Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Campaign gets racial
Options
Comments
-
-
-
LikewiseManic Moran wrote: »By the way, I tip my hat for at least providing me the most engaging discussion/argument I've had on here in a long time.
OK. But there is really no way of knowing without a release of the figures?No idea. But as it is what is in effect a professional (if sensationalist) publication, one would assume that its readership should be something of a reflection of the makeup of that profession.
Well I wasn't suggesting the less radical option, I was merely pointing out that depending on absolute numbers, which are absent, the voting trends may mean something or they may mean nothing at all. Assuming the voting trend is one way is choosing to believe what you want, rather than seeking the facts.Mathematically, you are quite correct. However, this is where we start getting into my area of education. There is a professional standard out there for accepting something as a given with no statistics or proof whatsover to back it up, which has withstood several centuries of scrutiny. That standard is 'The Reasonable Man.' Would a person of reasonable sense and understanding believe that the demographic readership of a specific publication would be something at least vaguely approximating the eligible demographics of those likely to read it, or would he believe that the demographic readership is skewed 99% one way? I believe he'd choose the less radical option.
I hadn't considered that, but yes, it is true.How do you get there from where I started? I'm just addressing the valid concern of excessively small sample size for that one demographic. One possible reason for such a result would be if members of that demographic declined in overwhelming numbers to participate.
The main issue I take with your conclusion is that the data does not suggest that african americans are more likely to vote for obama than anyone else based on race. The hispanic vote depends on rank and demograph.
Ok, but your inference is pre-processing. So long as you are saying that YOU BELIEVE the data might mean this, rather than inferring that the data has any value.I am making the inference on what is causing the voting preference based on my reading of the overall situation. I am not saying that the figures themselves provide any inference. There's an old saw in the military, that one must never confuse information with intelligence. Data on its own, no matter how much of it you have, tells you nothing. It must be processed. Not 'may' be processed, but 'must' be in order to be of any value whatsoever. You seem to agree with this concept by some of your later comments. This is precisely what I am doing.Remind me. The only one I can recall mentioning was the issue of hispanics looking at issues of culture and immigration, but I'm sure those are issues which are a concern to non-military hispanics as well, who seem to be running at almost 3:1 Obama:McCain.
Well: "There will still be some sociological factors relating to immigration, heritage, and tradition".
It may also depend when the survey was conducted. Was it before or after McCain's U-turn on immigration became widespread knowledge?
If I were to argue against my own point, I could surmize that Hispanics may be more prejudiced against an african american candidate and it may be that they specifically (actually, you can probably count Asians in there too - we're a fickle group) would be less likely to vote for someone because of race.0 -
Advertisement