Please, you’re wasting your time explaining. I know all this. I’m talking about how a libertarian would interpret the question due to its ambiguous phrasing. My only point is that of the original parent comment: the methodology of the researcher is bad.

No, 0.05$ is not a substantial amount of money. A 5 percentage points tax increase could be considered substantial. The question is worded so that it can be interpreted in the latter way, and it’s also using a subjective word like “substantial”. Somebody who is politically against taxes is likely to interpret it the latter way, and hence the poll’s results are skewed by its vagueness.

If we want to measure math skills and understanding of the law, a better question would be by how many dollars the total tax would increase. This would also give us better information on how far off people are.

I mean I understand all of these things. But the question is worded in a way that can be interpreted wildly differently depending on the political affiliation of the person responding.

Yeah what does “substantially” mean in this context and what are we even measuring? In terms of percentage units, the step from 28% to 33% is definitely a substantial increase. The question doesn’t specify whether we’re talking about total dollars paid or just how much the tax percentage increases in that bracket.

They could have just polled how many dollars the total tax paid increases.

They’re basically “republicans light”: still bad but at least not literal nazis