New Gallup Poll on the Assassination

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

As the graph shows, that is a slight rise from when the question of conspiracy was asked at the 50th anniversary but the
difference is within the 3% margin of error that is normally associated with polling data. The 61% result in 2013 could
indicate an actual number of 64% and the current 65% result could indicate an actual number of 62% so statistically the
difference is insignficant. I was mildly surprised the number had reason since it had been trending downward, but as I
pointed out, that could simply be attributed to the margin of error.
In the past ten years, there have been almost no new developments or revelations that would be likely to cause a change in
opinions one way or another. I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

This part of the poll is interesting: to wit, the conspiracy "view is less prevalent among Democrats (55%) than Republicans (71%) and independents (68%)."
I would guess the increase among Republicans is due to the Russian collusion claims against Trump, the perception by Republicans that the "deep state" is corrupt and that in this view just as "they" tried to get Trump they "got" JFK. So, it comes from a increasingly negative view of the CIA/FBI/security state.
These assassination polls seem to reflect the prevailing views of "the government" at the time they were taken. During the 1970s and the revelations of the CIA abuses and Vietnam the conspiracy view increased. Those numbers declined in the 1980s and 1990s when a more positive - or less negative - view of them changed.

Steven Galbraith

2023-11-22 17:24:37 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

As the graph shows, that is a slight rise from when the question of conspiracy was asked at the 50th anniversary but the
difference is within the 3% margin of error that is normally associated with polling data. The 61% result in 2013 could
indicate an actual number of 64% and the current 65% result could indicate an actual number of 62% so statistically the
difference is insignficant. I was mildly surprised the number had reason since it had been trending downward, but as I
pointed out, that could simply be attributed to the margin of error.
In the past ten years, there have been almost no new developments or revelations that would be likely to cause a change in
opinions one way or another. I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

To put it differently: these polls have less to do with what people know about the assassination and more to do with the prevailing view of "the government."

Hank Sienzant

2023-11-22 18:28:48 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

As the graph shows, that is a slight rise from when the question of conspiracy was asked at the 50th anniversary but the
difference is within the 3% margin of error that is normally associated with polling data. The 61% result in 2013 could
indicate an actual number of 64% and the current 65% result could indicate an actual number of 62% so statistically the
difference is insignficant. I was mildly surprised the number had reason since it had been trending downward, but as I
pointed out, that could simply be attributed to the margin of error.
In the past ten years, there have been almost no new developments or revelations that would be likely to cause a change in
opinions one way or another. I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

To put it differently: these polls have less to do with what people know about the assassination and more to do with the prevailing view of "the government."

When the Democrats are in power, Republicans are more likely to lean toward distrust of government and hence, conspiracy.
When the Republicans are in power, Democrats are more likely to lean toward distrust of government and hence, conspiracy.

Steven Galbraith

2023-11-22 19:00:42 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

As the graph shows, that is a slight rise from when the question of conspiracy was asked at the 50th anniversary but the
difference is within the 3% margin of error that is normally associated with polling data. The 61% result in 2013 could
indicate an actual number of 64% and the current 65% result could indicate an actual number of 62% so statistically the
difference is insignficant. I was mildly surprised the number had reason since it had been trending downward, but as I
pointed out, that could simply be attributed to the margin of error.
In the past ten years, there have been almost no new developments or revelations that would be likely to cause a change in
opinions one way or another. I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

To put it differently: these polls have less to do with what people know about the assassination and more to do with the prevailing view of "the government."

Simple rule (not much new with this point): people tend to trust an institution more when they or their people run them and lose that trust when the "other side" runs them. But I think in particular the view by Republicans that the "deep state" tried to remove Trump is something different than the usual "my guy good versus your guy bad" tribalism.

Ben Holmes

2023-11-30 20:52:44 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 11:00:42 -0800 (PST), Steven Galbraith

Simple rule...

Coming from you, "Simple lie..."

Ben Holmes

2023-11-28 21:05:14 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 10:28:48 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<***@aol.com> wrote:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?

Ben Holmes

2023-11-28 16:07:35 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 09:24:37 -0800 (PST), Steven Galbraith

To put it differently: these polls ...

Denigrate them, it's all you can do.

Chuck Schuyler

2023-11-22 21:34:37 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

As the graph shows, that is a slight rise from when the question of conspiracy was asked at the 50th anniversary but the
difference is within the 3% margin of error that is normally associated with polling data. The 61% result in 2013 could
indicate an actual number of 64% and the current 65% result could indicate an actual number of 62% so statistically the
difference is insignficant. I was mildly surprised the number had reason since it had been trending downward, but as I
pointed out, that could simply be attributed to the margin of error.
In the past ten years, there have been almost no new developments or revelations that would be likely to cause a change in
opinions one way or another. I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

I noted earlier this year that I thought that very thing would pop up in polling for the 60th anniversary.

Ben Holmes

2023-12-01 00:48:23 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 13:34:37 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler

Post by Chuck Schuyler
I noted earlier this year that I thought that very thing would pop up in polling for the 60th anniversary.

Still the interest you assert doesn't exist...

Ben Holmes

2023-11-29 17:53:32 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 08:52:36 -0800 (PST), Steven Galbraith

Post by Steven Galbraith
This part of the poll is interesting

You just HATE the polling results...

Hank Sienzant

2023-11-22 18:25:17 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

Well, one development. Older people who remember the assassination and the coverage and the investigation die off, younger people who remember the movie "JFK" take their place. We are now further removed from the release of the movie JFK (32 years) than we were from the release of the Commission 26 volumes of evidence at the time of the movie (27 years). If people weren't knowledgeable enough about the facts of the assassination in 1991 to know the movie was nonsense, why would anyone expect people not even alive in 1963 or 1991 to be knowledgeable about the assassination?

The polls are meaningless, except to show how little knowledge about the assassination younger people (those younger than 60 were born after the assassination) really have.

Post by JE Corbett
I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

JE Corbett

2023-11-22 21:16:34 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

Well, one development. Older people who remember the assassination and the coverage and the investigation die off, younger people who remember the movie "JFK" take their place. We are now further removed from the release of the movie JFK (32 years) than we were from the release of the Commission 26 volumes of evidence at the time of the movie (27 years). If people weren't knowledgeable enough about the facts of the assassination in 1991 to know the movie was nonsense, why would anyone expect people not even alive in 1963 or 1991 to be knowledgeable about the assassination?
The polls are meaningless, except to show how little knowledge about the assassination younger people (those younger than 60 were born after the assassination) really have.

I think boomers are more apt to believe in conspiracy because they had a direct emotional attachment to JFK and are less
likely to look at the event dispassionately. Emotion overtakes reason. I wonder what the breakdown would be among
boomers, Gen-X, millennials (what happened to Gen-Y), and Gen-Z. While were at it, why did they start with Gen-X. We've run
out of letters already. Why didn't they start with Gen-A? But I digress.

A generational breakdown might be revealing. I wonder how many of Gen-Z have even seen the movie JFK. I wonder how
many actually care whether or not there was a conspiracy? The JFK assassination is to them what the McKinley assassination
was to our generation. I don't recall ever having a discussion about that with anybody I knew.

I think we can make a few generalizations. Few people, regardless of generation, have bothered to read the WCR. I'll bet
the numbers who have bothered to read any conspiracy book are a minority. Those who can identify the key players in
the event are even smaller and those who can identify minor players (Newmans, Paines, etc) smaller still. In short most
people, regardless of age, have taken the time to educate themselves about the basic facts of the event. A majority who
are old enough to remember the movie JFK probably got most of what they know about the assassination from that
fictional work. Is it any wonder there would be so many misconceptions about the assassination.

Hank Sienzant

2023-11-22 23:50:24 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

Well, one development. Older people who remember the assassination and the coverage and the investigation die off, younger people who remember the movie "JFK" take their place. We are now further removed from the release of the movie JFK (32 years) than we were from the release of the Commission 26 volumes of evidence at the time of the movie (27 years). If people weren't knowledgeable enough about the facts of the assassination in 1991 to know the movie was nonsense, why would anyone expect people not even alive in 1963 or 1991 to be knowledgeable about the assassination?
The polls are meaningless, except to show how little knowledge about the assassination younger people (those younger than 60 were born after the assassination) really have.

I think boomers are more apt to believe in conspiracy because they had a direct emotional attachment to JFK and are less
likely to look at the event dispassionately. Emotion overtakes reason. I wonder what the breakdown would be among
boomers, Gen-X, millennials (what happened to Gen-Y), and Gen-Z. While were at it, why did they start with Gen-X. We've run
out of letters already. Why didn't they start with Gen-A? But I digress.
A generational breakdown might be revealing. I wonder how many of Gen-Z have even seen the movie JFK. I wonder how
many actually care whether or not there was a conspiracy? The JFK assassination is to them what the McKinley assassination
was to our generation. I don't recall ever having a discussion about that with anybody I knew.
I think we can make a few generalizations. Few people, regardless of generation, have bothered to read the WCR. I'll bet
the numbers who have bothered to read any conspiracy book are a minority. Those who can identify the key players in
the event are even smaller and those who can identify minor players (Newmans, Paines, etc) smaller still. In short most
people, regardless of age, have ** NOT** taken the time to educate themselves about the basic facts of the event. A majority who
are old enough to remember the movie JFK probably got most of what they know about the assassination from that
fictional work. Is it any wonder there would be so many misconceptions about the assassination.

Fixed that for you.

JE Corbett

2023-11-23 03:35:16 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

Well, one development. Older people who remember the assassination and the coverage and the investigation die off, younger people who remember the movie "JFK" take their place. We are now further removed from the release of the movie JFK (32 years) than we were from the release of the Commission 26 volumes of evidence at the time of the movie (27 years). If people weren't knowledgeable enough about the facts of the assassination in 1991 to know the movie was nonsense, why would anyone expect people not even alive in 1963 or 1991 to be knowledgeable about the assassination?
The polls are meaningless, except to show how little knowledge about the assassination younger people (those younger than 60 were born after the assassination) really have.

I think boomers are more apt to believe in conspiracy because they had a direct emotional attachment to JFK and are less
likely to look at the event dispassionately. Emotion overtakes reason. I wonder what the breakdown would be among
boomers, Gen-X, millennials (what happened to Gen-Y), and Gen-Z. While were at it, why did they start with Gen-X. We've run
out of letters already. Why didn't they start with Gen-A? But I digress.
A generational breakdown might be revealing. I wonder how many of Gen-Z have even seen the movie JFK. I wonder how
many actually care whether or not there was a conspiracy? The JFK assassination is to them what the McKinley assassination
was to our generation. I don't recall ever having a discussion about that with anybody I knew.
I think we can make a few generalizations. Few people, regardless of generation, have bothered to read the WCR. I'll bet
the numbers who have bothered to read any conspiracy book are a minority. Those who can identify the key players in
the event are even smaller and those who can identify minor players (Newmans, Paines, etc) smaller still. In short most
people, regardless of age, have ** NOT** taken the time to educate themselves about the basic facts of the event. A majority who
are old enough to remember the movie JFK probably got most of what they know about the assassination from that
fictional work. Is it any wonder there would be so many misconceptions about the assassination.

Fixed that for you.

Thank you. Sometimes my fingers get out ahead of my brain.

I know I'm teeing it up for the CTs with that admission. Let them have at it.

Hank Sienzant

2023-11-23 16:42:53 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

Well, one development. Older people who remember the assassination and the coverage and the investigation die off, younger people who remember the movie "JFK" take their place. We are now further removed from the release of the movie JFK (32 years) than we were from the release of the Commission 26 volumes of evidence at the time of the movie (27 years). If people weren't knowledgeable enough about the facts of the assassination in 1991 to know the movie was nonsense, why would anyone expect people not even alive in 1963 or 1991 to be knowledgeable about the assassination?
The polls are meaningless, except to show how little knowledge about the assassination younger people (those younger than 60 were born after the assassination) really have.

I think boomers are more apt to believe in conspiracy because they had a direct emotional attachment to JFK and are less
likely to look at the event dispassionately. Emotion overtakes reason. I wonder what the breakdown would be among
boomers, Gen-X, millennials (what happened to Gen-Y), and Gen-Z. While were at it, why did they start with Gen-X. We've run
out of letters already. Why didn't they start with Gen-A? But I digress.
A generational breakdown might be revealing. I wonder how many of Gen-Z have even seen the movie JFK. I wonder how
many actually care whether or not there was a conspiracy? The JFK assassination is to them what the McKinley assassination
was to our generation. I don't recall ever having a discussion about that with anybody I knew.
I think we can make a few generalizations. Few people, regardless of generation, have bothered to read the WCR. I'll bet
the numbers who have bothered to read any conspiracy book are a minority. Those who can identify the key players in
the event are even smaller and those who can identify minor players (Newmans, Paines, etc) smaller still. In short most
people, regardless of age, have ** NOT** taken the time to educate themselves about the basic facts of the event. A majority who
are old enough to remember the movie JFK probably got most of what they know about the assassination from that
fictional work. Is it any wonder there would be so many misconceptions about the assassination.

Fixed that for you.

Thank you. Sometimes my fingers get out ahead of my brain.
I know I'm teeing it up for the CTs with that admission. Let them have at it.

Nan, we all do that on occasion. No biggie.

Ben Holmes

2023-11-30 19:03:27 UTC

On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 08:42:53 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<***@aol.com> wrote:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?

Ben Holmes

2023-11-30 16:07:04 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 19:35:16 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett

Post by JE Corbett
I know I'm teeing it up for the CTs with that admission. Let them have at it.

Nah... your blatant lying and cowardice over-ride any minor mistakes
you make.

Ben Holmes

2023-11-29 19:09:57 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 15:50:24 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<***@aol.com> wrote:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?

Ben Holmes

2023-11-30 21:41:40 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 13:16:34 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett

I think...

Who cares what you think? How about what you can CITE FOR?

Ben Holmes

2023-12-04 19:22:27 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 10:25:17 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<***@aol.com> wrote:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?

David

2023-11-22 23:06:38 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

As the graph shows, that is a slight rise from when the question of conspiracy was asked at the 50th anniversary but the
difference is within the 3% margin of error that is normally associated with polling data. The 61% result in 2013 could
indicate an actual number of 64% and the current 65% result could indicate an actual number of 62% so statistically the
difference is insignficant. I was mildly surprised the number had reason since it had been trending downward, but as I
pointed out, that could simply be attributed to the margin of error.
In the past ten years, there have been almost no new developments or revelations that would be likely to cause a change in
opinions one way or another. I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

don't need no stinkin' "new developments," Rump Ranger... near 60 years now and you fools STILL can't close the '64 WCR. Incompetent nutters! And some around here uses a very apt term: "and THAT tells the whole story"....

Hank Sienzant

2023-11-22 23:50:57 UTC

Post by David

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

As the graph shows, that is a slight rise from when the question of conspiracy was asked at the 50th anniversary but the
difference is within the 3% margin of error that is normally associated with polling data. The 61% result in 2013 could
indicate an actual number of 64% and the current 65% result could indicate an actual number of 62% so statistically the
difference is insignficant. I was mildly surprised the number had reason since it had been trending downward, but as I
pointed out, that could simply be attributed to the margin of error.
In the past ten years, there have been almost no new developments or revelations that would be likely to cause a change in
opinions one way or another. I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

If not Oswald, who? Go ahead, we'll wait.

Ben Holmes

2023-11-30 00:44:22 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 15:50:57 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<***@aol.com> wrote:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?

Ben Holmes

2023-11-27 16:22:29 UTC

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 04:49:30 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

As the graph shows, that is a slight rise from when the question of conspiracy was asked at the 50th anniversary but the
difference is within the 3% margin of error that is normally associated with polling data. The 61% result in 2013 could
indicate an actual number of 64% and the current 65% result could indicate an actual number of 62% so statistically the
difference is insignficant. I was mildly surprised the number had reason since it had been trending downward, but as I
pointed out, that could simply be attributed to the margin of error.
In the past ten years, there have been almost no new developments or revelations that would be likely to cause a change in
opinions one way or another. I think a general distrust of the government had been on the rise in the last ten years and that
might make people more conducive to believing in a JFK conspiracy. One question pollsters almost never ask is whether
people believe Oswald was actually innocent. I think recognize that most people believe he was at leas complicit even if
they don't believe he acted alone. I would bet the number believing him to be innocent would be in the low single digits.
One other question I wish they would ask is, "Do you give a rat's ass?". I'm betting a solid majority would say NO.

Of course, Corbutt's presence here belies his faith in the
non-interest in the JFK case.

Bud

2023-11-22 19:20:28 UTC

Post by Bud
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514310/decades-later-americans-doubt-lone-gunman-killed-jfk.aspx

The problem I have with most of these polls is the wording used in the formulation of the question. Is the "one man" Oswald? I`ve never seen any other single person implicated. Are the "others involved" in cahoots with the "one man" (Oswald)?

Ben Holmes

2023-11-29 17:43:26 UTC