Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Interesting stuff. Well educated, overwhelmingly white, and fond of Brit Hume. As I might have guessed!
I never took the survey. But I question the way the results of q. 1 are presented: "Year born"? So your blog's dominant demographic (21-34, what does that mean, 1921-34?) is between 62 and 85 years years old. Funny I never got that vibe from from the comments...Those born before 1918, well, they are mostly not on the web, or they have the excuse of often being dead, so no wonder that cohort drops off like that. But, what, everybody under 32 is just lumped together? I beg to differ...Oh... what? They mean "age"! Now that makes sense. Why didn't they say so. It's all so clear now. Of course, that means I'll take half as much interest in your blog later this year, when I turn 35... Kid-ding!Cheers,First time commenter, long time lurker. So easy on the new guy, who is unwisely, perhaps, trying to show that he once tried to take a professional interest in bad graphs.
Would be interested to know how many have current/prior military experience.
So. The computer-based writings of a professor of law draws readers in the greatest numbers from people working in the law, education, and computers/software/tech.After that, much of the rest of the data (race, education level, income, religion) is quite what you would expect, based on the demographics of people working in those fields . . . but political affiliation skews rightward from what you'd predict.
Ann does attract the elderly gentlemen more than most blogs!
So, what does the Blogress think of who "we" are?Curious minds, uh, are curious.
I notice half of your religious are Cathnostics. Or is it Agolics?And I'm floored that Antiques Road Show edged out '24'...must be that Sippican Cottage influence.
Interesting that a third of the respondents are lurkers who were willing to take a poll for you, but never comment.
Why assume that anyone tells the truth on those surveys anyway?Most people select the answers that sound the best.I'd like to know how Althouse intends to verify any of the findings.
maxine you are tiring as all hell. why assume that people lie. do you lie? do you have an alternative set of statistics? do you have different conclusions? do you have any data whatsoever that suggests people are not telling the truth.you are sometimes so silly.
I’d like to know how many Althouse readers fit into the category of incorporeal, heroin using, banjo loving, toothpaste eaters.I can't possibly be the only one!
Is this the same survey of a week ago. I must have screwed up- for the sex question, I just answered yes.
Hmmm--In general, older, upper middle class white guys--why the older set, Steve asks? Cleavage, man--cleavage.
Glad to hear there are more "neither dog nor cat" people out there - seems everywhere I go there are animal people. (I know, this is weird that this is the statistic that jumped out at me the most).
angieoh!, it jumped out at me too - although I despair that there are any "neither cat nor dog" people!
Howzerdo - really? I mean, I don't hate animals, as long as they belong to other people and I do not have to care for them. My mother in law says that people who don't love animals cannot be capable of loving humans. I just think she is a jerk - other humans I love just fine!
angieoh!, actually, I don't have a problem with people who don't have animals. (I have a big problem with people who abuse animals, though.) But I have to admit that it would be very hard for someone who was animal-less to be friends with me, or with anyone in my family. My pets are equal partners in the household. People bring their pets with them when they visit me. My mother has eight horses (some rescued) that are her whole life as well as a rather scary German Shepherd Dog. My sister has a little poodle that she takes everywhere. My brother has goats and chickens (some rescued, and all are pets). My other brother has a pair of Cocker Spaniels that are special needs rescues. And not loving animals would have been a deal-breaker between me and my husband. In my case, the survey choices for this question were too limited; "both" hardly captures it - there was no choice for "all animals" or "pets rule!"
What incentive is there to tell the truth on a survey? You're not under oath. There's absolutely no reward in it. So, why bother?Unless you're under oath, most people answer random questions so as to show themselves in the best possible most flattering light--which isn't necessarily the truth.EXAMPLE: The salary questions. Funny how people are exactly, perfectly mid-income. I don't think so, but on a survey, we'll all say that we are, nonetheless.Millionaires are too ashamed to admit their millions, so they just fudge and say mid-income. The poor are too embarrassed to admit their poverty, so they lie and say middle-class too.Oh, but Althouse Readers are completely different, they tell the truth always, no matter what, right?Sigh.Margin of error, people. Margin of error. Or in this case--totality of error!
Friday Sarcasm.I'm sure Althouse readers always tell the truth, all the time, on every single Survey they've ever taken.Absolutely.
well Maxine...since you hold truth in such little regard we can now read all your postings knowing that you either randomly lie about everything or you always tell the truth about nothing.What a sad commentary on a pitiful existence.
doyle...i really really don't get the brit hume stuff. to think that 100% of his audience is on althouse is amazing.
also Maxine when you wrote: "Margin of error, people. Margin of error. Or in this case--totality of error!'Earth to Maxine...calling Maxine...this was a SURVEY it was NOT A POLL. POLLS have margins of error. SURVEYS DO NOT HAVE MARGINS OF ERROR. THERE IS NO GENERALIZATION IN A SURVEY. NO PROJECTION TO THE GENERAL POPULATION.Earth to Maxine. Over and go away.....errr OUT.
Post a Comment