Again, you could prove yourself right. But right now, anyone with any smidgen of stats understanding knows you’re not telling the truth.
According to you, you could easily prove yourself right by sharing the results of a quick search…
Response bias exists, but there’s no “oh, under 10%, we chalk that up to response bias.”
Again, you could prove yourself correct with a sinple link. According to you, it’s just a quick search away. If you’re telling the truth, well boy, isn’t it kind of weird to keep responding instead of taking the handful of seconds to prove yourself right?
Lol feel free to share a reasonable link but having done a heavy stats degree, I’ve never encountered this. I could call the former chair of statistics Canada and ask but again, pretty sure this isn’t a thing.
It’s just so weird, when confronted with actual proof you’re going to make up statistical practices?
The wildly charitable interpretation, maybe you are getting confused by sample size or something? It wouldn’t apply here but…
As for the exit poll, amounts below 10% are generally considered response bias.
But that’s not at all a thing in statistics. I’m not sure what you’re misunderstanding but you can’t just make up arbitrary cutoffs, that’s not at all how it works.I get that you’re unhappy you’re wrong but pretending stats are however you feel is just silly.
As for the exit poll, amounts below 10% are generally considered response bias.
Sorry what? Where is this coming from?
It’s far, far more important to give the 6 million Biden voters who didn’t come back in 2024
About the same number of Biden voters were trump voters in 2016: https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results
In other words, folks who are actually persuadable.
Meanwhile, if those 6 million want to help trump’s agenda by sitting out again, that’s horrific ahit with which they have to live. (Holding American Democracy hostage because you want everyone to be more progressive is pretty goddamn terrible.)
As much fun as characterizing half the country is, according to exit polls, 7% of Biden voters voted for trump in 2016.
https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results
they will never vote for you.
As much fun as characterizing half the country is, according to exit polls, 7% of Biden voters voted for trump in 2016.
https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results
In other words, it’s even more important to convince Republican voters to switch.
Running up the margins in blue states doesn’t help.
… That’s not what a monopoly is. There is competition, Fox is the most popular.
No idea on satellite tv but you’re welcome to share some stats.
And as you may know, news or attack ads online can feature say, an interview that was aired on Fox news without people actually having to watch Fox news. Wild eh?
A) blaming everything on tiktok and twitter is a little silly. (Though, I’d day the most effective part of that was convincing progressive allies to help trump by not voting.)
B) you should look at the exit polling, the top concern for trump voters was the economy and the border.
https://www.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0
Which is why, going on TV saying your end goal is to abolish borders is mind bogglingly unhelpful. No, people probably don’t like trump’s approach to the border but to then have someone argue their approach is no borders… just, goddamn that is so unhelpful.
We might even win back a true senate majority, soon!
This interview has likely made that task harder.
Yes, the DSA looked great in a primary against the Left half of the populace in Michigan and Maine. Maine, well, we saw the ungoodness there. In Michigan, the concern is that Sayed may be a weaker general election candidate than the alternatives. (Much like how a large part of the Dems’ chances in Texas is because Paxton won the primary and is considered a much weaker general election candidate.)
More importantly, the folks who might win the Senate for the Dems are coming from generally Red states, Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Which is exactly why this interview is goddamn terrifying! No Dem in the red states which are needed for the Senate wants to fight about abolishing prisons or the border.
You’re conflating Fox news watcher with trump voter.
Edit: Also, at least according to exit polls, 7% of Biden voters voted for trump in 2016.
https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results
The democrats just lost an election on inflation and the border.
Romer, DSA co chair, is out there saying the DSA wants to abolish prisons and borders. These are broadly unpopular positions which the Democrats now have to waste time and energy convincing people those aren’t their positions.
And Republicans, for all their faults, are great at tarring opponents. Those questions could be run on ads nonstop until after the midterms.
It’s more “Democrats are electing people who stand for incredibly unpopular positions, here are some of the crazies whom you’d support by voting Democrat.”
Same way we use the craziest Republicans as evidence of how dangerous that party is.
Ehhh, Buttigieg does it and does it well. But he is a very smart politician.
Megan Romer, DSA co-chair, is apparently not in his league and I think handed Republicans a cudgel at the worst time.
Given that the Republicans won the popular vote, that’s a wildly… Interesting position.
Joe Biden begs to differ.
If memory serves, it’s literally the most watched news channel in America and impressively, still watched by a swathe of independents.
But much more importantly, the ads that Republicans will run based on the interview will go well beyond Fox news.
Lol, I’m not the one lying to win an internet argument.
Again, you could easily prove yourself right by sharing the results of a quick search…
I cannot imagine being so sad as to have to lie to win an internet argument. I hope other parts of your life are better?