I'm not sure how you're interpreting this number, but the way I think about it is that Yang has been able to attract voters that no other democratic candidate has a hope of attracting, and that's why if he's not the nominee they won't support whoever is.
-
-
-
I’m not supporting Yang, but I agree that folks have been wildly misinterpreting these stats, and there’s a strong argument to made that higher numbers in the “no” column is better.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Bonkers. Absolutely bonkers.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Personal preferences aside this chart doesn’t have enough supporting data to be meaningful on its own. Sample size, stat sig, population variance etc.
-
#klobuchar is the likely 41%
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
This poll had a sample size of 1051 registered voters. 171,517 people caucused in 2016 so if that stayed the same this poll reflects 0.613%(not a typo < 1 percent) of ALL caucusers, not just Dems. A significant amount of yang's supports have never voted or switched parties.
#MATHHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.