Essay:An analysis of another misleading poll/calculations

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by LT (Talk | contribs) at 03:29, July 4, 2020. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search
Main article: Essay:An analysis of another misleading poll

The following is a thorough list of mathematical calculations/explanations related to Essay:An analysis of another misleading poll.

Finding sample makeup by gender

According to the polling data for the 2020 Senate special election in Arizona, 34% of respondents intend to vote for Republican Martha McSally and 49% prefer Democrat Mark E. Kelly. For the two-way tables that involve the preferences by gender, 34% of men intended to vote for McSally, and 52% for Kelly; for women, 34% back McSally and 46% are for Kelly. Since it's unknown exactly what percent of the sample makeup is by gender, M can be used as a variable for male respondents and F for female respondents. Since the percent of men (out of the entire sample) that support McSally and the percent of women (again out of the entire sample) that support McSally must add up to 34%, the equation "34M + 34F = 34" can be set. With the same notion applying to Mark Kelly, the equation "52M + 46F = 49" can be set as well. And to solve: 

    34M + 34F =  34        → → →    34M =  –34F + 34  |    52M + 46F =  49        → → →    52M =      –46F + 49     ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
  −       34F =  34F       → → →  ÷ 34  = ÷ 34        |  –       46F =  46F       → → →  ÷ 52  = ÷ 52               ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
  ———————————————————————  → → →  —————————————————   |  ———————————————————————  → → →  —————————————————————————  ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
    34M       = –34F + 34  → → →      M  =   –F + 1   |    52M +     = –46F + 49  → → →      M = –(46/52)F + 49/52  ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
                                                                                                                    ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
  ↓ ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ↓ ↓ ↓
  ↓ ↓ ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ↓ ↓
  ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ←
  ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
  ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
  ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓

   –F + 1 = –(46/52)F + 49/52  → → →   (6/52)F + 49/52 = 1      → → →   (6/52)F =    3/52
  + F     =         F          → → →  –          49/52 = 49/52  → → →  × (52/6) = × (52/6)
  ———————————————————————————  → → →  ————————————————————————  → → →  ——————————————————
       1  =   (6/52)F + 49/52  → → →   (6/52)F         =  3/52  → → →         F = 3/6

Since exactly half of the sample makeup are women, the other half must be men. Plugging these figures back into the original equations result in identities, so the answers yielded are correct.

Retrieved from "https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:An_analysis_of_another_misleading_poll/calculations&oldid=1664797"