If 90% want Universal Background Checks, why are 39% happy they got shot down?

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...about-the-failure-of-the-gun-bill-in-numbers/

Gun-reax-new1.jpg


90% my ass.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Because the legislation involved more than background checks?

Basic survey reading fail.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
Because the legislation involved more than background checks?

Basic survey reading fail.

Actually it was voted on Amendment to Amendment, and we very well could have gotten Universal Background checks and little else if the votes had been there.

That and the question asked specifically notes universal background checks, and that was the big issue in the news. I would think someone who wanted background checks but was opposed to everything else would be in the "None/Other" category as opposed to "very happy/relieved".
 
Last edited:

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
LOL! Independents are happy it got voted down.

Keep trying that gun control democrats, oh please keep pushing it! Make it a pillar of your platform and tie Obama all to it. Please oh please!
 

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
I wish people had to pass a basic test on how firearms work before they were allow to vote on them.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
I wish people had to pass a basic test on how firearms work before they were allow to vote on them.

According to the press and plenty of senators along with the presdient about this vote, it was to get background checks on all the firearms you can buy over the Internet!

Now, because the meanies in the senate voted no people can still buy any gun they want, as much as they want over the internet. Just click, buy and the weapon of war is delivered right to your door, no questions asked and no background check!
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Actually it was voted on Amendment to Amendment, and we very well could have gotten Universal Background checks and little else if the votes had been there.

That and the question asked specifically notes universal background checks, and that was the big issue in the news. I would think someone who wanted background checks but was opposed to everything else would be in the "None/Other" category as opposed to "very happy/relieved".

The question asked about legislation as a whole, of which background checks were a part.

The rest of your post is baseless speculation.

Basic poll reading failure.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
The question asked about legislation as a whole, of which background checks were a part.

The rest of your post is baseless speculation.

Basic poll reading failure.

If the question was meant to be about the legislation as a whole, why did it note universal background checks and nothing else? They put in that little factoid just to jog peoples' memories? :p
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
If the question was meant to be about the legislation as a whole, why did it note universal background checks and nothing else? They put in that little factoid just to jog people's memories? :p

Have you ever wondered why the individual parts of the Affordable Care Act are generally very popular but the act itself is not? It's because there are more considerations when you talk about legislation in the aggregate than when you talk about individual issues.

Your OP is based on a fundamental misreading of what the poll question asked. That's really the beginning and end of it.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
Have you ever wondered why the individual parts of the Affordable Care Act are generally very popular but the act itself is not? It's because there are more considerations when you talk about legislation in the aggregate than when you talk about individual issues.

Your OP is based on a fundamental misreading of what the poll question asked. That's really the beginning and end of it.

You didn't answer my question.

Last I checked half the poll question asked about Universal Background Checks.

If they had asked "What word best describes how you feel about the Senate voting down new gun control legislation last week?" I'd concede your point.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
You didn't answer my question.

Last I checked half the poll question asked about Universal Background Checks.

If they had asked "What word best describes how you feel about the Senate voting down new gun control legislation last week?" I'd concede your point.

No, the question was about the legislation, mentioning that it included background checks. That is nowhere remotely the same.

If someone asked 'How do you feel about Obamacare, which includes a ban on denials for pre-existing conditions?' Do you think the results should be the same as a question of 'how do you feel about a ban on denials for pre-existing conditions?' Of course not.

Seriously, your OP was just wrong. 90% indeed.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
No, the question was about the legislation, mentioning that it included background checks. That is nowhere remotely the same.

If someone asked 'How do you feel about Obamacare, which includes a ban on denials for pre-existing conditions?' Do you think the results should be the same as a question of 'how do you feel about a ban on denials for pre-existing conditions?' Of course not.

Seriously, your OP was just wrong. 90% indeed.

Likewise the results also wouldn't be the same as asking "How do you feel about Obamacare?"

If I ask you "How do you feel about fruit, which includes bananas?" You're probably going to be thinking about bananas when you answer. That's just basic human psychology.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Likewise the results also wouldn't be the same as asking "How do you feel about Obamacare?"

If I ask you "How do you feel about fruit, which includes bananas?" You're probably going to be thinking about bananas when you answer. That's just basic human psychology.

I'm not even sure what your point is anymore. You seem to be agreeing with me that the question didn't ask what you claimed it did.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
You didn't answer my question.

Last I checked half the poll question asked about Universal Background Checks.

If they had asked "What word best describes how you feel about the Senate voting down new gun control legislation last week?" I'd concede your point.

In which case, it's a double-barreled question and indicates poor methodology. Let's take the question as posed: "What word best describes how you feel about the Senate voting down new gun control legislation that included background checks on gun purchases?" Personally, I'm in favor of universal background checks, but I'm opposed to a lot of the other rules that made up a bulk of the legislation. What's my answer to that poll question? If I say I'm relieved it doesn't address my feelings towards background checks. If I say I'm disappointed it doesn't address my feelings toward the rest of the gun control legislation. I would argue that my feeling should be one of relief, since I was opposed to more of the gun legislation than I was in favor of, but in reading my answer of "relief", you would conclude I'm opposed to universal background checks. That's simply bad poll writing.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,201
14,877
136
So in all the previous threads where polls were brought up the overwhelming opposition to the results was that the polls were/could be manipulated to get the response the pollster wanted. It was then shown in plain English what the question was, "do you support background checks".

And here we have a poll whose wording is manipulative and not a fucking peep from those same people about the polls validity.

Hypocrite much? Yeah I think so.
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
The problem here is with the person reading the poll, not the poll itself. Pew is an excellent pollster.

The questing is leading the people polled. The poll is therefore a joke. The OP correctly pointed out the psychology behind the question even if you think his interpretation is wrong, that point, is correct.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
The questing is leading the people polled. The poll is therefore a joke. The OP correctly pointed out the psychology behind the question even if you think his interpretation is wrong, that point, is correct.

I agree that the question is badly worded; that doesn't make the OP any less wrong.
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
I agree that the question is badly worded; that doesn't make the OP any less wrong.

But somehow it makes what you are saying more right? WTF? Why not leave it at a shitty question, therefore a shitty poll and be done with it?

Trying to defend the position that someone is wrong about their interpretation of the results to a shit question seems pretty ridiculous.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
But somehow it makes what you are saying more right? WTF?

Uhmmm. Yes. What aren't you understanding?

His OP clearly argues that because of the results of this poll, previous polls putting support for background checks at 90% must have been wrong.

I told him that you cannot get that information from the polling question provided because that's not what the question asks. That is pretty indisputably more correct.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
I'm not even sure what your point is anymore. You seem to be agreeing with me that the question didn't ask what you claimed it did.

I never claimed it asked solely about background checks. However, the fact that background checks received massive amounts of media attention, were very much the focal point of the legislation, and are directly mentioned in the question, make its numbers applicable, if perhaps not to a precise figure, to whether people want universal background checks or not.

At the very least, I think it debunks or at least poses a great challenge to the validity of 90% figure and/or what everyone has been saying said figure represents. I've heard that 90% figure touted as the penultimate symbol of American unity on a controversial issue. Yet now 39% of people are apparently happy to see it go, even with poll language effectively making it the center of the question.

It would appear 90% is bunk in terms of representing legitimate, practically applicable public opinion. At best it might represent that 90% of people are in favor of the theory of background checks, but not the reality of them actually being legislated.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
I never claimed it asked solely about background checks. However, the fact that background checks received massive amounts of media attention, were very much the focal point of the legislation, and are directly mentioned in the question, make its numbers applicable, if perhaps not to a precise figure, to whether people want universal background checks or not.

At the very least, I think it debunks or at least poses a great challenge to the validity of 90% figure and/or what everyone has been saying said figure represents. I've heard that 90% figure touted as the penultimate symbol of American unity on a controversial issue. Yet now 39% of people are apparently happy to see it go, even with poll language effectively making it the center of the question.

It would appear 90% is bunk in terms of representing legitimate, practically applicable public opinion. At best it might represent that 90% of people are in favor of the theory of background checks, but not the reality.

There is simply no way you can get that conclusion from the data presented; this is just confirmation bias, wishful thinking, and unfounded speculation.
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
Uhmmm. Yes. What aren't you understanding?

His OP clearly argues that because of the results of this poll, previous polls putting support for background checks at 90% must have been wrong.

I told him that you cannot get that information from the polling question provided because that's not what the question asks. That is pretty indisputably more correct.

No, you went a step further with this.

Seriously, your OP was just wrong. 90% indeed.

Nothing here says that 90% is correct either now does it. I would add that the poll does seem to bring that 90% into question. To what extent who knows.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
There is simply no way you can get that conclusion from the data presented; this is just confirmation bias, wishful thinking, and unfounded speculation.

I prefer "reasonable intuition". You're saying that this poll shows nothing of significance regarding the question of background checks, despite having the issue plastered all over every TV in America for months, making it the focal point of the new gun control legislation, and despite the fact that the question itself references universal background checks.


I disagree. No I don't have a scientifically provable case or a hard figure, but I do have a reasonable one. I spend 4 months shoving bananas in your face on a daily basis, and then have a highly publicized vote on a law that include apples, bananas, peaches, and cherries. I then ask you how you feel about the vote being struck down, and mention the vote included bananas. You don't have any real time to think about your answer. Now tell me, exactly what criteria are you going to base your answer on? (Answer: How you feel about bananas)
 
Last edited: