Poll: Half of Americans Cool With a Gay President

i dont see why its even needed to ask these sort of things. anyone who votes in a leader or not based on sexual orientation and not their ability to do the job well they are idiots.

 

Mmmm 967 respondents…

Don't want to sound cynical but I wonder how well the respondents truly reflect the range American society as a whole.

 

...I agree. 967 divided by 50 states= just over 19. That means if they truly wanted to reflect the USA, they'd have polled 19 people in each state. How feasible is this? And did they only poll people in major cities, not rural areas(usually more conservative) etc?

*sigh*

From outside observation though it would seem that Americans are more tolerant from these stats though...

----------

Well we know that. Unfortunately so many people want to know about the lives of political leaders nowadays, its like they're a less popular form of celebrity. I mean, you see Obama on the magazine racks when waiting in line to pay for groceries. "Sasha's school day trip"... :eusa_clap

People just like to be nosy because they have little in their lives or think someone has a more exciting life than them, which I supposed the President must but... I don't know.

---
Plus, can you imagine, the USA JUST got a president who is of different racial background than the previous Presidents. That was a big step for them somehow... And yet from meetings I've seen him in during foriegn visits to other countries, some of the other leaders seem aloof towards him. Racist? Perhaps...

Can you imagine if a gay man or woman was President? That would be pretty cool, but they'd probably be fearful for their lives. The other countries in the world can be much more intolerant than those in the West.

 

Thank you. I was just about to say that.

Yay for Statistics!

 

so u all say they care cos peopel are nosy idiots? hmmm and were allowed to vote because? lol

oh dear better not give them ideas.

 

It's how politics works.

You would need a lot more than 967 people for a very close accuracy of 300,000,000 people.

According to the link an earlier poster posted, with a confidence interval of 1 @ a confidence level of 95%, you would need 9,604 people.

If you don't know what that means, let me reword it: "We can be 95% confident that the statistics are within 1% of completely accuracy." If you have less than that amount, the confidence interval increases, thus giving us less accurate data.

The confidence interval with 957 people is 3.15%, which is more than 3 times larger than the other. While not terrible, it certainly isn't as accurate.

----------

The only issue is that statistics doesn't include the range of beliefs and ideologies that people hold in the USA.

 

Well by using conventional stats wisdom, we're assuming that there's no sample bias. And here the sample bias is obviously those who read vanity fair...

 

With a little bit of searching, I found this little tidbit:

The poll was commissioned by Vanity Fair, but it was conducted by CBS. It's not like they called up only Vanity Fair subscribers.

 

HAHAHAHAH I concede...

Shall we conclude that based on a voting population of 200,000,000, a confidence level of 95% and confidence interval of +/- 4, an unbiased sample of 900 is adequate?


LOL

 

Yeah, but you need a broad range of people for it to be accurate. What kind of people do you get that read Vanity Fair? Mostly liberals. You wouldn't catch many people from the bible belt picking up an issue of Vanity Fair.

 

That is exactly why Dubya got in. People thought they could "drink a beer" with the guy, not because they thought he was capable of running the country.

And as for Al Gore...His campaign tried to dumb him down because he was deemed "too smart" to appeal to voters. WTF, seriously. I don't know about any of you, but I want my president to be smarter than I am...And I seriously doubt Dubya was smarter than me (not to brag or anything, but I just don't think his intelligence is *there*)