• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

STOP SHAMING TRUMP SUPPORTERS

WokeandBroke said:
Can you think of a time when the polls weren't right when it came to Donald Trump's presidential election campaigns?
Click to expand...

true. republicans are notoriously mistrustful of media and pollsters, so it's reasonable to think that this poll understates exactly how many rubes there are out there among the republican party
 
ChrisL68 said:
Like most things you're just wrong here since the national campaign polls were pretty much spot on.
Click to expand...

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/why-2016-election-polls-missed-their-mark/

The results of Tuesday’s presidential election came as a surprise to nearly everyone who had been following the national and state election polling, which consistently projected Hillary Clinton as defeating Donald Trump. Relying largely on opinion polls, election forecasters put Clinton’s chance of winning at anywhere from 70% to as high as 99%, and pegged her as the heavy favorite to win a number of states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that in the end were taken by Trump.

---

Again, your will to resist reality in favor of the comfortable is impressive. Useless, but impressive.
 
WokeandBroke said:
The problem is that the answer to your question assumes that you have the ability to calmly and soberly embrace and assess your own failures. I'm too old to continue making that assumption. If you were alive during the 2016-2020 and actually feel that the Democrats accepted the reality of the outcome of that election upon its own terms (rather than the ones you spun to stay comfortable), didn't launch a series of thirsty investigations that went nowhere (Bob Mueller might be walkin through that door, but he didn't bring anything with him), didn't impeach the President for political motives (twice, LOL), then there's nothing I can tell you that reality hasn't already beaten you about the face and neck with. Your will to ignore reality is superior to my desire to save you from yourself.

Meanwhile, I don't personally know a single Republican (and I know plenty) who thinks Trump won the election. It's obvious. Stop projecting your four years of denial onto a single mob of idiots. Imagine if every time Antifa burned a Target in Minnesota Republicans accused educated Dems of arson. Pretty dumb, right? So stop it. Log off. Meet some real people who disagree with you. It will be good for you.
Click to expand...


Sessions, Comey, Mueller, and Rosenstein, the guys who started and conducted the Russia investigation, are/were all Republicans, by the way. You see, the party, until recently, had a few hold overs with principles and beliefs that the Republic was more important than the Republican Party.
 
WokeandBroke said:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/why-2016-election-polls-missed-their-mark/

The results of Tuesday’s presidential election came as a surprise to nearly everyone who had been following the national and state election polling, which consistently projected Hillary Clinton as defeating Donald Trump. Relying largely on opinion polls, election forecasters put Clinton’s chance of winning at anywhere from 70% to as high as 99%, and pegged her as the heavy favorite to win a number of states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that in the end were taken by Trump.

---

Again, your will to resist reality in favor of the comfortable is impressive. Useless, but impressive.
Click to expand...
National polls had clinton up 2 and that's where the national popular vote ended. Is it kind of shoots holes in your fanciful theory that a national poll of republicans would be wildly off. If anything there would be a natural selection bias towards the not stolen side as that would be the more Country Club republicans who would be more likely to answer.
 
Last edited:
Chris, you gave JH a deflection point and he ran with it to avoid the pwnage. Shame on you!
 
Imagine saying "I don't know anybody who believes that" and then minutes later complaining that a poll of 1,552 people that shows hundreds of people believe it is "small sample size."

Then imagine thinking people should earnestly engage with you despite such arrogant ignorance.
 
the problem with Trump supporters is the sheer number of those who do believe it but won't admit it outside of their safe zones
 
Knowing a LOT of people who identify with the current state of the Republican Party is definitely something to aspire to for all of us.
 
“Impeached twice for political reasons” is a good one.

I don’t think he really believes in anything because I can’t remember a single discussion he’s had without obfuscation or spin. There’s no consistent pattern other than “whatever sounds better for my party”
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
If you want a real answer for the why doesn’t I got covid count is because not all covid infections are created equal. In a healthcare setting your number one job is to do no harm, which starts with protecting patients from yourself, be that vaccines, surgical masks, clean operating SOPs and and so forth.

So you develop a simple process for ensuring your patient population is protected, vaccines. Why is it simple, because it’s easily documented and their is way less person to person variability in immune response to the vaccine than to an actual viral infection. Yes, natural immunity can provide protection, and for some longer lasting or better than the vaccine, but others not so. What’s even better is prior covid plus singular vaccine, that I think with documentation there should be no need for a two shot vaccine regiment.

There’s the rub though, documentation, how are you proving your prior covid infection? Antibodies, those don’t necessarily correlate 1 to 1, and you would need to run a much more complicated test than the hey look you have antibodies thanks Ted cross, plus you are now introducing another layer and special process for those that were previously infected, and there’s no good answer why when those individuals can just get the vaccine, free, with no special process. What are you afraid of from a vaccine that mimics in a safer way the natural infection of covid which you already had?

What’s really happening is, one you have a bunch of people pushing natural immunity should count as a rallying cry for not getting vaccinated, even if they haven’t been previously infected, like it will be some chicken pox party even though the dangers are vastly greater. Second, you have a very very slim minority of healthcare workers making a lot of noise about not being vaccinated and getting fired when the numbers never match the outrage, like small percentages but in an already taxed system I suppose those can add up.
Click to expand...

there
 
WokeandBroke said:
Do you remember the 2016 Presidential Election polls?
Click to expand...

the problem is not the size of the sample

there are other ways to have bad data besides insufficient sample sizes -- the number of respondents is not an issue for what the poll is claiming -- can't speak to any other component of their methodology
 
Shooshmoo said:
You don't think that includes you?

Part of that definitely includes me. I don't think I have zero moral convictions or am in any position to judge what is hip or cool. I am also able to go a bit further than just knowing something is important (as are John Oliver and Trevor Noah).

But I would definitely want to be on the side of facts and knowledge, than be on the other side and be equally if not more smug, be operating completely outside of facts and knowledge, and base my morality and reality on a warped version of Christianity.

The idea that smugness and condescension is limited to one side is insane.

Anecdote -- no one on this board is more smug than JH.
Click to expand...

I'd focus primarily on these sentences then:

A politics that insists it has no ideology at all, only facts. No moral convictions, only charts, the kind that keep them from "imposing their morals" like the bad guys do.
Click to expand...

The knowing know that police reform, that abortion rights, that labor unions are important, but go no further: What is important, after all, is to signal that you know these things.

I don't know how many times electoralism or pragmatism or whatever it gets called trumps actual ideology or moral conviction, but it happens particularly in the space of the smug liberal more (in my observation anyway) than elsewhere. I think it follows logically from their theory of change, which gets internalized via university and a continuing series of meritocratic steps in an educated person's life. That is to say, if I make the right choices, get a good education, I'll get a good job, I'll make good money, I'll have upward mobility, and I'll have earned it all. That informs the ethos of access to political power too, the idea that you've participated and succeeded in an earned way which gives you your seat at the table, and your access to knowledge especially is something that makes your vote count. And it's really easy to look down on people who haven't gotten to the same place you have or in the same way you have to dismiss other access to power or theories of change.
 
PhDeac said:
Imagine saying "I don't know anybody who believes that" and then minutes later complaining that a poll of 1,552 people that shows hundreds of people believe it is "small sample size."

Then imagine thinking people should earnestly engage with you despite such arrogant ignorance.
Click to expand...

Rather than debating issues with actual human beings, you all insist on arguing against a boogey-man. If you're going to ascribe this point of a view to a significant number of 80M people, I don't think a single occurrence is too much to ask.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
the problem is not the size of the sample

there are other ways to have bad data besides insufficient sample sizes -- the number of respondents is not an issue for what the poll is claiming -- can't speak to any other component of their methodology
Click to expand...

I think a lot of trauma could have been/can still be avoided if you all didn't see out bias confirmation in artificial factors like polls and internet message boards.
 
The main GOP project at the state level is audits and curbing voting rights. I can't tell if you're gaslighting or honestly think your buddies at the country club are representative of today's Republican Party.
 
WokeandBroke said:
Rather than debating issues with actual human beings, you all insist on arguing against a boogey-man. If you're going to ascribe this point of a view to a significant number of 80M people, I don't think a single occurrence is too much to ask.
Click to expand...

you keep saying 80m as if that was the vote count. i guess inflating the number helps you sleep better at night?
 


Some very good snippets from this interview:

“There’s this illiberal desire to attribute peoples political motivations to something essential to their being that makes them irredeemable”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top