true. that seems like a large number though. I mean, any individual might do that, but would that many?
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 17:26:24 -0400, Angel Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure, but they seem a bit contrived to me. > > As in they take a set of statistics and then give them meaning, or they use a > block of statistics to represent a certain viewpoint. > As in the supposedly rhetorical question of whether 167,222 people would vote > for a democratic senator, but not the democratic > President. > Some people might, to assert otherwise is assuming people were voting > primarily along party lines. > > -Gel > -----Original Message----- > From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > oh there is no help for this past election. I am thinking that there should > perhaps be geek observers at the next one though... like > the legal observers at this one. > > But do the statistics in there make sense? Or are they just misunderstood > gobbledygook? I am not sure. > > Dana > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:135055 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
