• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -151 year ago

      While I agree, this survey is based on less than 1% of the population. The article does not clearly cite its sources. ‘Based on 1019 responses’ from who? Sydneysiders? People from the NT?

      This uncited survey from a for profit company, with major shareholders being venture capitalists, asset managers, shitbags, etc. with a history of possible poll manipulation means nothing.

      I expect better from the Guardian

      • ZeroCool
        link
        fedilink
        English
        771 year ago

        this survey is based on less than 1% of the population.

        Yes, that’s how polls work.

        • @afraid_of_zombies
          link
          English
          -31 year ago

          And surprise surprise they have the predictive value of about chance.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            171 year ago

            You really need to look into the concept of statistical sampling. It’s how just about all science works, and I can assure you science works.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              71 year ago

              While I don’t disagree, polling is the absolute worst example of scientific analysis. There are so many easy ways they can be swayed…leading questions, framing questions, selection bias, etc. And that gets used to form manipulative articles based on intentionally misreresentative facts.

              Polls really need to be taken with context and a grain of salt.

            • @afraid_of_zombies
              link
              English
              -21 year ago

              And you really shouldn’t be having this conversation with a former testing engineer.

              You can’t compare these garbage polls with what goes on in the science+engineering landscape. The main difference is if we are wrong there are consequences for being wrong.

          • ZeroCool
            link
            fedilink
            English
            35
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            OK, so something with no citations or methodology is gospel, got it…

            I didn’t say that, now did I? I simply pointed out that criticizing a survey for being based on “less than 1% of the population” is fucking stupid because that’s just how polling works. Got it? Good. We’re done here.

            • MelodiousFunk
              link
              fedilink
              5
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The article does not clearly cite its sources. ‘Based on 1019 responses’ from who? Sydneysiders? People from the NT?

              This uncited survey from a for profit company, with major shareholders being venture capitalists, asset managers, shitbags, etc. with a history of possible poll manipulation means nothing.

              Was that edited in after the fact? Why are people dogpiling based on that first sentence and ignoring the rest?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -51 year ago

              My point of contention was not just less than 1%, it was no citations as well. You just used that part.

              If I ask 1000 ac/dc fans what the best music genre is they probably are not going to say soft rock.

          • @afraid_of_zombies
            link
            English
            21 year ago

            The irony of course is that the gospels were made up completely. Except for the part in Luke and John where they admit to coping from other writers.

      • PugJesus
        link
        fedilink
        371 year ago

        While I agree, this survey is based on less than 1% of the population.

        The fact that the survey is uncited is a problem, but polling is a science, and you only need a relatively small amount, with proper weighting, to get reliable results.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -11 year ago

            Meant to edit, accidentally deleted.

            Is it weighted? How? Who was polled? All Melburnians or people whose favorite joke is ‘Show us your map of Tazzie’? With no sources or methodology it means nothing. The moon is made of cheese.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        161 year ago

        I agree with what you’re saying for the most part, but for a population the size of Australia with 1000 respondents, a 99% confidence level has a margin of error of 4% which is perfectly acceptable. Unless the survey targeted very specific demographics versus a random sample, it should be very accurate.

      • BuckFigotstheThird
        link
        English
        6
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Agreed. YouGov is garbage. They are owned by christian nationalists of the Tory variety. There is nothing governmental about them, and they meddle in public opinion of foreign countries. Their polls rarely show the source information. I’ve seen them post absurd things, like quietly polling a catholic church and being like, “98% of Americans oppose abortion”. I don’t know who exactly they polled, cause they won’t tell us most of the time.

    • @Gigan
      link
      English
      -251 year ago

      No they don’t, they’re idiots. Severing a valuable longstanding alliance because you don’t like their current leader, who will be in power for at most, another 4 years is an incredibly short-sighted decision.

      Cut off the nose to spite the face energy.

        • @EatYouWell
          link
          English
          -21 year ago

          I mean, I’m sure he’ll have a massive coronary or stroke before he finishes his second term, if he even lives past his felony trials.

      • BuckFigotstheThird
        link
        English
        51 year ago

        But, they can start supporting again after 4 years. Seems pretty short sighted to not think about 5 years +.

      • 🔍🦘🛎
        link
        English
        21 year ago

        I mean, what would “dumping our alliance” even look like? Cut off trade? Deny travel? I get the sentiment but this is just stupid, not to mention Australia’s own right wing woes.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          They could stop military cooperation, they could severely limit trade, they could begin to require Americans to have visas for entry.

          Don’t forget this is a poll not a diplomatic statement from the Aussie gov. If it was they would have outlined what would be expected.

          Though one would expect Australia to be a little more tactful when it come to foreign policy announcements or opinions on an ally’s head of state or elections for the position.