71 Percent Say Keep Redskins Name

[Sugar12]

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...issent-growing

Surprising to anyone? Probably not the results the liberal media thought they would get

[art vandelay]

I am surprised. But this is the result of a silent majority. And they stay silent possibly because of how they'll he attacked by the vocal minority, possibly because they know they're wrong, or possibly because of a little but of both.

[Susquehanna Birder]

Not surprised. There is a lot of ignorance out there.

[Phoward12]

Some of the loudest voices on the side of changing it are probably doing the most harm. We have a "columnist" down here names Mike Wise who constantly beats the drum about the name, gets into twitter fights over it, etc.

Problem is, in his blind rage, he manages to make some screw-ups. For instance, a few Native Americans messaged him to tell him they liked the name, thought it honored them, etc. His response was to tell them that even though they were Native Americans, their opinion didn't count next to those of the offended.

Fact is, unless Snyder is paying all of them to give the "correct opinion," a majority of them are far more concerned with the poverty and drug abuse in their communities than they are with the name. Many of them like it, which I think makes it odd to call them ignorant.

It will be interesting to see how this all gets resolved. Frankly, I'm shocked that 23 percent said it should be changed; I thought the vocal minority was more minor than that. I guess I should keep in mind that only 1,000 people were surveyed.

[Sugar12]

Yeah I guess the sample size is pretty small but still statistically significant. I thought the opposite about the 23%. Based on how much I have heard about it, I thought it was a lot higher than that...At least 50/50.

[Eagle In Ohio]

I love how the article states

that 71 percent of Americans are in favor of keeping the name, then you realize that they polled 1,019 people. That's some extensive research right there. A very thorough poll.

[Susquehanna Birder]

What really gets me is that it shouldn't be a popularity vote. Either it's right or wrong. The fact that roughly 1/3 of the sample think that it's wrong should say something.

[Sugar12]

Sample Size Used

...Is almost exactly the number needed to be statistically significant. If you want a confidence level of 99% and a confidence interval of 4% you need 1040 people in the poll.

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm#one

[Sugar12]

I personally think the name is wrong for the record...However I just don't think it should be such a hot button for discussion. It's just not a huge deal to me and doesn't effect my life in any way, shape or form. And no I'm not of Native American descent but I have to believe that I wouldn't care about a team called the WOPs or Mick's

[3rd & Inches]

...Is almost exactly the number needed to be statistically significant. If you want a confidence level of 99% and a confidence interval of 4% you need 1040 people in the poll.

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm#one

I hated stats. That class sucked ass.

[TerpEagle]

that 71 percent of Americans are in favor of keeping the name, then you realize that they polled 1,019 people. That's some extensive research right there. A very thorough poll.

You do understand how polls work, correct? They use a sample size and apply statistical methods to limit bias and determine confidence intervals.

Any poll you see applies this method and probably has similar sample sizes.

There is statistical error but odds are that the 71% is relatively accurate. It's doubtful that the actual opinion of the nation would swing opposite the poll results or even to 50:50 with that sample size - unless there was an error in the polling method which resulted in extremely significant bias.

For example, look at the sample sizes for the 2012 presidential election.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationw...election,_2012

The bigger issue with that article, and perhaps I just missed it, is that I didn't see their sampling error.

Regardless, the poll does show a growing opinion over the last 2 decades that the Redskins name is offensive and inappropriate but is it really surprising that it's not a majority opinion?

From an anecdotal standpoint I think that's probably pretty accurate mostly due to ambivalence by most people over the issue.

[Susquehanna Birder]

I hated stats. That class sucked ass.

I hear ya. When they sent me to Six Sigma class at work, my head nearly exploded.

[Mt Iggle]

SB- Six Sigma? I don't even know what that is. I was at one time a certified HS math teacher.
You shall have to inform me on Sunday.
Go Eagles!

[TerpEagle]

It's approximately 3 errors per million units.

[FuriousXGeorge]

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...issent-growing

Surprising to anyone? Probably not the results the liberal media thought they would get

It was 79% a year ago, 89% in 1992. I doubt the "liberal media" (lol what kind of douche uses that term?) was that surprised. Momentum is definitely behind change, but ignorant racist traditions take some time to crumble.