I can't tell if I'm crazy, if it's being censored, or what, but I was just recently looking at a study done by Pew Research and everything seemed to contradict my own (anecdotal), so I went to check their polling sample statistics and they stated they had a pool of 4400ish participants pulled from their usual polling sample group of 10,000ish people (sorry if I'm using the wrong terminology)This struck me as wildly inconsistent with population statistics in the US pulling AAs at 13ish% of the population, and it seems clear to me that a significant majority of their sample base is most likely pulled from heavily democratic areas (which are home to a majority of the AA population) or that it is unverified... how is a sample size that only consists of .0026% of the nations population supposed to be used as a means to convey the opinion of Americans as a whole, especially when it seemingly MUST draw from areas/people with significant political bias?also, why is it that no matter what search engine i seem to use, I can't find any information even challenging this same issue? I'm probably just retarded and I'm simply glossing over everything with bad math and assumptions, but for now I can't help but question absolutely every non-biased "survey" being pushed.I hope I'm just dumb, somebody educate me please.
>>489012566You're Dumb, Retarded and don't know statisticsPew is Cringe and Cucked but not for these reasons
>>489012634if not for this reason, then why? they seem fishy to me...
>>489012817What's your problem with them? Their Number of Niggers is wrong?
>is math le wrong?>it violated my personal beliefs?cool board
So it's completely unreasonable for me to assume that a study group primarily funded within the US would be willing to use biased sample groups for US based political issues, all the while using non-bias sample studies for issues abroad to retain their non-partisan status where it matters? ((($$$)))I'm speaking specifically about a studies done within the US representing American citizens and their political views about issues that influence our political leadership...At the end of the day, nobody in America actually gives a shit what some third world country decides to enact into law or how they oppress whoever, but by publishing a study that is supposed to represent an unbiased view of the average American, it seems as though they are trying leverage the herd mentality of the majority... I guess I'm just absolutely braindead. I came here (to /pol/) because i figured this would be the most likely place to find "wrongthink"/based individuals who would provide a contradiction to the narrative that search engines censored this type of thinking, but I guess I am just genuinely stupid and irredeemable. Thanks for curing my budding racism I guess.Maybe i should stop being such a cynical skeptic and focus my limited IQ on something like gooning or hard drugs.
>>489012987why on earth would (((anybody))) want to be biased to show that Muslims are backwards inbred incels who support an oppressive religious legal system? oh wait...also, nobody in the western world gives a shit what some cunts in a desert do to their women. The only reason why they are even pandered to in western societies is because of fringe leftists trying to avoid the inevitable backswing (Via the political pendulum) so that they can retain a paycheck and secure legal power.Do you think any "2nd world" countries tolerate Muslims? (no... they all actively genocide them unless they assimilate to their culture)So essentially my take from your response is that, because one of their studies supports your belief, accurate or not, that all of their studies must be accurate and there is no incentive for them to produce biased propaganda
