Since polls show our military wants out of Iraq..what do you (and others) think of this poll?
Army Times
Army Times
One for spike
- Thread starter Gonz
- Start date
2minkey
bootlicker
catocom
Well-Known Member
2minkey
bootlicker
yep. and neither is the optimism.
the "uncertain" category is the middle of the distribution curve, gonz. of course it's big. and it is not leaning either way.
chcr
Too cute for words
Given the "leadership" of the last eight years, can you blame them for wanting to wait and see?
I wonder, what would that number be if it weren't for 80% of black soldiers having an optimistic outlook? That percentage has to sway the numbers considerably.
Considering that over half of them trust GW, while a third trust Obama, they're hardly lining up in favor.
spike
New Member
What if we removed the whites from the polling? Or the republicans?
I like how the writer grouped "uncertain or pessimistic". He could have easily said "seven out of 10 active-duty service members say they are uncertain or optimistic".
pc_builder
New Member
I thought that was kind of strange, too. He could have also said "Only 3 out of 10 were optimistic". Would have given him the same spin he was looking for. 
Frank Probity
New Member
Publishers of the Military Times, the parent organization of the Army Times, even has doubts as to the accuracy of the survey.
In a disclaimer, the editors of the Military Times state:"Although public opinion pollsters use random selection to survey the general public, the Military Times survey is based on responses from those who chose to participate. That means it is impossible to calculate statistical margins of error commonly reported in opinion surveys, because those calculations depend on random sampling techniques.
The voluntary nature of the survey, the dependence on e-mail and the characteristics of Military Times readers could affect the results.
So, what was the point of the post again? To point out that 30,000 (approximate) people were invited to participate in the survey, 5000 (plus or minus) responded and 1900 (plus) of those were used.
Add to that the editors uncertainty of accuracy and it looks like a definite maybe as a conclusion.
In a disclaimer, the editors of the Military Times state:"Although public opinion pollsters use random selection to survey the general public, the Military Times survey is based on responses from those who chose to participate. That means it is impossible to calculate statistical margins of error commonly reported in opinion surveys, because those calculations depend on random sampling techniques.
The voluntary nature of the survey, the dependence on e-mail and the characteristics of Military Times readers could affect the results.
So, what was the point of the post again? To point out that 30,000 (approximate) people were invited to participate in the survey, 5000 (plus or minus) responded and 1900 (plus) of those were used.
Add to that the editors uncertainty of accuracy and it looks like a definite maybe as a conclusion.
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
And 68% just either don't trust him or don't know what the hell to think about him; but the real question is this:
Do you trust a poll that adds up to 101%?
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
From where did you get 38?
chcr
Too cute for words
Yeah, okay.
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Not to mention that the collective 'we' has voted in the same a-holes that got us into this mess in the first place...
