Bisram’s lies

This is going to be provocative. A provocateur with a pen, stirring up anger then thoughts. For this is our history, of Akintunde a loyal slave, who did any and many for his slave master. However, despite canine loyalty, the slave master would perpetually beat the black off Akintunde’s skin. Then one night, this night after another such skin denuding beatings, an anguished Akintunde sought the cold of the water and his young wife, to sooth his pains.

However, as they eased their agonised bodies into the ditch, the slave master presented with a Book. Where the book carried, represented an agenda, brainwash Akintunde, then take off with his young Abeba. And just that he did, with a familiar story told—His sacrifice shall emancipate you. Then the deception—But you must slavishly follow it, without question, without critical thinking, more so this snippet, “Slaves be obedient to your master.” And the Book was blindly embraced by Akintunde. Without question. Without critical thinking. Without doubt.

Then centuries thereafter, burdening the people was a brutal Apartheid System. Those murders. Victimises. Discriminates. Demolishes. Destroying the psyche of Akintunde’s descendants. Then one night, one dark torturous night, one presented, an agent of the Apartheid Regime. One who undyingly embraces Apartheid. An unapologetic supremacist.

For his presence wasn’t serendipitous, since cognisant he’s of our infighting, and was set on adding fuel to the fire. Thus, a familiar narrative he presented—My Book of quasi-opinion polls shall emancipate you. Then a familiar deception—But disavow your leader you must. And slavishly the descendants of Akintunde repeated his tragic mistake—Blindly embracing another Book, even as they contemplated sacrificing their leader, without question.

1. If that Book could’ve emancipated us, wouldn’t that have been detrimental to the slave master interest?
2. If that poll could’ve emancipated us, wouldn’t that have been detrimental to PPP interest?
3. Why many amongst us, not critical thinkers?

Opinion polling

Opinion polling, with genesis in America, dates back to the nineteenth century. Where based on the data collected, it can be broadly classified qualitative or quantitative. However, impractical it’s to poll an entire electorate, which in some countries may be in the hundreds of millions. As a result, a minimum representative number of the population, is computer generated.

Which now takes us to Bisram’s polling of 570 participants, of which the generation of 570 is unknown. Was it computer generated? Was it guess work? Was it based on who turned up? Was it a predetermined 570 in Babu Jon? Was it a minimal representative number? For there are many questions with no answers, generating findings that lack credibility, reliability and validity. Where reliability speaks to reproducibility of the results, if polling were repeated, whilst validity speaks to accuracy.

Then the issue of data collection must be considered, since if of the wrong modality, reliability and validity would also be adversely impacted. For example, data collection via telecommunication is likely to exclude the elderly and low socioeconomic groups, who are less likely to own a mobile phone. Via person-to-person younger voters are likely to be excluded. Via postal, then the indigenous and squatters may be excluded. Via internet or social media, the elderly is excluded.

Therefore, again in Bisram polling, simply stating the polling was done by interviewing is absolute nonsense, since interviewing is possible with telecommunication or face-to-face etc. That is, the specific modality should’ve been stated.

Now the demographics, that is much more than race. For it includes age, race, sex education level etc. Which means, with Bisram only considering race, the polling lacks credibility.

Then the number out of the 570 persons who didn’t respond should be stated, since it directly causes non respondent bias. Case in point is, university educated Indians are less likely to vote race and more likely to vote AFC. If they aren’t covered in the polling, then the polling results would be biased against them, hence any conclusion determinant on them lacks credibility.

Further, Blacks who predominantly support APNU+AFC are less likely to partake in a Bisram polling. The result is, the PPP supporting Indian cohort is overrepresented, leading to the nonsense statistic of 80% popularity for the university dropout, along with a possible PPP landslide victory. Finally, is response biased, where the interviewees are led by the pollster to provide an answer of choice. This could be assessed by reviewing the interview questions.

Bisram ballocks

Which now takes us to the unknown of Bisram’s polls;

1. How was the sample size of 570 arrived at? Was it just who turned up?
2. What was the demographics of the sample?
3. Was the sample size computer generated, as a numeral representation of the population?
4. How was the data collected?
5. How was the margin of error calculated?
6. What’s the representative sample size?
7. How many from the sample didn’t participate? Nonresponse bias.
8. Was the sample extracted from the flawed voters’ list?
9. Where is NACTA website?
10. What similar polling was undertaken, along with election correlation?
11. Over what period was this polling done?
12. Is NAFTA registered with an oversight Polling Body?

Mark’s take

For this the reality, I’ve scoured the internet for NACTA website, but it’s non-existent. The fact is, pollsters wouldn’t release to the media, the details of the polling methodology, however they would be available on their websites for independent analysis. But of high suspicion, no such website or data exist for Bisram. Why? Concocted? To escape scrutiny?

Then this nonsense statement of Bisram undertaking polling since the 1980’s, which adds no credence to this quasi-poll, and only speaks to Bisram producing fake polls since the 1980’s.

Which means, we as a people need to exercise more caution when it comes to PPP and their sycophants, like Bisram. For this quasi-poll wasn’t designed to emancipate us, rather it only serves to place a spanner in the APNU+AFC advances, whilst setting an elephant trap for supporters.