What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

If you like polls, polls on white nationalism (1 Viewer)

Riversco

Riversco

Footballguy
https://www.yahoo.com/news/most-americans-oppose-white-supremacists-195150184.html

Summary:

8% of the US population is currently overt nazis, willing to lay claim to nazi views (some larger percentage undoubtedly are nazis but wouldn't respond to a poll this way)

16% say interracial marriage should not be allowed.

31% believe in protect white heritage

39% believe white people are under attack in this country.

All of that explains why Trump won 300 electoral votes.

Currently I'd guess around 16-20% of the US population is nazi and that number is growing as long as the wall isn't built.

 
So you're saying we should just wait for the next big NASCAR event or gun show then something put a permanent wall around it to enclose everybody inside?

 
OrtonToOlsen said:
So what you're saying is that people that voted for Trump are racist? Interesting.
Click to expand...
I think there's a good possibility.  I think the republican party is getting more racist every day.  Its getting radicalized.  Republicans do not tune into mainstream news outlets anymore.  They haven't been for over a year now.  They are getting their news from alt right venues.  They are simply getting more and more radical as we go along.  It a journey that starts with a feeling of hopelessness and disenfranchisement.  Of feeling left behind as a culture.  And the only way out is to fight.

There's been experiments with nazi recruitment tactics in the past in academia and they've shown terrifying results.  It seems that, once they hit a fairly low threshold of the population, it catches on like wildfire and you get a conversion wave.  The experiments I read about actually had to be stopped because it was working too well and the test subjects were beginning to form groups outside the parameters of the test.   There's something very different about the nazi belief system from any other system we know.  It taps into something we don't really understand and once it gets going it mass converts people and does it with speed unlike any other belief system in existence.  It gets normal average everyday losers to form groups, take initative, and take extreme action.  It is HIGHLY HIGHLY dangerous.  

You absolutely do not err on the side not taking it seriously.  You take it extremely seriously.

My feeling is once 25% of the population turns nazi, it is surely too late.  An entire quarter of the population adopting nazi beliefs is definitely enough for it to snowball.  I think the US is somewhere between 16-20% nazi right now which might already be too late.  I think we're only 2-3 more major political disasters by the democrats from reaching 25%.  

At that point, I think the nazis will be able to produce candidates for office from Alabama to Wisconsin AND WIN.  However, I don't think any elections are even necessary.  They will just overthrow the government.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
People who voted for Trump are racist.  :lmao:

Conservatives get their news from alt right.  :lmao:

Experiments with Nazi recruitment.  :lmao:

20 percent are already Nazis.   :lmao:

Government will be overthrown.   :lmao:

Some major fear-mongering going down here.   :thumbup:

 
It sampled around 5,360 American adults

Sample 10,000,000 American's and see what changes ........... as with any poll, you can get the results you are looking for in how you conduct your poll

 
Stealthycat said:
sure it is

what % of the US population is 5,000 ?
Click to expand...
The entire US population isn't the relevant population.  But even if we go by eligible voters (around 230 million, I understand), 5,000 is a minute percentage.  But more than sufficient for a reliable sample.  To get a 5% margin of error with 95% confidence level, I'd need under 400 polling subjects (provided those subjects were representative of the larger population of eligible voters). 

I get that you find this implausible.  It doesn't make sense to you.  But statistics is a pretty well documented field.  There were some problems with the 2016 election polling (although the polls were more accurate than people seem to think they were), but those problems weren't due to a small sample size. 

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
The entire US population isn't the relevant population.  But even if we go by eligible voters (around 230 million, I understand), 5,000 is a minute percentage.  But more than sufficient for a reliable sample.  To get a 5% margin of error with 95% confidence level, I'd need under 400 polling subjects (provided those subjects were representative of the larger population of eligible voters). 

I get that you find this implausible.  It doesn't make sense to you.  But statistics is a pretty well documented field.  There were some problems with the 2016 election polling (although the polls were more accurate than people seem to think they were), but those problems weren't due to a small sample size. 
Click to expand...
It was an online poll.  So any illusion this is some kind of random sample of the entire population can be thrown out the window.  It is garbage. 

 
jon_mx said:
It was an online poll.  So any illusion this is some kind of random sample of the entire population can be thrown out the window.  It is garbage. 
Click to expand...


Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Online polls have a lot of problems.  Sample size is not one of them.  A well chosen sample of 5,000 can be perfectly representative.
Click to expand...
See how Ramsay's post was almost exactly two hours before yours?

 
Henry Ford said:
See how Ramsay's post was almost exactly two hours before yours?
Click to expand...
Sure, and I posted about online polls before that.  If Ramsay was so well aware of problems with online polling sample why go on and defend the size of it?  He is right that 5,000 is more than sufficient if the sample is chosen randomly of the entire population.  An online poll is about as un-random of a sample as you can get so no matter if there were millions of participants it would be a poor sample.  Stealthycat point was incorrect about sample size, but if you understand the problems with online polling then there is no reason to go debating the sample size.  It is irrelevant. 

 
jon_mx said:
Sure, and I posted about online polls before that.  If Ramsay was so well aware of problems with online polling sample why go on and defend the size of it?  He is right that 5,000 is more than sufficient if the sample is chosen randomly of the entire population.  An online poll is about as un-random of a sample as you can get so no matter if there were millions of participants it would be a poor sample.  Stealthycat point was incorrect about sample size, but if you understand the problems with online polling then there is no reason to go debating the sample size.  It is irrelevant. 
Click to expand...
Don't be obtuse.  He was specifically responding to a post about sample size. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
Don't be obtuse.  He was specifically responding to a post about sample size. 
Click to expand...
I am not being obtuse.  We are discussing an online poll.  His points are irrelevant and are taking away from important discussion.  If it were me, I would be called a troll for getting us off on a tangent. The whole issue of sample size in the case of an inherently unrepresentative sample of an online poll, and hence this thread, does not matter.   

 
jon_mx said:
I am not being obtuse.  We are discussing an online poll.  His points are irrelevant and are taking away from important discussion.  If it were me, I would be called a troll for getting us off on a tangent. The whole issue of sample size in the case of an inherently unrepresentative sample of an online poll, and hence this thread, does not matter.   
Click to expand...
Oh?  A thread on a message board doesn't matter?  Let's alert the media.

 
jon_mx said:
I am not being obtuse.  We are discussing an online poll.  His points are irrelevant and are taking away from important discussion.  If it were me, I would be called a troll for getting us off on a tangent. The whole issue of sample size in the case of an inherently unrepresentative sample of an online poll, and hence this thread, does not matter.   
Click to expand...
Stealthycat started the tangent about sample size. RHE simply pointed out that online polls have their own issues, but in this case, sample size wasn't one of them. He was being informative, not a troll. 

 
The Football Freak said:
Stealthycat started the tangent about sample size. RHE simply pointed out that online polls have their own issues, but in this case, sample size wasn't one of them. He was being informative, not a troll. 
Click to expand...
You would think that would be the case.  But the thread Nazi's disagree.  Stick on topic or you are accused of being a troll and told to start a thread on that topic. 

 
jon_mx said:
You would think that would be the case.  But the thread Nazi's disagree.  Stick on topic or you are accused of being a troll and told to start a thread on that topic. 
Click to expand...
Sample size would be on topic with a poll.  Stealthycat brought up a point on sample size, and RHE corrected his mistake.  He even pointed out that online polling has issues, so it's not like he was arguing for the polls legitimacy. So, are you saying Stealthycat was trolling by bringing up sample size? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Football Freak said:
Sample size would be on topic with a poll.  Stealthycat brought up a point on sample size, and RHE corrected his mistake.  He even pointed out that online polling has issues, so it's not like he was arguing for the polls legitimacy. So, are you saying Stealthycat was trolling by bringing up sample size? 
Click to expand...
He never addressed the issues.  He was belittling Stealthy's point but glossing over the real issues with this poll. 

 
its not just poll size - its also how the polls are conducted, where they're conducted etc

taking 5,000 of 350,000,000 of anything and calling it an accurate sample I question, I just do

 
jon_mx said:
I am not being obtuse.  We are discussing an online poll.  His points are irrelevant and are taking away from important discussion.  If it were me, I would be called a troll for getting us off on a tangent. The whole issue of sample size in the case of an inherently unrepresentative sample of an online poll, and hence this thread, does not matter.   
Click to expand...
The point that the sample size was adequate is not irrelevant or even tangential to the claim that the sample size was inadequate. It's directly responsive.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
The point that the sample size was adequate is not irrelevant or even tangential to the claim that the sample size was inadequate. It's directly responsive.
Click to expand...
I did not claim it wasn't responsive to that.  The point I am attempting to get across is focusing on any fault in Stealthycat's claim is a distraction from the real flaws of the poll in the OP.   There seems to be more interest in discrediting the opposition than discrediting a faulty claim of the posting.  

 
jon_mx said:
I did not claim it wasn't responsive to that.  The point I am attempting to get across is focusing on any fault in Stealthycat's claim is a distraction from the real flaws of the poll in the OP.   There seems to be more interest in discrediting the opposition than discrediting a faulty claim of the posting.  
Click to expand...
News flash: No one takes Riversco seriously.

 
Stealthycat said:
its not just poll size - its also how the polls are conducted, where they're conducted etc

taking 5,000 of 350,000,000 of anything and calling it an accurate sample I question, I just do
Click to expand...
Well...you're wrong.  

Go here.  https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/sample-size-calculator/  

Plug in: 3500000 for population, 95% confidence level, and 3% margin of error.

This is stuff taught in any college Statistics class...sometimes even in HS.

 
Henry Ford said:
News flash: No one takes Riversco seriously.
Click to expand...
I dunno, ever since he reasoned that guys who were afraid of letting their wives know that they intended to vote for Trump were why the polls were "wrong," I've been in awe of his predictive skillz. "It's the only possible explanation," I believe was the comment.

 
jon_mx said:
I did not claim it wasn't responsive to that.  The point I am attempting to get across is focusing on any fault in Stealthycat's claim is a distraction from the real flaws of the poll in the OP.   There seems to be more interest in discrediting the opposition than discrediting a faulty claim of the posting.  
Click to expand...
When somebody makes a faulty argument in support of a true conclusion, it's worth pointing out that the argument is faulty.

Trump is a bad President, but if somebody argues that the reason he's bad is that he spends too little time Tweeting, I'll defend him against that false charge.

The online poll is untrustworthy, but if somebody argues that the reason it's untrustworthy is that its sample was too small ... same thing.

 
jon_mx said:
Sure, and I posted about online polls before that.  If Ramsay was so well aware of problems with online polling sample why go on and defend the size of it?  He is right that 5,000 is more than sufficient if the sample is chosen randomly of the entire population.  An online poll is about as un-random of a sample as you can get so no matter if there were millions of participants it would be a poor sample.  Stealthycat point was incorrect about sample size, but if you understand the problems with online polling then there is no reason to go debating the sample size.  It is irrelevant. 
Click to expand...
You're a strange dude.

 
OrtonToOlsen said:
Well...you're wrong.  

Go here.  https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/sample-size-calculator/  

Plug in: 3500000 for population, 95% confidence level, and 3% margin of error.

This is stuff taught in any college Statistics class...sometimes even in HS.
Click to expand...
and polls are never wrong, that's a fact I guess isn't it ?

again - you believe what you want to, tat's your choice, but don't try and make a yahoo poll factual proof of anything 

 
Nobody is defending that poll.  People are defending general principles of statistics.  You're equating a likely crappy poll (with no design to ensure representativeness) with ALL POLLS, even if they were carefully designed to be representative across the relevant variables of interest.  This is simply wrong.  And it matters to the extent that we all have to decide whether someone's opinions and arguments should be taken seriously.  So when you make an obviously wrong argument, and then continue to dig in your heels on that wrong argument, we can save everybody's time and just ignore you. 

 
then Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election

everyone had her penciled in, she was up double digits in many polls

they were wrong

If I wanted a 65-70% of the people don't mind confederate statues poll results, I'd do that poll in an area largely southern and in a city that has statues and parks of the Confederacy. I'd get my poll results one way or the other. 

If i wanted them to be AGAINST the statues, I'd do that poll in a very liberal black neighborhood in California .... I'd get my poll results one way or the other. 

I'd also word the polls differently, to get the results I wanted. 

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
People are defending general principles of statistics.  You're equating a likely crappy poll (with no design to ensure representativeness) with ALL POLLS, even if they were carefully designed to be representative across the relevant variables of interest.  This is simply wrong. 
Click to expand...
in today's world, its harder to trust any polls .... CNN has an agenda, FOX has an agenda, TheBlaze does ... most do with few exceptions. General Statistics have value, but the game is changing on how polls as conducted and how accurate the results are. 

again - ya'll can't prove poll's are accurate, I cannot prove they are not ........... I'm a skeptic by nature 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Do You Believe College Liberals Have Hijacked The Democratic Party? (5/19/22 7:43 PST)
2
Replies
77
Views
2K
BladeRunner
BladeRunner
GordonGekko
New York Times: "Will Asian Americans Bolt From The Democratic Party?" (6/20/22 23:20 PST)
Replies
36
Views
873
jon_mx
J
HellToupee
Greenwald: The Pressure Campaign on Spotify to Remove Joe Rogan Reveals the Religion of Liberals: Censorship
2 3
Replies
103
Views
3K
AAABatteries
AAABatteries

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top