I don’t know anymore. Maybe Reuters has been kicked in the teeth by AP and UPI along with the instant news networks too many times, but they’re pretty much doing away with sensible reporting and headline writing. Chris Wright has documented some of Reuters headlines showing obvious democratic bias, but today I’d like to show how the Repubs got one.? Check this story out. According to this link, 10,965,822 Californians went to the polls in the 2000 election returns (at least these are the “official” numbers–who knows how many votes were lost through routine election mishaps).
The poll conducted covered 695 people. Let’s see… That’s 0.006338% of the total vote from 2000. However, they did get results (and a margin of error making the distinction meaningless), and they did get a sensational headline.
Statistics, polls, and people or organizations with hidden motives will be biased. This should be expected as a fact before any data is considered in any circumstance.
Use what God gave you, folks. Think about everything you read and try to test its validity if it is information that supports one position over another.
Actually, I’ve got a statistics background, and you’d be surprised how small a sample is needed to give a reasonable margin of error.
That said, how a question is asked can easily skew a poll. Always remember ?The remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: ?There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics?.?
Knowing Reuters, they probably posted this one to rile up some Democrats and get ’em voting liberal again 🙂
Actually, the Disraeli quote went on to say: "lies, damned lies, statistics, release dates for software, budget estimates, and the media." 🙂