Davin News Server

On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 09:55:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>On 2025-06-20 04:24, NoBody wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 11:15:51 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2025-06-19 04:02, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:21:26 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2025-06-18 04:30, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 19:09:19 -0500, AlleyCat <katt@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 09:51:05 -0400,  NoBody says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us06112025_usfa29.pdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's the point of asking the question if they support the bill when
>>>>>>>> they clearly don't know enough about it to have an informed opinion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course this information was available to both you and "truthout"
>>>>>>>> (laughter) but you chose not to find it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And that's exactly why I said this: "Why Lee Lee Dare Not List The Questions
>>>>>>> Posed In Polls"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://tinyurl.com/mr39ebdp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These polls are used as propaganda tools. They don't deal in truth. At this point, I don't know why they even BOTHER will polls. Trump's
>>>>>>> not going anywhere. What good is a poll at this point?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They can screech, "IMPEACH", all they want. If they couldn't get him impeached before after doing some questionable things, HOW can they
>>>>>>> impeach him now? WHAT has he done that's an impeachable offense?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Deport ILLEGALS without due process? Hell... EVERY President has done that, since they started deporting ILLEGALS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've already proven that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah the usual suspects around here - Bradley, Lying Lee, Siri and the
>>>>>> endless version of the moron Rudely simply can't deal in facts.
>>>>>
>>>>> The facts are there...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and they don't look good for you MAGAts:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling -
>>>>> immigration issues?"
>>>>>
>>>>> 54% disapprove.
>>>>>
>>>>> Read the poll for yourself:
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us06112025_usfa29.pdf>
>>>>
>>>> Laughter.
>>>>
>>>> 16. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling -
>>>> immigration issues?
>>>> REGISTERED VOTERS.....................
>>>> Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom
>>>> Approve 43% 87% 4% 43% 55% 32%
>>>> Disapprove 54 9 95 52 41 65
>>>> DK/NA 3 3 1 5 3 4
>>>>
>>>> You can see by looking at the responses that the poll oversampled
>>>> Democrats as their responses carried far too much weight to the
>>>> average.
>>>
>>> How is that shown? Explain.
>> 
>> Oh good grief.
>>   
>> If only 4% of Republicans disapprove but 95% of Democrats disapprove
>> and they get a total of 43% disapproval, this would indicate a high
>> bias to Democrats.
>
>It would.. ...if that's what had happened.
>
>But you haven't show that is what happened, and have instead inferred 
>that that must be the reason.

Laughter.  
The numbers explain themselves.
Alternate theories are accepted but that would require you to think.

>
>> 
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh and how come they don't include party affiliation questions
>>>> anymore?....
>>>
>>> And yet, they include party affiliation breakdowns.
>>>
>> 
>> Irrelevant since we do not know the party make up of the total.  This
>> used to be a standard metric included in political polls.  Now they
>> hide it.
>
>Actually, we do.
>
>And it isn't hidden.

It should have been embedded in the poll itself.
One shouldn't have to hunt around for it.


>
>> 
>> Why?
>> 
>>> Again: explain.
>>>
>>> Oh, and look at that!
>>>
>>> They include a link to their website where you can view the methodology
>>> of the poll!
>> 
>> Would you be kind enough to post that link as it relates to this
>> specific poll?  I don't see it in the poll.  Just a generic link to
>> their website.
>
>Funny how you whine when I ask for such, but I'll continue being the 
>bigger person:

Laughter.  When have I declined to cite for you something I stated
when you requested?
>
>You go to that website:
>
><https://poll.qu.edu>
>
>Click the HUGE article right at the top:
>
><https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3924>
>
>And then click the "Sample and Methodology" link:
>
><https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us06112025_demos_usfa29.pdf>
>
> From there you read:
>
>"PARTY IDENTIFICATION QUESTION WORDING - Generally speaking, do you 
>consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, or what?
>
>REGISTERED VOTERS
>
>PARTY IDENTIFICATION
>
>Republican 26%
>Democrat 28%
>Independent 36%
>Other/DK/NA 9%"
>
>Kind of destroys your bullshit, doesn't it?

36% "Independent"
Laughter
They realy mean liberal Democrat.

Oh and the title is hysterically funny:

"With Just 67% Of Republicans In Support, "

67% is not "only".  That's an overwhelming majority.

Bias noted.

Thank you for providing the link BTW.