Ah yes, a murderous dictator guilty of a multitude of human rights violations vs. a Democrat; the choice is obvious. That Democrat makes me feel like one day they might try and take my guns,...
Ah yes, a murderous dictator guilty of a multitude of human rights violations vs. a Democrat; the choice is obvious. That Democrat makes me feel like one day they might try and take my guns, clearly the dictator is better.
It really is astonishing - it wasn't that long ago where just being against pre-emptive war was enough to have one branded as a terrorist sympathizing traitor. People like to act fair-minded and...
It really is astonishing - it wasn't that long ago where just being against pre-emptive war was enough to have one branded as a terrorist sympathizing traitor. People like to act fair-minded and think that "both sides" are more and more polarized but riddle me this - would Democrats favor Kim Jong Un over Paul Ryan? Certainly there is no love lost for the twerp, but at least Paul Ryan hasn't used political prisoners to test the effectiveness of chemical weapons.
Reminds me of the study that showed approval for strikes on Syria stayed the same for Democrats between Obama and Trump but approval for Republicans swung from 22% to 82% between Obama and Trump.
Reminds me of the study that showed approval for strikes on Syria stayed the same for Democrats between Obama and Trump but approval for Republicans swung from 22% to 82% between Obama and Trump.
So, no -- we can't actually say with confidence that Republicans are more favorable to Kim (19 +/- 6.1%) than Pelosi (17 +/- 6.1%). This is literal clickbait designed by people who don't...
The poll also has a credibility interval plus or minus 6.1 percentage points for Democrats, plus or minus 6.1 percentage points for Republicans, and plus or minus 7.8 percentage points for Independents.
So, no -- we can't actually say with confidence that Republicans are more favorable to Kim (19 +/- 6.1%) than Pelosi (17 +/- 6.1%).
This is literal clickbait designed by people who don't understand statistics (edit: DB, not Ipsos) to elicit comments like we see here.
If you wanted to accurately assess how many Republicans were more favorable towards Kim than Pelosi you would ask that question directly (and likely see different results) rather than asking about how favorable people were to a long list of celebrities and politicians (edit: see excellent rebuttals to this point from @havoc and @Gaywallet)
I think the bigger take away (yes it's a clickbait title) is why do any of them have a favorable opinion of Kim Jong Un at all? What's up with that? Kim's favorability rating should be ~0%.
I think the bigger take away (yes it's a clickbait title) is why do any of them have a favorable opinion of Kim Jong Un at all?
What's up with that? Kim's favorability rating should be ~0%.
Why do 8% (+/- 6.1%) of Democrats view Kim favorably? Or 7% (+/-7.8%) of Independents? edit: for that matter, Pelosi is only 47% unfavorable where Kim has a whopping 75% unfavorability!
Two things: No matter the question, there's always a ~10% of survey responders who will pick an answer just to fuck with the survey. People don't always follow the news closely. They're seeing...
Two things:
No matter the question, there's always a ~10% of survey responders who will pick an answer just to fuck with the survey.
People don't always follow the news closely. They're seeing this Asian dude on TV called Kim Jung-un and he's getting praised for discussing denuclearization, so people are just reacting to this specifically.
Ok -- and what about those two reasons doesn't apply to Republicans? I was specifically pointing out that this statement: seems a bit silly to me for the reasons you mention: though specifically I...
Ok -- and what about those two reasons doesn't apply to Republicans? I was specifically pointing out that this statement:
What's up with that? Kim's favorability rating should be ~0%.
seems a bit silly to me for the reasons you mention: though specifically I would replace #1 (do you have a source for 10%?) with:
For the survey, a sample of roughly 1,000 adults age 18+ from the continental U.S., Alaska and Hawaii were interviewed online in English
I seem to have missed the context of your reply. I totally agree with your point, and it absolutely applies to Republicans as well. I'd add that Republicans might be inclined to give a positive...
Ok -- and what about those two reasons doesn't apply to Republicans?
I seem to have missed the context of your reply. I totally agree with your point, and it absolutely applies to Republicans as well. I'd add that Republicans might be inclined to give a positive answer for KJU and/or a negative one for Pelosi just to echo their party's agenda and/or piss off Liberals.
And that is something a person who didn't study sociology and polling would say. :p What you said about the accuracy of the stats is correct, but that does not mean the questionnaire was flawed....
If you wanted to accurately assess how many Republicans were more favorable towards Kim than Pelosi you would ask that question directly (and likely see different results) (...)
And that is something a person who didn't study sociology and polling would say. :p
What you said about the accuracy of the stats is correct, but that does not mean the questionnaire was flawed. Rather, there was likely no intent to make those data points comparable in the first place.
My own incomplete knowledge of how to properly frame such a poll aside, I really wasn't trying to imply that the poll itself was flawed; merely that DB was reading a lot into the results of a...
My own incomplete knowledge of how to properly frame such a poll aside, I really wasn't trying to imply that the poll itself was flawed; merely that DB was reading a lot into the results of a question that wasn't there, or as you said:
Rather, there was likely no intent to make those data points comparable in the first place.
That's a leading question. It would not surprise me either if you saw different results by switching which name comes first. Imagine if you were presented the option of choosing between Hitler and...
If you wanted to accurately assess how many Republicans were more favorable towards Kim than Pelosi you would ask that question directly
That's a leading question. It would not surprise me either if you saw different results by switching which name comes first.
Imagine if you were presented the option of choosing between Hitler and a kitten killer. Most people would probably favor the kitten killer, but if you asked for support would see close to 0% for either.
We don't ask questions like this in science on purpose - it tells us nothing of scale.
KJU is probably also a lot less unpopular among the left (note I said the left, not Democrats) than Nancy "We're Capitalists" Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi has done far worse to hurt the marginalized in...
KJU is probably also a lot less unpopular among the left (note I saidthe left,not Democrats) than Nancy "We're Capitalists" Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi has done far worse to hurt the marginalized in the US than the Kim family could ever hope to in their wildest feverish dreams.
I can't wait for Democrats to narrowly win a 51% majority in midterms this year and then have Nancy Pelosi immediately institute Pay-Go...
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and other top Democrats are vowing to abide by fiscally hawkish pay-as-you-go rules if they seize the majority next year, rejecting calls from liberals who feel they’d be an impediment to big legislative gains.
Pelosi, who adopted “pay-go” rules when she held the Speaker’s gavel more than a decade ago, says she’ll push to do it again if the Democrats win the House in November’s midterm elections.
“Democrats are committed to pay-as-you-go,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said Tuesday, affirming the policy would be a 2019 priority.
... thus immediately dashing the hopes of anyone who thought there might for a moment be a chance to implement strong social programs (like Medicare For All, or free college & student loan forgiveness, or subsidized childcare for working families), and reinforcing that they won't bother to attempt reining in the collective psychosis of late capitalism, and further proving how little structural, non-aesthetic difference actually exists between our two corporate-owned-and-operated parties.
But hey, the far-right wing of our singular capitalist party, the Republicans, hate Pelosi even more than they hate Kim. So clearly she deserves our full-throated support!
Don't get me wrong, Pelosi is terrible. When asked why Democrats in the House should support her as majority leader, what did she say? Was it that she is dedicated to making Americans' lives...
Don't get me wrong, Pelosi is terrible. When asked why Democrats in the House should support her as majority leader, what did she say? Was it that she is dedicated to making Americans' lives better, or that she has her finger on the pulse of her constituents? Nope! It was that she's a good fundraiser. Screw her.
I for one am tired of the 50+ year game where the two parties (which the public and elected officials encourage) paint themselves black and white at the expense of the other. Ok, maybe it's like...
I for one am tired of the 50+ year game where the two parties (which the public and elected officials encourage) paint themselves black and white at the expense of the other. Ok, maybe it's like 100+ years, but I haven't been around that long.
It's time that those of us who sometimes fantasize that we are sometimes rational wrap this dead horse-and -buggy elephant argument up, take it out to the trash where it belongs, and start talking about what we agree on.
And it wouldn't hurt to start questioning the new media on what the rest of the world thinks, because honestly I think the Koreans have a closer view of what's going on in Korea, but I've yet to see an article polling them. I don't particularly like Trump, he seems to me a divisive person, but my next door business owning immigrant neighbor really likes him. I'll concede that it's a feather in Trump's hat to have pulled off what he did in Korea whatever it was. That's what I'm talking about, calling a win a win (however grudgingly) instead of continuing with the paint-pot approach to stalemate every freakin' day! Ok, I'm done yammering.
Ah yes, a murderous dictator guilty of a multitude of human rights violations vs. a Democrat; the choice is obvious. That Democrat makes me feel like one day they might try and take my guns, clearly the dictator is better.
It really is astonishing - it wasn't that long ago where just being against pre-emptive war was enough to have one branded as a terrorist sympathizing traitor. People like to act fair-minded and think that "both sides" are more and more polarized but riddle me this - would Democrats favor Kim Jong Un over Paul Ryan? Certainly there is no love lost for the twerp, but at least Paul Ryan hasn't used political prisoners to test the effectiveness of chemical weapons.
Reminds me of the study that showed approval for strikes on Syria stayed the same for Democrats between Obama and Trump but approval for Republicans swung from 22% to 82% between Obama and Trump.
So, no -- we can't actually say with confidence that Republicans are more favorable to Kim (19 +/- 6.1%) than Pelosi (17 +/- 6.1%).
This is literal clickbait designed by people who don't understand statistics (edit: DB, not Ipsos) to elicit comments like we see here.
If you wanted to accurately assess how many Republicans were more favorable towards Kim than Pelosi you would ask that question directly (and likely see different results) rather than asking about how favorable people were to a long list of celebrities and politicians (edit: see excellent rebuttals to this point from @havoc and @Gaywallet)
I think the bigger take away (yes it's a clickbait title) is why do any of them have a favorable opinion of Kim Jong Un at all?
What's up with that? Kim's favorability rating should be ~0%.
Why do 8% (+/- 6.1%) of Democrats view Kim favorably? Or 7% (+/-7.8%) of Independents?
edit: for that matter, Pelosi is only 47% unfavorable where Kim has a whopping 75% unfavorability!
Two things:
No matter the question, there's always a ~10% of survey responders who will pick an answer just to fuck with the survey.
People don't always follow the news closely. They're seeing this Asian dude on TV called Kim Jung-un and he's getting praised for discussing denuclearization, so people are just reacting to this specifically.
Ok -- and what about those two reasons doesn't apply to Republicans? I was specifically pointing out that this statement:
seems a bit silly to me for the reasons you mention: though specifically I would replace #1 (do you have a source for 10%?) with:
I.e., they did not use live-caller interviews, 538's gold standard
I seem to have missed the context of your reply. I totally agree with your point, and it absolutely applies to Republicans as well. I'd add that Republicans might be inclined to give a positive answer for KJU and/or a negative one for Pelosi just to echo their party's agenda and/or piss off Liberals.
And that is something a person who didn't study sociology and polling would say. :p
What you said about the accuracy of the stats is correct, but that does not mean the questionnaire was flawed. Rather, there was likely no intent to make those data points comparable in the first place.
My own incomplete knowledge of how to properly frame such a poll aside, I really wasn't trying to imply that the poll itself was flawed; merely that DB was reading a lot into the results of a question that wasn't there, or as you said:
That's a leading question. It would not surprise me either if you saw different results by switching which name comes first.
Imagine if you were presented the option of choosing between Hitler and a kitten killer. Most people would probably favor the kitten killer, but if you asked for support would see close to 0% for either.
We don't ask questions like this in science on purpose - it tells us nothing of scale.
KJU is probably also a lot less unpopular among the left (note I said the left, not Democrats) than Nancy "We're Capitalists" Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi has done far worse to hurt the marginalized in the US than the Kim family could ever hope to in their wildest feverish dreams.
I can't wait for Democrats to narrowly win a 51% majority in midterms this year and then have Nancy Pelosi immediately institute Pay-Go...
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/390898-dem-leaders-embrace-pay-go
... thus immediately dashing the hopes of anyone who thought there might for a moment be a chance to implement strong social programs (like Medicare For All, or free college & student loan forgiveness, or subsidized childcare for working families), and reinforcing that they won't bother to attempt reining in the collective psychosis of late capitalism, and further proving how little structural, non-aesthetic difference actually exists between our two corporate-owned-and-operated parties.
But hey, the far-right wing of our singular capitalist party, the Republicans, hate Pelosi even more than they hate Kim. So clearly she deserves our full-throated support!
Don't get me wrong, Pelosi is terrible. When asked why Democrats in the House should support her as majority leader, what did she say? Was it that she is dedicated to making Americans' lives better, or that she has her finger on the pulse of her constituents? Nope! It was that she's a good fundraiser. Screw her.
But KJU is still an objectively worse human.
I would agree.
I for one am tired of the 50+ year game where the two parties (which the public and elected officials encourage) paint themselves black and white at the expense of the other. Ok, maybe it's like 100+ years, but I haven't been around that long.
It's time that those of us who sometimes fantasize that we are sometimes rational wrap this dead horse-and -buggy elephant argument up, take it out to the trash where it belongs, and start talking about what we agree on.
And it wouldn't hurt to start questioning the new media on what the rest of the world thinks, because honestly I think the Koreans have a closer view of what's going on in Korea, but I've yet to see an article polling them. I don't particularly like Trump, he seems to me a divisive person, but my next door business owning immigrant neighbor really likes him. I'll concede that it's a feather in Trump's hat to have pulled off what he did in Korea whatever it was. That's what I'm talking about, calling a win a win (however grudgingly) instead of continuing with the paint-pot approach to stalemate every freakin' day! Ok, I'm done yammering.