Politico: Governor Newsom Given High Marks for His Coronavirus Response (phone, population)

[JumpingRoo]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

No hysteria there, Roo. Read his posts. Ask a linguistics expert. Hilarious in any case.

An individual such as yourself wouldn't know an Eastern Romance language from a Slavic language. Glad your "expertise" is here to solve the Scooby Doo mystery. What is your academic credentials again? Wait, we all know the answer to that one. . La revedere

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by JumpingRoo

An individual such as yourself wouldn't know an Eastern Romance language from a Slavic language. Glad your "expertise" is here to solve the Scooby Doo mystery. What is your academic credentials again? Wait, we all know the answer to that one. . La revedere

1. You have no idea what I know or not because formal education credentials do not guarantee knowledge exclusively.

2. I didn’t suggest you, or anyone, take my analysis as expert ... I suggested you consult a credible expert of your choice.

3. Your own grammatical faux-pas of mis-applying singular against plural (”What is your academic credentials again”) suggests you might benefit from outside linguistics analysis yourself.

4. I pretty much always “have a great one.” Thanks

[JumpingRoo]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

1. You have no idea what I know or not because formal education credentials do not guarantee knowledge exclusively.
)

Certainly not from an individual who gloated about his ignorance forcing him to join the military.

As for your attempt to be a Pseudointellectual, it wouldn't be so hilarious if the above weren't true. Carry on.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by JumpingRoo

Certainly not from an individual who gloated about his ignorance forcing him to join the military.

As for your attempt to be a Pseudointellectual, it wouldn't be so hilarious if the above weren't true. Carry on.

Never “gloated” about any ignorance (and maybe you should look up the definition of “gloat”)
Wasn’t “forced” to join the military
Haven’t ever referred to myself - nor inferred - as an “intellectual”

Zero for three.

[JumpingRoo]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Never “gloated” about any ignorance (and maybe you should look up the definition of “gloat”)
Wasn’t “forced” to join the military

I stand by what I said. Proudly gloating that you were a tool of the state as you had nothing going for you.

Haven’t ever referred to myself - nor inferred - as an “intellectual”

Zero for three.

Constantly, which is comical at this point. Thanks for the laugh, now carry on about them Ruskis in your head.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by JumpingRoo

Let me simplify it for you:

You conclude the majority agree with your position from an online poll that polled in only 8,800 people from only 2 language groups. That is comical.

A state poll of 8,800 people is certainly adequate, in fact a nationwide poll of 1,000 people is adequate.

A "3 percent margin of error" means that there is a 95 percent chance that the survey result will be within 3 percent of the population value. To put it another way, you would expect to see a less than 3 percent difference between the proportion of people who say "yes" to the survey question and the proportion of people in the population who would say "yes" if asked.

How is it that a survey of only 1,000 people can reach this level of accuracy? You must first assume that the survey respondents have been sampled at random from the population, meaning that people are selected one at a time, with all persons in the U.S. being equally likely to be picked at each point. For most polls, this is approximated by calling phone numbers generated randomly by computer.

The margin of error depends inversely on the square root of the sample size. That is, a sample of 250 will give you a 6 percent margin of error and a sample size of 100 will give you a 10 percent margin of error. A 10 percent margin of error is not so useful. It would give you vague claims such as, "The proportion of Americans who support the death penalty is somewhere between 60 percent and 80 percent." Pollsters thus spend the money to get a reasonably large sample. In the other direction, by surveying 4,000 people, you can get the margin of error down to 1.5 percent.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...l-of-only-100/

[saibot]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

A state poll of 8,800 people is certainly adequate, in fact a nationwide poll of 1,000 people is adequate.

How is it that a survey of only 1,000 people can reach this level of accuracy? You must first assume that the survey respondents have been sampled at random from the population, meaning that people are selected one at a time, with all persons in the U.S. being equally likely to be picked at each point. For most polls, this is approximated by calling phone numbers generated randomly by computer.

So...is the group of people who is going to pick up a phone call from an unknown number and respond to a poll question really a "randomly selected group"? It sounds like a very specific demographic group to me.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by JumpingRoo

I stand by what I said. Proudly gloating that you were a tool of the state as you had nothing going for you.




Constantly, which is comical at this point. Thanks for the laugh, now carry on about them Ruskis in your head.

Never said I “had nothing going for [me]”. Never been true. Never said such.

Never claimed any intellectual status. Never ever.

So, how long do you want to keep this up? You joined CD 10 years ago, made a couple dozen or so posts in one year ... and then just started posting again 3 days ago after a nine year hiatus? And you are already an expert on my 15,000 posts history, eh? Been reading and not commenting for nine years. Hmmm. Or doing a LOT of reading for a few days to catch up on little old me. I’m honored.

Or, you are one of a number of multi-account participants who re-surface after being tossed out of the Forums under other names. Agenda much? Lmfao.

[JumpingRoo]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Never said I “had nothing going for [me]”. Never been true. Never said such.

Never claimed any intellectual status. Never ever.

So, how long do you want to keep this up? You joined CD 10 years ago, made a couple dozen or so posts in one year ... and then just started posting again 3 days ago after a nine year hiatus? And you are already an expert on my 15,000 posts history, eh? Been reading and not commenting for nine years. Hmmm. Or doing a LOT of reading for a few days to catch up on little old me. I’m honored.

Or, you are one of a number of multi-account participants who re-surface after being tossed out of the Forums under other names. Agenda much? Lmfao.

LOL! Were you bored trolling the Michigan forum? You are quite the delusional hoot.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

A state poll of 8,800 people is certainly adequate, in fact a nationwide poll of 1,000 people is adequate.

Well, not if you don’t like the result and are feeling argumentative.