A majority of Britons support rejoining the European Union's single market even though that would mean the restoration of the free movement of workers from the bloc, according to a poll published on Wednesday.
Shit takes and bad interpretations do not invalidate the utility of polling.
Yes, they do. Companies are paid for these polls. Today, tomorrow, again next week. They don’t refine their data (usual polling data isn’t changing that quickly), they refine how to get the answer they want. Those polls also don’t show the reaction of public opinion on policies (again those don’t change every other day) for transparency. They show how yesterday’s rage-inducing lie on the front page worked and how it compares to today’s to refine manipulation tactics.
Do you throw it every scientific study that doesn’t meet your ridiculous criteria as well?
No I’m talking about always the same polls overvaluing one option being always used by the publications pushing that story again and again.
So you have an actual argument or do you want to keep attacking half a dozen strawman arguments you found between the line I never wrote?
“Oh, No! Someone diagrees with me! Let’s find a couple of things he never actually said and then attack him repeatedly for being anti-science!!”
Are you even serious or is this just trolling at this point?
PS: Yes, a lot of different people do polls. Actually using those, or doing a weighted avarage or just mentioning they exist would be an improvement. But it is not happening, because publications always work with the same polling whose result are beneficial for that publication.
No, unlike you I know what I’m talking about. I know how YouGov does their polls. I know how YouGov was wrong at Scotlands Referendum 2014. I know how they were also wrong with their polls for the Brexit referendum, and also which publications constantly referenced them as a reason to “stay calm… UK will not leave the EU”, which obviously contributed to lower turnout on the anti-Brexit side. And I know -again unlike you- why always the people wanting to tell a story about UK’s EU support are referencing YouGov polls. Because they are always overvalueing certain positions again and again.
“Would you choose to undergo an elective surgery to fix your broken leg if it had a 20% chance of killing you?”
Would you chonge your mind if you heard how the chance of getting killed now is 0.05% lower next day. Then another 0.1 higher 3 days later? Oh, and on saturdays your chances to die actually go down to 19%. Unless it’s in a month with an “R”. Oh, and the guy doing the procdure has his own stats that show a 3% lower risk, even 4% if you’re favorite color is green.
That’s an actual analogy of the amount of polls we are flooded with. And that’s also perfectly describing their accuracy and worth.
Do proper polls with a detailed analysis about their methodology once in a while to stay in contact with public opinion and shifts of it. Constantly doing polls again and again for your latest story, always picked from the polling group you know will lean more to your desired result however is nothing more than a tool to give credibility to a narrative.
This entire thing you are calling for, that you were complaining does not exist, already exists and is constantly being improved. I’m not throwing out big accusations, you are taking broad sweeps at stats and polling and asking - really it’s demanding - that they do things they are already doing
No matter how often you say this and deny reality, I can at any given day look up the daily story of how polls shows another 0,1% increase for this party and another loss of 0.05% for that party compared to the last poll about 3 days ago for a fictional election actually happening in 2 years. Complete with pages of text how it’s all X’s fault for policy Y that was actually never discussed and was only mentioned by some backbencher in a Tweet (bonus points when it’s a pure invention of some opposition politician). That’s the reality. A reality I see every day.
A reality of total media failure using polls as a pretense to give their narrative the seeming of plausibility.
And this reality doesn’t change because you don’t want it to exist for your point to be true.
Yes, they do. Companies are paid for these polls. Today, tomorrow, again next week. They don’t refine their data (usual polling data isn’t changing that quickly), they refine how to get the answer they want. Those polls also don’t show the reaction of public opinion on policies (again those don’t change every other day) for transparency. They show how yesterday’s rage-inducing lie on the front page worked and how it compares to today’s to refine manipulation tactics.
deleted by creator
No I’m talking about always the same polls overvaluing one option being always used by the publications pushing that story again and again.
So you have an actual argument or do you want to keep attacking half a dozen strawman arguments you found between the line I never wrote?
“Oh, No! Someone diagrees with me! Let’s find a couple of things he never actually said and then attack him repeatedly for being anti-science!!”
Are you even serious or is this just trolling at this point?
PS: Yes, a lot of different people do polls. Actually using those, or doing a weighted avarage or just mentioning they exist would be an improvement. But it is not happening, because publications always work with the same polling whose result are beneficial for that publication.
deleted by creator
No, unlike you I know what I’m talking about. I know how YouGov does their polls. I know how YouGov was wrong at Scotlands Referendum 2014. I know how they were also wrong with their polls for the Brexit referendum, and also which publications constantly referenced them as a reason to “stay calm… UK will not leave the EU”, which obviously contributed to lower turnout on the anti-Brexit side. And I know -again unlike you- why always the people wanting to tell a story about UK’s EU support are referencing YouGov polls. Because they are always overvalueing certain positions again and again.
deleted by creator
Would you chonge your mind if you heard how the chance of getting killed now is 0.05% lower next day. Then another 0.1 higher 3 days later? Oh, and on saturdays your chances to die actually go down to 19%. Unless it’s in a month with an “R”. Oh, and the guy doing the procdure has his own stats that show a 3% lower risk, even 4% if you’re favorite color is green.
That’s an actual analogy of the amount of polls we are flooded with. And that’s also perfectly describing their accuracy and worth.
Do proper polls with a detailed analysis about their methodology once in a while to stay in contact with public opinion and shifts of it. Constantly doing polls again and again for your latest story, always picked from the polling group you know will lean more to your desired result however is nothing more than a tool to give credibility to a narrative.
No matter how often you say this and deny reality, I can at any given day look up the daily story of how polls shows another 0,1% increase for this party and another loss of 0.05% for that party compared to the last poll about 3 days ago for a fictional election actually happening in 2 years. Complete with pages of text how it’s all X’s fault for policy Y that was actually never discussed and was only mentioned by some backbencher in a Tweet (bonus points when it’s a pure invention of some opposition politician). That’s the reality. A reality I see every day.
A reality of total media failure using polls as a pretense to give their narrative the seeming of plausibility.
And this reality doesn’t change because you don’t want it to exist for your point to be true.