You don't know that many people.

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 8:55:00 AM (view original):
You don't know that many people.

From my poker nights, work events, family functions, well over 200 opinions.

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 8:55:00 AM (view original):
You don't know that many people.

From my poker nights, work events, family functions, well over 200 opinions.

Assuming you know 200 people that voted, you know .000001% of the voting pool in 2016.

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 10:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 8:55:00 AM (view original):
You don't know that many people.

From my poker nights, work events, family functions, well over 200 opinions.

Assuming you know 200 people that voted, you know .000001% of the voting pool in 2016.

Yes and? You don’t think 200+ persons is a significant sample? When they do polling what % of persons/voters do you think they poll? Can you name one person who was on the fence and was swayed by ads? I have yet to encounter one anywhere.

200+ is not a significant sample.

What is the p-value of 200? Actually Tang, if you really wanted to show that the data wasn't reliable you could have just said that the 200 people that were polled are not random. 200 people can be significant. We don't know. No confidence level or margin of error have been identified.

who cares? we all know how inaccurate polls can be, right?

My response was a poor attempt at a joke.

They always argue over whether a specific number can be considered significant without giving any other relevant data. I just wanted to point out to Tang that he could have ended the argument very quickly without even mentioning the number of people polled.

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 10:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 10:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 8:55:00 AM (view original):
You don't know that many people.

From my poker nights, work events, family functions, well over 200 opinions.

Assuming you know 200 people that voted, you know .000001% of the voting pool in 2016.

Yes and? You don’t think 200+ persons is a significant sample? When they do polling what % of persons/voters do you think they poll? Can you name one person who was on the fence and was swayed by ads? I have yet to encounter one anywhere.

So you're saying that political ads don't sway voters?

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/18/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):
What is the p-value of 200? Actually Tang, if you really wanted to show that the data wasn't reliable you could have just said that the 200 people that were polled are not random. 200 people can be significant. We don't know. No confidence level or margin of error have been identified.

But you are missing one key factor:

I am lazy.

I included that when I calculated the variance.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/18/2018 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 10:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 10:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 8:55:00 AM (view original):
You don't know that many people.

From my poker nights, work events, family functions, well over 200 opinions.

Assuming you know 200 people that voted, you know .000001% of the voting pool in 2016.

Yes and? You don’t think 200+ persons is a significant sample? When they do polling what % of persons/voters do you think they poll? Can you name one person who was on the fence and was swayed by ads? I have yet to encounter one anywhere.

So you're saying that political ads don't sway voters?

They do if candidates are unknown but in the case of DJT and HRC, no I don't believe they did.

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 1:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/18/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):
What is the p-value of 200? Actually Tang, if you really wanted to show that the data wasn't reliable you could have just said that the 200 people that were polled are not random. 200 people can be significant. We don't know. No confidence level or margin of error have been identified.

But you are missing one key factor:

I am lazy.

And stupid

Posted by bad_luck on 12/18/2018 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 10:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 10:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 8:55:00 AM (view original):
You don't know that many people.

From my poker nights, work events, family functions, well over 200 opinions.

Assuming you know 200 people that voted, you know .000001% of the voting pool in 2016.

Yes and? You don’t think 200+ persons is a significant sample? When they do polling what % of persons/voters do you think they poll? Can you name one person who was on the fence and was swayed by ads? I have yet to encounter one anywhere.

So you're saying that political ads don't sway voters?

are you swayed by political ads? I'm not.

Posted by cccp1014 on 12/18/2018 3:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 12/18/2018 1:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/18/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):
What is the p-value of 200? Actually Tang, if you really wanted to show that the data wasn't reliable you could have just said that the 200 people that were polled are not random. 200 people can be significant. We don't know. No confidence level or margin of error have been identified.

But you are missing one key factor:

I am lazy.

And stupid

and civil...don't forget civil.