Youve Got To Be Kidding!
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2005
- Messages
- 319
- Reaction score
- 1
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
cnredd said:Not withstanding the fact that you capitalized my name AND spelled it wrong, I will respond with a post from a previous thread...
Biased sources are one of my "pet peeves" in this forum...especially if someone tries to "break" a story. If it's SUCH a huge story, then why isn't it reported elsewhere?
There are a couple of people on this forum that get all of their sources from the same few places; all of them totally partisan...They just can't seem to understand that....
a)It makes them look like they're just towing the party line blindly...
b)makes debate futile because any objective person would just "consider the source"
One exception is when a source is used AGAINST one's own affiliation...
Let's say I heard a story about a Liberal acting like an idiot...
If a Liberal says, "Where'd you hear that?" and I say "Ann Coulter", then the credibility is gone....the Lib "considered the source"...
But if I said, "Al Franken", then the Liberal might believe the story has some merit...the Lib "considered the source".
Other than that, arguing FOR your side using Op-ed pieces and facts that are slanted means absolutely nothing except you found someone to agree with your ideology...
Big deal...:roll:
Calm2Chaos said:What he said.................:rofl
cnredd said:I HAVE FACTS!...REPUBLICANS SUCK!!...HERE ARE MY TOTALLY UN-BIASED SOURCES!!!
http://www.republicanssuck.com
http://www.IgotmyheadupHowardDeansbutt.com
http://www.tinfoilhatdiscountstore.com
WOW!!!...I'M A GENIUS!!!!!:roll: :roll: :roll:
Youve Got To Be Kidding! said:Cant even follow up the links and watch the video. Just watch the video and tell me its bullshit.
Youve Got To Be Kidding! said:So your inclined to say the votergate video is total bullshit? Even without watching it?
Youve Got To Be Kidding! said:Its also funny that these are official numbers being represented on the websites. They dont offer any new information of itself new by there source.
Youve Got To Be Kidding! said:Real adult of you. The video speaks for itself.
You are so wrong. You give yourself way too much credit.Originally posted by cnredd:
Billo does the same thing...get frustrated when I don't play into biases and prejudices...
I don't come here to defend unworthy accusations thrown at me...
Considering it was released a week BEFORE the election, I would be inclined to believe it's bullcrap.:dohYouve Got To Be Kidding! said:So your inclined to say the votergate video is total bullshit? Even without watching it?
Which for me, sums it all up. This is not a 'proper' paper.I have released this paper despite not having the opportunity to use normal academic safegaurds
Which confirms exactly what I said: statisticians cannot rely on raw data - it has to be altered using past trends.The data I used for this analysis was available apparently because of a computer glitch allowed apparently "uncalibrated" data (not yet corrected to conform to announced vote tallies)
In general we have every reason to believe that exit polls are accurate survey instruments
Wrong. In 2002 the two predictions were: Allensbach’s average was 1.24%, Forsa’s 0.68%.news media's exit polls, for the last two generations, have never been more than a tenth of a percent off
One might think that there is no reason why voters in stable democracies should conceal or lie about how they have voted, especially because nobody is under any obligation to answer in an exit poll. But in practice they often do. The majority of exit polls carried out in European countries over the past years have been failures.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?