4 ms·

Just in case the HN crowd aren't aware, you should probably ignore anything the Daily Mail publishes.

nkurz 4y ago
Should we also ignore the University of Chicago Institute of Politics which the article links? https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/Polarization-Poll.pdf https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/Po... Somewhat surprisingly, it's a well sourced article for what is presumed to be a low quality source. From what I can tell, they even summarized the poll correctly.
- cmeacham98 4y ago
  I'm very skeptical of this poll and (especially) the article: 1. Only 1000 people? I'm not a trained statistition, but is that really enough to generalize about the American public as a whole? 2. The question is worded way more softly than the headline would make you think (actually, to be more specific, the headline is a straight up lie - the poll asks nothing about respondents 'readiness') 3. Any crazy answer will always get some minimum number of responses, whether it be from people filling in the poll at random or intentionally trolling - I highly doubt the true number is 25% 4. Who was even surveyed? Was it all college students? I read through the entire release from UChicago but all it said was "voters". 5. Are there any other polls backing this up? You can often find a poll for almost anything, I would love to see what other polls asking a similar question show.
  - nkurz 4y ago
    1. A thousand people is enough if they are well chosen. A million people is not enough if their choice is not random. It's hard to know which is the case here, but the general presumption should probably be that there is significant bias. They describe their methodology a bit here: https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/Disinfo-Poll-Methodology.pdf https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/Di... 2. The wording of that question seems to be "It may be necessary at some point soon for citizens to take up arms against the government." (https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/IOP-Poll-Topline.pdf https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/IO...) I'd call that softer, but not way softer. It would definitely alarm me if it was true. 3,4,5: Yes, it would be useful to know the answers here. They describe some of this in the Methodology page I linked in 1, but more detail would be helpful. Probably the best use of this poll result is to suggest ways for someone else to perform a better poll. But I did find it to be pleasantly well sourced for a newspaper with a poor reputation for accuracy.
    - cmeacham98 4y ago
      It's maybe better than I'd expect from the Daily Mail, but I still conclude the headline is an intentional lie. Nowhere does the poll ask respondents if they are "ready" to take up arms, which would imply some level of active preparation (such as buying a gun and ammo). I would find that much much more concerning than the actual question posed, even if the poll is 100% accurate.
    - Someone 4y ago
      I think the statement “It may be necessary at some point soon for citizens to take up arms against the government.” is way, way softer than “Are you ready to take up arms against the government?” Isn’t the former taught about every kid in the US when they learn about the constitution?
  - JieJie 4y ago
    Most importantly, what was the percentage 10 years ago? 20 years ago? 50 years ago?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Should we also ignore the University of Chicago Institute of Politics which the article links? https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/Polarization-Poll.pdf https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/Po... Somewhat surprisingly, it's a well sourced article for what is presumed to be a low quality source. From what I can tell, they even summarized the poll correctly.

cmeacham98 4y ago
I'm very skeptical of this poll and (especially) the article: 1. Only 1000 people? I'm not a trained statistition, but is that really enough to generalize about the American public as a whole? 2. The question is worded way more softly than the headline would make you think (actually, to be more specific, the headline is a straight up lie - the poll asks nothing about respondents 'readiness') 3. Any crazy answer will always get some minimum number of responses, whether it be from people filling in the poll at random or intentionally trolling - I highly doubt the true number is 25% 4. Who was even surveyed? Was it all college students? I read through the entire release from UChicago but all it said was "voters". 5. Are there any other polls backing this up? You can often find a poll for almost anything, I would love to see what other polls asking a similar question show.
- nkurz 4y ago
  1. A thousand people is enough if they are well chosen. A million people is not enough if their choice is not random. It's hard to know which is the case here, but the general presumption should probably be that there is significant bias. They describe their methodology a bit here: https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/Disinfo-Poll-Methodology.pdf https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/Di... 2. The wording of that question seems to be "It may be necessary at some point soon for citizens to take up arms against the government." (https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/IOP-Poll-Topline.pdf https://uchicagopolitics.opalstacked.com/uploads/homepage/IO...) I'd call that softer, but not way softer. It would definitely alarm me if it was true. 3,4,5: Yes, it would be useful to know the answers here. They describe some of this in the Methodology page I linked in 1, but more detail would be helpful. Probably the best use of this poll result is to suggest ways for someone else to perform a better poll. But I did find it to be pleasantly well sourced for a newspaper with a poor reputation for accuracy.
  - cmeacham98 4y ago
    It's maybe better than I'd expect from the Daily Mail, but I still conclude the headline is an intentional lie. Nowhere does the poll ask respondents if they are "ready" to take up arms, which would imply some level of active preparation (such as buying a gun and ammo). I would find that much much more concerning than the actual question posed, even if the poll is 100% accurate.
  - Someone 4y ago
    I think the statement “It may be necessary at some point soon for citizens to take up arms against the government.” is way, way softer than “Are you ready to take up arms against the government?” Isn’t the former taught about every kid in the US when they learn about the constitution?
- JieJie 4y ago
  Most importantly, what was the percentage 10 years ago? 20 years ago? 50 years ago?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]