Navy Pride
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 39,883
- Reaction score
- 3,070
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
It's over NP, it's just a matter of when. Right now, everyone is just ironing out the details.
We shall see. the 95% pf the Marine Corps who are against it could win out yet, especially if the Navy and Army figures are anywhere near that.........
For somebody who claimed they would be on board for this policy to be repealed if the troops didn't mind, you changed your tune rather quickly.
What did you expect from the most anti-gay person on this board?
You are grasping at straws at this point. Seriously a show of hands at town hall style meetings is not enough to claim that 95% of Marine Corps are against it.
What about the Pentagon survey which showed that most of the armed forces don't care and that a repeal of the policy would likely not hurt our current war efforts?
For somebody who claimed they would be on board for this policy to be repealed if the troops didn't mind, you changed your tune rather quickly.
Whatever happened to the Navy Pride "If the military is ok with it, I'm ok with it"? Singing a different tune now Navy? Why am I surprised? Actually I'm not.
I proved the 95% in the Marines and the study for from the other services won't be available until Dec 17........We shall see what it says......It has to really torque your jaws that Hussein Obama your hero who says he is for repeal is fighting repeal with his justice Department......I love it...........
You are grasping at straws at this point. Seriously a show of hands at town hall style meetings is not enough to claim that 95% of Marine Corps are against it.
What about the Pentagon survey which showed that most of the armed forces don't care and that a repeal of the policy would likely not hurt our current war efforts?
For somebody who claimed they would be on board for this policy to be repealed if the troops didn't mind, you changed your tune rather quickly.
Is there any poll, survey, or study that interviewed 100% of the membership of the United States armed forces? The answer to that would be, "no". That being the case, a show of hands at a townhall style meeting has just as much accuracy and credibility as anything else that's been presented, so far.
Can you read, you called me a liar when I said that the Commandant of the Marines said that 95% of his marines were against it and I proved you were wrong.....You owe me and apology for that............Not sure how you get away with it either..
Um...no. The Pentagon survey included responses from over 100,000 active duty soldiers who were able to respond in private and anonymity without any fear of repercussions. Based on what has been reported, 70% of those surveyed thought that lifting the ban would have no negative effect. The town hall style meetings would have been small, public, in front of commanding officers, and feasibly could have lead to repercussions. There is no comparison between the two. The town hall style meetings are pretty much useless from a measurement perspective in getting honest feedback.
100,000? That's it? So a survey of only 10% of our armed forces is enough? As you point out, there were no reserve component service members surveyed. If you through in reserve personel, it goes down to just north of 5%.
Do you know what a representative sample is? You don't need to survey an entire population in order to know within a few percentage points what the atittudes are. 5% is several times more than what is needed to form a representative sample. Apparantly they don't teach statistics in the armed forces.
Sampling (statistics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Do you know what a representative sample is? You don't need to survey an entire population in order to know within a few percentage points what the atittudes are. 5% is several times more than what is needed to form a representative sample. Apparantly they don't teach statistics in the armed forces.
Sampling (statistics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I proved the 95% in the Marines and the study for from the other services won't be available until Dec 17........We shall see what it says......It has to really torque your jaws that Hussein Obama your hero who says he is for repeal is fighting repeal with his justice Department......I love it...........
Is there any poll, survey, or study that interviewed 100% of the membership of the United States armed forces? The answer to that would be, "no". That being the case, a show of hands at a townhall style meeting has just as much accuracy and credibility as anything else that's been presented, so far.
That's why I put more stock in results, than I do any kind of poll.
These two posts are representative of a much larger issue that plagues this country: a lack of ability in discerning good information from bad.
Take NP's post. He says he "proved" that 95% of the USMC is against gays serving openly. Where did his information come from?
A single officer asking for a "show of hands" in a single town-hall meeting. Why is this a bad method of information gathering?
- Not at all detailed. (single vague question)
- Not at all accurate. (raising hands? I doubt he even counted, just "estimated")
- Tiny sample size (one group of marines)
- Most importantly, utterly severe "peer pressure" influence. I can't stress this enough. You have a commanding officer, whose opinion is already well known, "asking" what the marines think. This is the military. Your opinion is that which your superior assigns to you. Next, this is an organization that does everything it can to stamp out individualism, and it's probably the most macho group of men on the face of this planet. An anonymous survey and a public one would probably yield drastically different results.
You can't compare this to an anonymous, scientificly-minded survey.
Which brings me to apdst. You don't survey 100% of a group, because that's prohibitively time consuming and unnecessary. A good enough sample size is close enough. There have been some leaked, preliminary numbers of what the pentagon has been doing so far, and they indicate a drastically different result. Since those are non-official, preliminary figures they aren't exactly solid, but this 95% number has zero credibility, especially given the fact that among the general population the support for allowing gays to serve openly is nearly 80%. The USMC being that far off of the general population is essentially impossible.
Which brings me to apdst. You don't survey 100% of a group, because that's prohibitively time consuming and unnecessary.
A good enough sample size is close enough. There have been some leaked, preliminary numbers of what the pentagon has been doing so far, and they indicate a drastically different result. Since those are non-official, preliminary figures they aren't exactly solid, but this 95% number has zero credibility, especially given the fact that among the general population the support for allowing gays to serve openly is nearly 80%. The USMC being that far off of the general population is essentially impossible.
good information = something I agree with.
bad information = something I don't agree with.
Well, how about in this case, we do poll 100% of our service members and go with the results, no matter what they are? Or, are you afraid of how that might turn out?
I bet it wouldn't be good enough, if you didn't like that outcome.
What if that other 95% of our service members are 80% homophobes? Then what? Will it be time to resort to the, "they can follow orders, or get the **** out", argument?
Pot, kettle, etc.
No, not afraid at all. It honestly doesn't make a difference to me whether or not a majority of troops support it. Majority vote is not my measuring stick for what is right and wrong.
Anyway, "follow orders or get the **** out" is pretty much the core principle on which the military rests, don't you think?
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?