• human@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    I think the issue here is you are reading

    Looks like it’s a YouGov survey, and the article cites a second YouGov survey as corroboration, so I’m not sure how scientifically rigorous this is.

    As

    Looks like it’s a <any firm> survey, and the article cites a second <the same firm> survey as corroboration, so I’m not sure how scientifically rigorous this is.

    My issue is with it being YouGov specifically, not that both were from the same source. Then I looked at the PDFs themselves to confirm they were opt-in web surveys before adding my edit.

    Personally I do think he’s guilty and would love it if 71% think he was at least complicit.

    Not really interested in taking this further though. Enjoy your day.