A Rigorous Scientific Look Into The 'Fox News Effect'

[Flash]

You also flunk reasoning.

But you are unable to explain your statement about fraud? You could have explained yourself in the time you took to insult me.
Educate me, sir.

Is there anything fraudulent about this study? Yes or no.

 

[Hawkeye10]

But you are unable to explain your statement about fraud? You could have explained yourself in the time you took to insult me.
Educate me, sir.

Is there anything fraudulent about this study? Yes or no.

It almost certainly is a complete fraud, so it carries no weight with me unless someone I trust who is an expert at these sorts of things gets the data, goes over everything, and tells me that it looks legit.

Bret and Heather would be fine.

 

[LurchAddams]

You also flunk reasoning.

You are such a loser. Seriously. Go fuck yourself, troll.

 

[Flash]

It almost certainly is a complete fraud, so it carries no weight with me unless someone I trust who is an expert at these sorts of things gets the data, goes over everything, and tells me that it looks legit.

Bret and Heather would be fine.

If it said Fox News viewers are the most informed would you also say it is fraudulent unless somebody read it for you?

 

[LurchAddams]

Where is the fraud in this study?

Oh, you poor man. Do NOT get sucked into that. All he and his troll sock, goat do, is make these statements, with no support, then when you ask them to prove it, like you just did, they give you babbling double talk and do anything except answer the question. Hawkeye10 and goat are troll sock brothers. Both do the same thing. Don't engage either, other than to flame them/him.

 

[LurchAddams]

Where is the fraud in this study?

Oh, you poor man. Do NOT get sucked into that. All he and his troll sock, goat do, is make these statements, with no support, then when you ask them to prove it, like you just did, they give you babbling double talk and do anything except answer the question. Hawkeye10 and goat are troll sock brothers. Both do the same thing. Don't engage either, other than to flame them/him.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The reason you and other MAGA-its love Fox News is because it confirms your predetermined hate bias 24/7. Sucks to be you.

Zero for three, by the way, bitch.

No, I'm saying that this study is a crappy one that doesn't prove what the researchers claim. I showed why and how the methodology is flawed. If they had done a proper study and proved what they claim, sobeit. But that's not what they did.

 

[Hawkeye10]

There have been far too many lies, claims dont get the mileage that they once did.

 

[LurchAddams]

No, I'm saying that this study is a crappy one that doesn't prove what the researchers claim. I showed why and how the methodology is flawed. If they had done a proper study and proved what they claim, sobeit. But that's not what they did.

Don't like the results? Attack the election.

Don't like the results? Attack the study.

So transparent.

Zero for three, Hawrthorne Blowmehard.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Don't like the results? Attack the election.

Don't like the results? Attack the study.

So transparent.

Zero for three, Hawrthorne Blowmehard.

Wrong! I pointed out the reason it was bad, among others. You come back with nonsense. It isn't the first statistical study I've panned for reasons related to the statistics involved. I think my best one was pointing out the bullshit studies used by radical Leftists in the Tucson Unified School District to claim their racist, hater, "Raza Studies" program was a success.

It was amazing in that case that the number of students per semester for five semesters never changed, nor did their racial make up...

That was an obvious major red flag right off. From there, things went down hill. Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne picked up on that via a reporter at the Arizona Republic I was feeding that stuff to and used it, in part, to get the program shutdown.
That's what taking several years of statistics and then applying them for decades does. The poll in this case is bullshit regardless of what you think or don't.

 

[Ross Dolan]

That is confusing correlation with cause. You can't be sure one caused the other because of the multiple sources.

You don't have to prove what you do not allege, TA.

They are not alleging that FOX caused it...they are merely saying that people who watch FOX score worse. Maybe the point is that the people who actually watch FOX are just fucking morons...so they would score worse no matter what.

 

[Into the Night]

And when are Republicans going to get serious about presenting that evidence in court?

Evidence does not require a court to exist. No court has authority to choose the electors for any State.

I mean they can bleat about forever but that doesn't mean much.

Actually, it does.

Eventually even the sheep will stop believing them.

That's what's happening to the Democrats.

 

[Into the Night]

They have no evidence

Argument of the Stone fallacy. Quite a bit of the evidence has already been shown to you. You can't wish it away.

They need to drag democracy down the hall and drown it in the bathtub first

The United States was never a democracy.

Then they will invent “the facts” they need

Which is what YOU are doing. Inversion fallacy.

You can't wish the evidence away, dude.

 

[Into the Night]

The question, as asked, allowed multiple answers. How did the pollsters determine watching Fox would give the result they got if persons answered "yes" to multiple sources?

As usual, polls don't mean a damn thing.

 

[Into the Night]

The reason you and other MAGA-its love Fox News is because it confirms your predetermined hate bias 24/7. Sucks to be you.

Zero for three, by the way, bitch.

Hate speech.

 

[Into the Night]

Where is the fraud in this study?

No published unbiased raw data.
Math errors: Failure to declare and justify variance. Failure to select by randN. Failure to calculate margin of error and publish with summary.

Conclusion based on randU.
Argument from randU fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Hey Idiot! You, Donald Trump, or Fox News have never presented any evidence of election fraud by any Democrats!

Lie. Argument of the Stone fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

You have failed at reading comprehension.

Selective reading is his specialty.

 

[Into the Night]

They can't present it in court because they don't have enough evidence to get a court to accept their cases.

Evidence does not require a court to exist, dumbass.
No court has authority to choose the electors for any State.

 

[Into the Night]

Then explain your post: "These kinds of "studies" are almost always straight up fraud."

If the studies are almost always "straight up fraud," what is fraudulent about this study?

RQAA. Stop asking the same mindless question over and over. It's been answered.