It's particularly sad because I think the 24% was meant to be "net satisfied" and got misread by someone and included as a "not satisfied" wedge by mistake.
-
-
-
"sad" as in I really do feel sorry for the person who made the mistake.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I have seen a few times similar horrors. This isn’t a new. But yeah best way to put it.

Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Numbers never lie .....


Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Did you hear the NSW CHO today speak about up to 500k people infected? https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/up-to-500-000-australians-may-have-been-infected-nsw-chief-doctor-20200722-p55ec3 …
-
I just saw that piece. It makes several basic errors, in particular assuming that NSW prevalence figures are representative of the entire country (when they are clearly not) and apparently taking an offhand quote of "maybe 1%" that was later clarified to "less than 1%"
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
You're going to love constituency level Liberal Democrat leaflets... It is a glorious world unto itself
pic.twitter.com/fvI8wa7lLK
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is both incoherent and not coherent
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.