Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (757816)	1/23/2007 8:17:43 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Re: [Two truly 'independent' variables would be unlikely to 'act as one'] "Yes, exactly, I agree, but this is not the case here... as I said earlier, there is only one independent variable and one dependent variable, i.e., Bush and success or failure respectively, ..." But, AS I POINTED OUT, from the question alone you have no way at all of telling if people WANT SUCCESS (or not) for AMERICA... or if they WANT SUCCESS (or not) for 'Bush's plan'. NOT identical things AT ALL. :-) "but, it further dramatizes the point by demonstrating how much people hate Bush..." I disagree on that. It may SUGGEST that, but I believe there is absolutely no way to tweak out the causal factor, to ascertain whether people's answers are motivated more by attitudes about the desirability of American 'success' in Iraq... or by their attitudes (pro or con) towards Bush. (Or, whether answers are motivated 50% by one and 50% by another... or 90/10... or 60/40, etc. No way to know from that one question alone. All that can reasonably be SUPPOSED from the answers is that --- to some unquantifiable degree --- negative public feelings about Bush personally probably push down the numbers that would have otherwise answered in the affirmative, that they were looking for 'success' in Iraq.) Again, though, it may be supposed, but it is not quantifiable because of the sloppy wording.