Edit - stickied? Sweet! Thanks for all the votes so far, it was way lower when I found it.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (83)
sorted by:
They intentionally worded the choices to confuse people who just quickly look at it. So, please be sure to carefully read the choices!
Agreed, there's only 1 real "no" but 2 "yes" and 1 "no" that can used to support a narrative.
that real no needs to have a higher total # of votes than the 2 yes + 1 no that can support a narrative.
update EXCELLENT JOB ANONS!!!*
1 real no = 2,326
2 Yes's + 1 no = 2,295
have some faith anon, i put faith in the anons here and they have not let these polls down yet
Up to 63% just now.
I will guarantee that they seed the poll initially with the approved narrative votes.
3,950 now
Up to 52% now
Also find it interesting that 3 of the choices are pro Trudeau and one is anti. Basically the answers should be yes or no, these answers are aligned to give more weight to diminish the response and make it more likely that people side with him. Exaggerated, the problem could have 99 pro Trudeau options and 1 anti. Unless that option hit over 50% their headline can read, "oh look it's a mixed opinion on protesters and the actions of the government"
That's why it's called Legacy Media, anon.
First thing I noticed even in my inebriated state. I'm damn proud of myself.
In addition to what was mentioned by others, every time you click on the poll the order of the questions is always the same with the 1st answer being the want they want to be the most popular and the one they don't like being 2nd last. Only higher than the "I don't know option".
The proper way to do this would be to randomize the order of answers so that the order is eliminated as a factor. Due to human nature, some answers will be more common just based on their order in the questionnaire (my guess would be the 1st one gets that advantage). For example, there may be a person who doesn't read the answers and just lazily picks the 1st choice every time they randomly do surveys.
Taking all the other things into account, this is an excellent example on how to rig a survey. The only down side is it's very obvious and not subtle at all per the following:
3 of 5 answers support their position. So even if a bot was choosing answers at random, they would get the result they want.
Answers they want picked are always ordered 1st.
Survey wording is intentionally confusing and obfuscated so only someone who pays close attention will actually pick what they want. The end result is a tendency towards either randomness (which favours them per 1 above) or towards getting confused/frustrated with the survey because it requires mental effort and just picking the 1st answer to get it out of the way (which favours them per 2 above).
Keep in mind, there is a reason the Toronto Star is called the Red Star. Even among many leftists it is considered to be garbage. I could go on and on about why this newspaper is the lowest form of trash but I will end by saying that their articles read like an opinion sections (no argument, poorly written, tell you what they think even as it makes no sense, peak ultra-leftist echo chamber) and their opinion sections read like articles (usually contradict the point of the newspaper / are right leaning, are well written, provide arguments and evidence to backup their points and make sense).
They always do that on government and propaganda sites. Foodstamps app in Fla. asks you if you eat and buy food as a list with everyone you have in your household. Many people confused by that because children don't buy food...