mozz

And because she unapologetically fucked over 95% of the committed Democratic support base who's in it for genuine and heartfelt reasons when she fucked over Bernie Sanders

Don't forget about that bullshit. Trump was still worse to a catastrophic degree, but that was her election to lose and she did everything in her greedy little disingenuous power to make sure she would lose it

I assumed you knew that since that's why you were linking it...

Obviously I knew that yes; as I already explained, that's why I asked. Have you not seen this before, someone asking a question they know the answer to as part of a debate to see the other's person's response before taking the next step in the conversation?

IDK, maybe I should change the way I talk to people on Lemmy. You seemed to be genuinely for-real confused by it and I've seen that before more than once (where people assume that I'm asking questions because I must not know anything about the topic).

So it excluded everyone younger than 22 and people who didn't vote in both 2020 and 2022...

Do you not understand how big of a demographic that is?

I do, yes. But I think that including it (including one factor that introduces, maybe imperfectly, an impact into the poll to account for different people having different probabilities of voting, instead of treating them all as the same) is better than treating all people as equally likely to vote, when clearly they are not. You wouldn't agree with that?

There's a difference between discounting a whole demographic (we polled only whites and not blacks) and selecting particular people to poll based on criteria which make them statistically more likely to impact the election.

No?

What are you confused about?

Not confused. I'm asking you a question to see if you know the answer. Your first try ("when only offered the choice of these two candidates") wasn't the answer -- when other candidates are included, Biden wins by 2% among all poll respondents. Want to try again or should I tell you? What's the question that leads to +9% and how is it different from the one you quoted?

I think working for leftist candidates sounds great. Working for better outcomes outside the electoral system sounds great. I think what people are telling you, that you're deliberately misinterpreting as "I should just shut up and be happy" or that you can't do those things for some reason, is that in this particular election it'd be good to vote for the better outcome instead of the worse one.

But yes, working for better candidates in general sounds great, working for Ranked Choice Voting to solve the problem at a little more underlying level sounds great. Working to try to misrepresent the best outcome that's currently available to make him look worse than he is (thus helping to promote an even worse outcome) sounds bad. Surely that all makes sense?

Yep, I read it. What was the question that led to +9 for Biden versus the question that led to +2 for Trump, again? It's two different questions to analyze statistically, and knowing which is which is pretty valid, yes.

Do you not think it's relevant to attempt to figure out, when you're polling voters, which ones of them are likely to actually vote in the upcoming election?

I mean I know that Trump is at this point leading by some small handful of percentage points of overall respondents in most head-to-head matchups. My point was that limiting it to likely voters seems like it makes a pretty dramatic difference. No?

Or asserting "everyone who disagrees with me is just calling me a Russian bot, definitely not putting up detailed reasoned arguments which I then pretend aren't happening"

Or repeatedly falling back on "OBVIOUSLY the economy is doing terrible, we all agree" instead of looking at historic union gains and low-wage earner gains even under punishing Covid inflation which yes they're not nearly enough but are actual progress in the right direction after God knows how long of nothing

Or posting clearly maliciously false criticism of Biden on things like marijuana or union support, and then falling back on "I'M ONLY TRYING TO HELP THE DEMOCRATS WITH MY WELL MEANING PUSHING OF HIM TO THE LEFT" and claiming they're being punished for their constructive criticism

Ask me if I'm salty about the overall nature of the discussion 🙂

One fascinating statement hidden in the article:

The Bloomberg News/Morning Consult poll of registered voters does not take into account how likely respondents are to vote in an election still more than six months away.

I thought yesterday about posting the story Joe Biden Has Stunning 9-Point Lead Over Donald Trump Among Actual Voters, but I decided that reporting on the polls as an indication of the quality of the candidate is just as misleading when it's pro Biden as anti Biden.

But, if we are going to treat the polls as things as newsworthy as the news likes to treat them, that little statement is a pretty fuckin significant oversight.

Same thing used to be true of social security, black people being allowed to vote, weed being legal, and lots of other things, until things changed

Maybe I'm talking out of my ass... I just saw this and jumped to an "okay I see how it is" reaction without knowing much about the game.

I mean, it would be possible for both to be true -- the game could be actually organically fun and well designed, and at the same time the promo + microtransactions teams are on point about how to squeeze people non consensually for money and eyeballs to accomplish their goals.

I have a prediction: Now that the USA people are waking up, the voting ratio on this comment (which wound up at currently a surprising-to-me 43:9 while most of them were asleep) will start to shift in the direction of many more downvotes, although it will continue to attract a trickle of upvotes.

Why is that, I wonder?

(I could try to disagree with the logic of saying "well now that we changed firefighters the amount of fire in the building is going down, BUT IT'S NOT OUT YET WTF ISN'T THAT CONVENIENT WHY DID WE EVEN BRING THESE GUYS INSTEAD OF THE GUYS WHO JUST START MORE FIRES," but I think looking into why this has such an unnatural pattern of voting is a little more interesting.)