• Saik0A
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

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

      • Saik0A
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          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.

          • Saik0A
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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.

      • Saik0A
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          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.

          • Saik0A
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            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.

              • Saik0A
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                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
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  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.

                  • Saik0A
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    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.