Editing 1625: Substitutions 2
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
| {{w|Poll}} | | {{w|Poll}} | ||
| {{w|Psychic reading}} | | {{w|Psychic reading}} | ||
− | | A 'poll', especially regarding political issues, refers to {{w|opinion poll|opinion}} or {{w|exit poll|exit}} polls. These tend to ask a carefully selected sample (for either balance or an intended ''inbalance'', depending on the poll's neutrality) their opinions in order to extrapolate the global consensus, e.g. the future result of an {{w|election}}. This substitution is Randall's way of saying that they could just as well have used a {{w|psychic}} person to predict the result. | + | | A 'poll', especially regarding political issues, refers to {{w|opinion poll|opinion}} or {{w|exit poll|exit}} polls. These tend to ask a carefully selected sample (for either balance or an intended ''inbalance'', depending on the poll's neutrality) their opinions in order to extrapolate the global consensus, e.g. the future result of an {{w|election}}. This substitution is Randall's way of saying that they could just as well have used a {{w|psychic}} person to predict the result. A true psychic (if that they are) would reveal an accurate result, whilst a false one (skilled at 'cold reading' an audience) would likely wish to provide the answer that pleases those asking the question (the actual purpose of some polls), or else attempt to provide their actual 'best guess' as to future outcomes in order to improve their own legend. |
|- | |- | ||
| {{w|Candidate}} | | {{w|Candidate}} |