Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

Shouldn't you know what a place is before you are willing to say it should be bombed

Shouldn't you know the reasons people gave an answer before you start judging their motives and calling them ignorant?

Nothing about ISIS. Unless, of course, The Guardian is lying about what the question is

Unless they contextualize the question to other information in their lives.  I assume these questions were asked of humans, not robots.

[Shadowlord]

Shouldn't you know what a place is before you are willing to say it should be bombed

Shouldn't you know the reasons people gave an answer before you start judging their motives and calling them ignorant?

When did I do that?

Nothing about ISIS. Unless, of course, The Guardian is lying about what the question is

Unless they contextualize the question to other information in their lives.  I assume these questions were asked of humans, not robots.

So you're saying the people who answered with support have concluded all arabic sounding places are threats and need bombing, eh? What's your explanation then?

[Reelya]

When you get medicine do you do a double blind statistically significant trial to see if it works? No, you assume it works because the person in the white labcoat says it does. Do you know why they wear the labcoats? It's because you are more likely to take medicine from them if they do. They surround the question (take the medicine or not?) with irrelevant information that implies something.

If a pollster asks someone if we should bomb someplace that has an arab sounding name, it's reasonable to assume there is a reason, like that bombing campaign going on because of those arab terrorist attacks. People think "oh, this bombing has something to do with the terrorists". They do not expect a question about bombing Disneyland. If you want that question then wait for the poll that clearly asks "Should we bomb a random place that has done nothing?"

But this has an added layer of a large number of voters not being able to distinguish reality from fantasy. Sure, if Agrabah was an actual place then it would be more understandable, but this is a poll of adults who are registered to vote, you'd hope they have at least a grade school knowledge of geography. Knowing that Agrabah isn't a place, or that it's a fictional place isn't on the same level as rocket science or biochemistry.

You make obvious bullshit up, and they cheer for it. It's not excusable because it's still a facepalm level of ignorance for a group of people who have made a decision by registering to vote that they, personally, are going to have a say in choosing the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth.

[Culise]

Yes, you're right that it doesn't explicitly state ISIS, but it's very clearly the implication the survey is aimed at when one's questions go:

Q32. Would you support or oppose banning Muslims from entering the United States?

Q33. Do you believe that thousands of Arabs in New Jersey cheered when the World Trade Center collapsed on 9/11 or not?

Q34. Would you support or oppose shutting down mosques in the United States?

Q35. Would you support or oppose creating a national database of Muslims in the United States?

Q36. Do you think the religion of Islam should be legal or illegal in the United States?

Q37. Looking back, do you support or oppose the policy of Japanese Internment during World War II?

Q38. Would you support or oppose bombing [Arabic-sounding city name]?

But this has an added layer of a large number of voters not being able to distinguish reality from fantasy. Sure, if Agrabah was an actual place then it would be more understandable, but this is a poll of adults who are registered to vote, you'd hope they have at least a grade school knowledge of geography. Knowing that Agrabah isn't a place, or that it's a fictional place isn't on the same level as rocket science or biochemistry.

Why would you expect people to know the name of every single hamlet, village, town, or hill in, say, Syria alone, in order to know that the Arabic-sounding town specified does not actually exist somewhere in the world?  Doesn't that seem like a bit of an unreasonable standard?

[Shadowlord]

You don't suppose PPP kept them from googling the name before answering, do you?

[Reelya]

Well at that point you're dealing with a group of paranoid people who would support just about anything up to genocide of groups they don't like. A blind cry of "kill them all because they are the enemy" isn't excusable because you hyped someone up first. It's the exact same undercurrent of blind followers that got us into a whole lot of messes in history, and should not be shrugged off. That way of thinking is a danger.

[TheBiggerFish]

Still, though, it's scary that that many people would support bombing a city that just sounds Arabic.

[Shadowlord]

I can see how those are definitely leading questions, though.

[Culise]

You don't suppose PPP kept them from googling the name before answering, do you?

According to their website, they use automated phone surveys with interactive voice response. That tends to call for snap responses based on immediate knowledge, since you can't rely on the automated timer to sit and quietly wait while you head to your computer to look stuff up.  If your only Internet access immediately at hand happens to be the cell phone they're calling for you to take the survey, that makes it even trickier to look anything up, since you presumably can't exactly hang up and call back.

[mainiac]

When did I do that?

When you decided just now that people's answers to a joke question had to be sincere and reflect their true beliefs.  And then you looked down on them for jumping to conclusions.

There's an xkcd for that of course.

but this is a poll of adults who are registered to vote, you'd hope they have at least a grade school knowledge of geography.

Where did you go to grade school?  I didn't learn the names of any of the towns of Syria in my gradeschool, let alone knowing each and every one of them so I know if there's a fake.

Still, though, it's scary that that many people would support bombing a city that just sounds Arabic.

Yes, it is scary that we have been in a year long bombing campaign during which a bunch of Arabic cities have been bombed and it's not even something we pay much attention to.  It is scary that war has become something that just fades into the background of everyday life.

[Culise]

Oh, also, I can't believe I almost missed the chance to post Yes Prime Minister.  It's not perfectly germane since this is about leading questions towards a nonsensical result rather than a specific policy result (well, unless you count sensationalizing perceived stupidity as a specific policy), but... ^_^

[Shadowlord]

When did I do that?

When you decided just now that people's answers to a joke question had to be sincere and reflect their true beliefs.  And then you looked down on them for jumping to conclusions.

I knew you were going to say that. Well, no, I assumed you were going to say that.

The thing is, everyone has to guess what anyone else they interact with is thinking, to try to understand them, to predict their behavior. It's something we all do all the time and saying "NO! STOP!" just makes me go "Buh? Whaaa?"

But hey, if you can stop, I guess you can be constantly surprised by everything everyone does!

Yes, it is scary that we have been in a year long bombing campaign during which a bunch of Arabic cities have been bombed and it's not even something we pay much attention to.  It is scary that war has become something that just fades into the background of everyday life.

P.S. I pay attention to what's going on over there, as much as I can from news reports anyways.

[mainiac]

But hey, if you can stop, I guess you can be constantly surprised by everything everyone does!

Why would I want to stop?  I'm going to go on assuming things.  I just plan on avoiding judging people for making reasonable assumptions.

[Egan_BW]

When confronted with the question "Bomb [place you never heard of], fer it or again it?" The proper answer is "insufficient information". As the survey did not include this option, it is bad and should feel bad.

[Reelya]

Yes, it is scary that we have been in a year long bombing campaign during which a bunch of Arabic cities have been bombed and it's not even something we pay much attention to.  It is scary that war has become something that just fades into the background of everyday life.

That might be reasonable if it was an across the board "yes" to that question. But when the willingness to bomb some random place on who-knows-who's say-so is highly correlated with the stated intention to vote for a specific candidate (since republican Trump supporters are twice as likely to support the bombing than republican non-trump supporters), there is actual information in there that tells you something about the people, and not just noise.

So, if the questions were leading, there has to be a specific reason that it was much more effective at leading you, if and only if you were a trump voter. Democrats and non-Trump republicans got the same questions and know the same facts about the year-long bombing campaign as Trump supporters did, yet they answers very differently.