FILE ON CANADIAN 2025 POLLINGEntity
On the record see profile →
For an n=1,500 sample at p=0.40
Pass 2: The Forensics, the Math, and the Philosophy of Canad
“For an n=1,500 sample at p=0.40”
VERIFIED — a word-for-word match in the stored source
Mean ≈ 38.6, std dev ≈ 2.7
Pass 2: The Forensics, the Math, and the Philosophy of Canad
“Mean ≈ 38.6, std dev ≈ 2.7”
VERIFIED — a word-for-word match in the stored source
the binomial standard error is √(0.40·0.60/1500) = 1.26 percentage points
Pass 2: The Forensics, the Math, and the Philosophy of Canad
“the binomial standard error is √(0.40·0.60/1500) = **1.26 percentage points**”
VERIFIED — a word-for-word match in the stored source
the observed standard deviation is larger than theoretical sampling SE
Pass 2: The Forensics, the Math, and the Philosophy of Canad
“The observed standard deviation is *larger* than theoretical sampling SE”
VERIFIED — a word-for-word match in the stored source
Disputed — who says what, against what see standalone →
These are things people say about Canadian 2025 polling that aren't settled fact — each one attributed to who's actually claiming it, so a claim never quietly passes as established just because it showed up in a document. Weigh it yourself.
Disputed
"the variance is in fact slightly too high relative to sampling theory, driven by ideologically distinct house effects"
Unattributed assertion · stance: pro
Not yet independently weighed — one source's claim, unconfirmed elsewhere.
Pass 2: The Forensics, the Math, and the Philosophy of Canad ↗
Disputed
"Canadian 2025 polling does not show the strong herding signature Silver flagged in US 2024 polls"
Unattributed assertion · stance: pro
Not yet independently weighed — one source's claim, unconfirmed elsewhere.
Pass 2: The Forensics, the Math, and the Philosophy of Canad ↗