Cataholic:
It all depends on where the statistics are coming from whether they can be trusted or not. Methodology, sample size, and other issues come into play whenever you are relying on someone else's statistics to prove or disprove a point., In the case of the Johns Hopkins study I cited in the cell phone discussion, the sample size was large, and they were using raw data from insurance companies' accident records.
In the case of pay, according to the bureau of labor statistics, on average women who are employed full time worked .7 of an hour per day less than their male couterparts. That alone accounts for a pay disparity. In the case of the Bureau of Labor stats, their sample size is huge (the US Workforce) and they are government employees, so they have no axe to grind. They use raw data from US employers, so the data they use has not been skewed by being filtered by another study. (Using data from a study in your statistical study, as is done at times, is a sure way to twist data.)
As far as voting for a party instead of an individual? Let's just say in the last 4 elections I've voted in, very few of the candidates I voted for won. Why? They weren't representatives of either of the major parties. I have a tendency to vote on the conservative side of things, but I don't vote for someone because they are a Republican. I actually look at the candidates and look at their platforms, and email campaigns for more information.
Slick campaigners do nothing for me. They are more likely NOT to get my vote because any time the BS meter goes off the candidate has probably lost my vote. Say what you mean, mean what you say, and just let the chips fall.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks