Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich reiterates call for 'hundreds of thousands' of Palestinians to be forcibly displaced from Gaza

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich reiterates call for ‘hundreds of thousands’ of Palestinians to be forcibly displaced from Gaza

  • Keeponstalin@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    3 days ago

    The polls are accurate. I have no interest in your personal belief, that doesn’t change the reality of the evidence.

    • michaelmrose@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12·
      3 days ago

      When in the last 9 years or so have the polls been accurate enough to make this statement? The stated margin for error is usually big enough to go either way and the actual accuracy has been less than one would suppose from the margin of error.

      • Keeponstalin@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        3 days ago

        You can find the margin of error in all the polls linked, you can even find the methodology of each polling organization on their respective sites. Not only are the margin of errors small, the reality of the significance of the polls are reinforced by the sheer amount, done by multiple organizations, all in the same ballpark. You have no basis for discrediting these polls, which is evident by your lack of engagement with the source material.

        • michaelmrose@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          33 minutes ago

          I’m not going to individually go over 34 polls so lets pick the first arbitrarily

          https://split-ticket.org/2024/07/10/we-polled-the-nation-heres-what-we-found/?ref=use-these-numbers.ghost.io

          First one is about Biden it shows 13% going to third parties and 6% I don’t know. That is interesting but useless in determining anything of note. It’s also pretty wrong. More people always SAY they are going to vote third party than actually do. They lie to polls or to themselves.

          Next we have Harris v Trump with 8% undecided equally useless for determining our counterfactual.

          Next we have a question wherein they are arbitrarily asked if they would support “A candidate who” not a particular person but a arbitrary person who holds a given view. We learn that based on what people SAY there are always enough undecided to swing it either way but more people say they would vote for a democrat who holds those views. Now at last we have something interesting right well…

          The problem is that something which adds blue voters in a blue state or too few to swing a red state is worth nothing in the final analysis. We know that some people say they would vote not for a actual candidate but for or against an imaginary hypothetical candidate but not if these gains would result in a single EC vote even if 100% true. The fact that again its a hypothetical person instead of the actual folks that people have strong feelings about is again also problematic.

          In the end I’m no more convinced than I started. I’m not doing this 33 more to prove that the rest is equally trash because you wasted my time by not collecting a singular example instead of a huge list of bullshit.