The one I sent yes.

I meant the Australian guy who replaced Ebin actually.

Nah.

Figures.

Also

Does anyone else think this damages the pollster's reputation?

Gallup has posted some very pro-GOP material before. I think ultimately individuals offer requests for information which they know will provide a certain result and Gallup acquiesces.

They're likely personally asked by someone prominent/perhaps paid off to conduct research in this area.

I don't doubt the accuracy of the result however.

Teachers tend to be a very left wing slanted profession.

In this particular poll it was left open-ended

It may have been in COMPARISON to the nearest suggestion. Many perhaps said "I don't know" or perhaps there were many options.

But yes, that's definitely worrisome.

They should have provided more information to clarify what they mean by "overwhelming"

Pretty much yes

Once you get into it it's very vague and hard to tell how "overwhelming" is defined

Multiple-choice plus multiple similar answers

Just a sloppy poll job IMO

https://news.gallup.com/poll/231224/teachers-prioritize-gun-control-prevent-shootings.aspx

Later on they get actually asked questions

Ultimately the poll was probably paid for by someone because no one really cares what teachers think

They're not security professionals or anything and it shows with the second actual policy question, where the "somewhat effective" category is cut by nearly half and goes entirely into "not effective at all," representing that probably about a tenth of the teachers actually looked into school security.

So 67%.

It adds up to over 150% so you can't tell how many answered the exact same way.

Very true.

It's very possible that everyone who said "just ban guns" gave out every other answer with gun control.

The second half is much more credible.

Ah, I see that. Open-ended.

Yes, very shoddy display.

Yep.

Pretty funny that every question in the second half of the poll got over 50% "effective"

"Require background checks" got like over 85% effective however.

"More background checks" is a classic inbetween position which allows you to not take a firm stance.

Despite it never been proven to work.

Indeed.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/summary.do?id=1512010&t=d&l=en
2017/2931(RSP) - 15/11/2017 Text adopted by Parliament, single reading
European Parliament Legislative Observatory Procedure
Remember that Poland is in the right!
"ensure that anyone who expresses an intention to seek asylum or international protection at Poland’s borders enjoys full access to the Polish asylum procedure in line with international obligations and EU law;" (so illegals flood into Poland)(edited)
"repeal the law on establishing a National Institute for Freedom - Centre for the Development of Civil Society, which hinders access to state funding from critical civil society groups;" (so pro-EU shills attack Poland as a fifth pillar)
"investigate media reports of police surveillance of opposition and civil society leaders;" (so criminals get away with it just for being involved in politics whatsoever)
"take a firm stand on the rights of women and girls by providing them with free contraception and accessible without discrimination;" (so Poland needs to pass a new welfare program providing free contraception for all, and they need to provide it to underage girls without discrimination to feed them to pedophiles)
"take appropriate action on and strongly condemn the xenophobic and fascist march that took place in Warsaw on Saturday, 11 November 2017" (11 November is literally Poland's independence day. This is like telling Americans we can't celebrate the Fourth of July.)
And worst of all, given the prior condition...
"respect the right to freedom of assembly;" (but only for proponents of the European Union)
The EU wants to make Poland into a satellite state with less control over its own affairs than the Polish People's Republic had.

In the future all of our kids will be forced to read Autobiographies by Homosexual YouTubers.

cringe

Well let’s hope it doesn’t happen