Lol Republicans want no penalty if he's convicted, but I'm willing to bet those assholes would throw the whole library at any minority breaking the law or woman seeking an abortion.
this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
312 points (93.8% liked)
politics
19107 readers
3040 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm not super trusting of polls anymore, especially because they're usually done by telephone. However-
The poll had a sample of 1,032 adults, age 18 or older, who were interviewed online; it has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points for all respondents.
This makes me a little more trusting despite that whopping MoE. It sounds like bad news for Trump overall.
I have a related degree. The reason people distrust polls, is because the media frequently misreports or misrepresents them.
Eg. aggregated polling from the 2016 suggested Trump had a 1/3 chance of winning. If you believed some media coverage every poll said Clinton was certain to win. That was how the media reported on the polling, not the polling itself. Invariably Trump winning in 2016 was within the margin of error.
that whopping MoE
Not a large margin of error. You're extrapolating from 1000 people to 300 million. It's astonishing it's that low if you think about it.
because they’re usually done by telephone
Not that common anymore. Often they'll do a a telephone poll then supplement it with online or other methods. Here's IPSOS's article about this poll:
The study was conducted online in English. The data for the total sample were weighted to adjust for gender by age, race/ethnicity, education, Census region, metropolitan status, household income, and political party affiliation. The demographic benchmarks came from the 2022 March Supplement of the Current Population Survey (CPS). Party ID benchmarks are from recent ABC News/Washington Post telephone polls.
I remember reading 538 leading up to the 2016 election, and hearing them say repeatedly that if Trump has a 1 in 4 chance (or whatever amount) of winning the election, not only is it possible for Trump to win, but in fact it means you actually expect it to happen in 1 out of 4 times.
Yeah I remember this too. I think the problem is that people simply don’t understand statistics and don’t realize a 70% chance of winning is totally different from getting 70% of the vote. I like what 538 has been doing in recent years by presenting odds rather than percentages, but people like echo chambers that confirm their biases so idk if this “polls don’t work” narrative is going to go away any time soon.
That's the article that has caused me to trust 538 above any other election prediction source. When HRC was doing a preemptive victory lap in Texas and HuffPo was publishing articles that said she had a 99% chance of winning, Nate Silver and Co were the only ones willing to admit the possibility of what would later become reality.
And then the big companies came in and wrecked 538.
Ok, fair enough. I defer to your expertise.
Indeed, the problem isn't polls themselves, assuming they're well constructed they're generally sound data, it's the interpretation and packaging of it as reported to the larger populous that gets in the way. Sometimes it gets to the point of funny when someone does an infographic where 30% and 60% somehow appear to have the same weight.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics...
Not that it matters here, but in case you want to use them somewhere serious:
Populous is an adjective
Populace is a noun
Thus why I'm not a writer, but at least the intent was there 🙂
I'm doing good if it doesn't look like a drunken baboon wrote it sometimes due to fat finger typing.
Considering people tend to view probability as 100% A, 100% B or 50-50, I'm not sure showing a 30-60 split as the same weight is really a bad choice...
My biggest issue with polls is that the media tout them as predictions, ignoring the fact that even if the data is 100% valid, circumstances can change dramatically in just a couple of days.
I maintain that polls are not actionable data for voters. They can help campaigns see trends and gauge the effectiveness of messaging, but they are useless to voters.
They can and do change in just a couple of days, but the real issue is that the media invariably fails to mention the margin of error or confidence interval.
It's always Candidate A 51%, candidate B 49%. When in reality it's inevitably something like "There's 19/20 chance that candidate gets between 48.5-53.5% of the vote, and that candidate gets between 46.5-51.5% of the vote."
And then when candidate B wins, the media will go "Why did the polls get it wrong?" when the election was always to close to call definitively.
Oh, and this is obviously ignoring the far more sinister use of misrepresented polling data, micro-demographically targetted thanks to big data harvested from social media. Think Cambridge Analytica algorithms which have determined that women in village X with one child and dog, being more likely to vote party Y, and then targetting them on social media with stories about the polls showing the result is a foreglone conclusion and that there's no point voting.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The 2 percent of Democrats who don't think he's guilty are suspect at least.
load more comments
(14 replies)
Bad news, the court of public opinion has or should have little to no bearing on legal proceedings.
But hey great news, the court of public opinion has or should have little to no bearing on legal proceedings.
The court of public opinion has a lot to do with an election, however. And that's the problem for Trump now.
Yep. Trump's only way of actually staying out of prison at this point isn't winning in an actual courtroom. It's delaying the trials for as long as he possibly can and then winning the general election.
So polls that show he's unlikely to be able to do so are indeed bad news for him.
Luckily for us, that can't keep him out of Georgia prison. He can only pardon himself of federal charges. Granted I don't think he has a chance in a general election. The Republican party is so screwed up they keep picking more and more extreme candidates even though those candidates usually lose in the general.
It shouldn't be the case but it's not unlikely that I'd he was already president, he would not be imprisoned while serving.
Impeachment is meant to be the way to remove him of that were the case but we've already seen that impeachment is now only a political tool for bashing your opponent when one party will exonerate trump from repurcuasions when clearly found guilty.
If he is president, he'd likely stay out of prison until he serves his term. At his age and health, he'd likely be dead by the end. When you're facing prison at his age, postponing it for 6 years is as good as getting off.
When you get to the second question, "Do you believe that Donald Trump is guilty of the alleged crimes in the federal 2020 election subversion election case?" and 14% of Republicans think he is guilty. If they are unwilling to vote for Trump, that's potentially an election flusher. While popular vote doesn't win elections (Hillary pulled 2.1% more of the popular vote than Trump in 2016), it can shift the electoral college votes in states, turning red states (potentially) to blue.
In the 2020 election, Trump won North Carolina (15 electoral college votes), Trump got 2,758,775 votes, Biden 2,684,292. If 14% of the republicans abstained from voting in 2020, Trump would have received about 2,372,547 votes, losing the state to Biden rather than winning it.
Yes, Trump lost to Biden anyway in 2020, but Republicans that won't vote for Trump, nor a Democrat, just won't vote. And voters not voting can shift Electoral College votes in states.
Relatively small shifts on the margins can have huge consequences in the electoral college.
It has a lot to do with it. Where do you think a jury comes from?
Jesus fuck, look at those republican numbers. Fucking cunts live in an imagined fascist state that they’re trying to make real.
I have some MAGA family who brush away all these indictments by saying, "The deep state doesn't want him to win."
I have no idea what it's going to take for these cultists to drop their Trump
Nothing. We win elections in 2024 and exceed how many voted last time. Volunteer with voting groups and get people registered and aware of how important it is.
Once some normality is restored, only then do these people realize the world moved on without them and possibly stop.
looks exactly like every other poll about him since like 2015
I don't care what anyone thinks, including myself. I want the legal system to do its job correctly. Nothing more, nothing less.
view more: next ›