General Discussion

Think. Again.

(22,456 posts)

40. Maybe you should do a poll of people who've studied statistics...

Reply to PoindexterOglethorpe (Reply #37)

Fri Apr 19, 2024, 06:34 AM

Apr 2024

...because polls always show truth?

"In the 1960s and 1970s, it became a standard textbook introduction to the subject of statistics for many college students. It has become one of the best-selling statistics books in history, with over one and a half million copies sold in the English-language edition.It has also been widely translated." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why aren't Libertarians included in polling? [View all] Enquiring_Mind Apr 2024 OP

Probably comes down to name recognition. Pretty Fly Apr 2024 #1

Kennedy announced in the past few days that he is not interested DemocraticPatriot Apr 2024 #24

He must feel confident he'll get on state ballots then. Pretty Fly Apr 2024 #25

So far he is 'officially' on ONE-- Utah---- with claims to be DemocraticPatriot Apr 2024 #36

It all depends on... Think. Again. Apr 2024 #2

While there are some deliberately biased polsters, it's ridiculously conspiratorial to imagine all or most... Silent3 Apr 2024 #4

There's a lot at stake, and big money involved... Think. Again. Apr 2024 #5

Show me the investigative reporting of the payoffs Silent3 Apr 2024 #6

Speaking of teaching statistics,.... Think. Again. Apr 2024 #7

What does that have to do with justifying a conspiratorial view of the majority of polling? Silent3 Apr 2024 #9

Well, is it really just a conspiratorial view if... Think. Again. Apr 2024 #10

All I am trusting is this couldn't be wide-spread without *something* tangible leaking out... Silent3 Apr 2024 #12

Uh-huh.... Think. Again. Apr 2024 #13

Show me the collection of articles that say that their is *widespread*, deliberate manipulation... Silent3 Apr 2024 #14

I have not jumped through your hoops, correct. Think. Again. Apr 2024 #15

That's an intellectually dishonest rhetorical technique Silent3 Apr 2024 #16

Please note too that I have done you the courtesy... Silent3 Apr 2024 #17

mmmm.... Think. Again. Apr 2024 #18

But you're tacitly admitting that you don't know how to defend that position. Silent3 Apr 2024 #19

You're just gaslighting me now. Think. Again. Apr 2024 #23

I think you don't understand what "gaslighting" means Silent3 Apr 2024 #32

Just keep walking AZSkiffyGeek Apr 2024 #29

Do post the pages where this eminent textbook NanaCat Apr 2024 #21

You've completely missed my point. Think. Again. Apr 2024 #22

I've taken statistics at two different schools PoindexterOglethorpe Apr 2024 #28

You're in the minority. Think. Again. Apr 2024 #34

Why do I doubt that? PoindexterOglethorpe Apr 2024 #37

Because they're lying with statistics? NT AZSkiffyGeek Apr 2024 #39

Maybe you should do a poll of people who've studied statistics... Think. Again. Apr 2024 #40

They need to name a candidate womanofthehills Apr 2024 #3

+1 H2O Man Apr 2024 #11

They don't have a candidate yet. Their nominating convention isn't until May. brooklynite Apr 2024 #8

They don't have a nominee yet Polybius Apr 2024 #20

Because they only care about their own interests bucolic_frolic Apr 2024 #26

Have you MET Libertarians? ismnotwasm Apr 2024 #27

They have the luxury of never having to back up their zany claims Orrex Apr 2024 #31

Yup ismnotwasm Apr 2024 #33

Because "Libertarian" is a less polite term for "asshole" Orrex Apr 2024 #30

Not true. They are always nice when I check out and return books. Wonder Why Apr 2024 #35

You're a bad person for posting that. Orrex Apr 2024 #41

The Libertarian party still has nine viable candidates in the running for the party's presidential nomination. LudwigPastorius Apr 2024 #38

They're falling apart, being raided by the right wing GenThePerservering Apr 2024 #42