Meanwhile, 60% in favour of EU accession and those are numbers from just before the current escalation and with the fisheries policy still being a giant unsolved issue. Might actually fall under the bus because tough luck getting the parliament to reform it if there's no need and with all those minerals Greenland isn't as keen on fishing, any more.
I understand this is a joke and all, but this is about 1% of the population. I don't know how easily Greenlanders have access to the internet and such and how this was distributed, but I actually think 1% is not a bad turnout here
If the polling organizer did its job correctly and removed bias from their sampling, a beautiful law in statistics has been proven, stating that small-ish samples are representative of the whole population if it follows e.g. a normal distribution. It's called "law of large numbers".
Is 500 really big enough to get a proper spread though? Iirc my statistics course (which i don't all that well tbf) you need a pretty significant sample still, would think a few thousand at least
That's 1% of their population. For comparison, if you polled Spain's 1% of population, it would have been around 470.000 people (I'm using the 47.000.000 population from memory though)
A general rule with polls is that you'll never get a result below 5% on a question with 2 options. Those people mostly weren't paying attention, didn't understand the question, didn't care or intentionally chose a contrarian response.
They would be, but the opinion of the common folk lend a lot to where a particular war goes. The United States are not as top-down as the administration and media would have you believe.
The Iraq war had a lot of initial support which dropped off quickly. This war? I don't even see it having that first push support.