Washington DC is being overrun by teh gays

Unarmed Gunman

Medium Pimpin'
May 2, 2007
7,339
288
0
The D
www.googlehammer.com
This chart explain a lot, actually:

JNlYQqj.jpg


No wonder there's so much faggotry in our government.
 


For stats nerds:

For a 99% confidence level using a sample of 493 respondents out of 617996 DC residents, the survey should say 88% +/- 3.77% for the "do not" figure. i.e the do not figure could be as high as 91.8%, the same as Hawaii, MA, ME, CA, NY, NH, NJ and many others on the table.

Lies, damn lies, etc.

Just sayin'
 
David Kopay, Washington Redskins 1969-1970

Jerry Smith, Washington Redskins 1965-1977

Wade Davis, Washington Redskins 2003
 
For stats nerds:

For a 99% confidence level using a sample of 493 respondents out of 617996 DC residents, the survey should say 88% +/- 3.77% for the "do not" figure. i.e the do not figure could be as high as 91.8%, the same as Hawaii, MA, ME, CA, NY, NH, NJ and many others on the table.

Lies, damn lies, etc.

Just sayin'

DC fag spotted.
 
That's funny, I was in DC last night for St. Patty's day and some guy grabbed my crotch in a crowded bar.
 
Prob like 20%. The missing 10% are busy lying on polls and getting secret blowies in bathrooms from random men.
 
why would any website even post these findings... these sample sizes are laughable.

Where did they do this survey a bath house in DC
 
why would any website even post these findings... these sample sizes are laughable.

Their chosen sample sizes are not really unusual and doubling it wouldn't have changed the margin of error as much as many might think it would. Surveys to some degree are always about finding ballpark figures.

For a country of over 300 million, Gallup polls 1,500 people for their president approval rating, which gives a 95% confidence with a 3% margin of error. Gallup could crank that up to 15,000 or 150,000, but it wouldn't really be worth it cost wise in relation to improved accuracy. 1,500 is all that is needed for a "close enough" number.

/STAT NERD MODE
 
For stats nerds:

For a 99% confidence level using a sample of 493 respondents out of 617996 DC residents, the survey should say 88% +/- 3.77% for the "do not" figure. i.e the do not figure could be as high as 91.8%, the same as Hawaii, MA, ME, CA, NY, NH, NJ and many others on the table.

Lies, damn lies, etc.

Just sayin'


I say fucking laziness. Why the fuck don't you increase the damn sample size to make the stats meaningful? Like all these presidential race polls that would say, Obama 51 Romney 49, plus or minus 2%. Retarded.