-
Stupid Ganett trying to move opinion rather than report it.
Especially the bar graphs on the right. There is an increase in the polling preferences of people that want to ban not-automatic rifles of 1%.
Well within the sloppy +/- 4% margin of error methodology, btw. Horrible statistical practice. They should get a large enough sample to make it 2% or less. They probably DID, but those numbers didn't work out to their favor...
Anyway. 1% more favorable to ban. But the bar graph is, say, a whole 'centimeter' bigger. On the ones against a ban, there is a 2% move. But the graph is only two 'millimeters' shorter. So at least their bias in this horrible infographic is only FOR a ban. Using a consistent bias would make that second bar graph 2 'centimeters' shorter. They did the graphic right for the Against Ban, but biased up the For Ban. They are trying to stress support of the removal of inalienable rights where it doesn't really exist.
Boo, USAToday. Cheaters. Just not cricket.
I bet they are sputtering anyway. Despite the full court press of propaganda from all Prog outlets they still haven't moved the needle to a majority supporting their tyrannical proposals. This may very well be scaring politicians. The ones on board for a ban always worry that they will pay a price for their folly at the polls but thought maybe this time it would work in their favor. They look to have guessed wrong.
3 comments:
You know, it's also very interesting that the 44% "for" bar is longer than the 53% "against" bar.
And by "interesting" I mean "intentionally deceptive."
The fact that it's not surprising is the worst part.
How come there's no option to support the idea of telling the commie congressholes to shove their gun control back up their asses where it came from? The questions seem rather biased to me.
Post a Comment