, as no criminality has been determined.
You were saying?
Reporting that a criminal complaint exists is not scamming anyone. You really struggle with factual content vs what your easily outraged persona believes.
But it is another example of Trump's character and flagrant disregard for the law.^The effects of three-card monte journalism are demonstrated right here, as no criminality has been determined.
Well, it seems that a disregard for the law isn't even established in this case, as that has not yet been determined.What has been the result of this blockbuster case!?!?!I never said that it's a "blockbuster case". But it is another example of Trump's character and flagrant disregard for the law. Then again, there are so many other investigations on against Trump that it's understandable that you might not care about this one.
Fantastic!Someone already did.Gee, you better contact the DOJ and have them get right on this whopper of a case.When you describe something illegal, let us know for sure, okay?
Do you mean like illegally using the presidential seal for commercial purposes?Federal law prohibits knowingly using the printed or other likeness of the presidential seal “for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States.”
Violations of the law can result in fines, imprisonment up to six months or both.
https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-7-16-Presidential-seal.pdf
Wrong about what?Gee, you better contact the DOJ and have them get right on this whopper of a case.When you describe something illegal, let us know for sure, okay?
Do you mean like illegally using the presidential seal for commercial purposes?Federal law prohibits knowingly using the printed or other likeness of the presidential seal “for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States.”
Violations of the law can result in fines, imprisonment up to six months or both.
Weird way of admitting you were wrong.
