Did and Did Not

[Jakes Progress]

94. I see that you are trying.

But your showing a naive reliance on numbers that, were they accurate, might possibly support your thesis. Even the source you used, The Washington Post, itself said those numbers were dubious, that they were to be taken with a grain of salt, that no conclusion could be drawn from such disparate sources. The sampling method was completely different on both studies you reference, making any conclusions worthless. Were you to be in a research field, you would know that two studies conducted eight years apart, by two different entities, using completely different sampling methods and elimination methods could not be used to support any proposition. That's the kind of conclusions made by pharma and advertising media to dupe consumers.

Please, have all the faith in an idol that you want. Blindly follow their meanderings and rail against anyone who questions them. That is your right. But don't try to use statistics that you don't really get to try to prove your point. Would you really buy this kind of slap dash analysis if it were to say the opposite - that Bernie voters were less supportive? Because if you would, I know I could spend a few dozen minutes on the internet and find someone who would say that. Would that cause you to drop your support for Bernie? If not, then what was the reasoning behind your post?