Sweet Jesus the people in this country are fucking stupid.
The guy came a hallway short from ending democracy in our country and installing himself dictator and these stupid fucks want to give him another shot.
deleted by creator
To them, he came that close to success…
Germany did that too. But the guy did a lot better in the first term and installed himself as the only Leader. He even got imprisoned, yet he prevailed.
Please Murica, just do the right thing. The oter option isn’t great, but you’ll regret another Trump 4ys
When Trump lost, they decided (and were propagandized into believing) that democracy had failed. Many of them genuinely believe that the democratic party is a fascist entity bent on destroying America. That’s the scary part.
I think there are about three things in play here:
- Quite a lot of the republican base lives in a completely different reality thanks to campaigns of propaganda and destroying education. Charitably, the best way to describe these people is extremely ignorant. For them, these indictments are dem led witch-hunts that they mostly don’t believe, even when you can literally see the opposite. EG: Should presidents take classified documents? No. What are these pictures? those are classified documents at maralago. Did Trump do something wrong? Now let me tell you about Hunter Biden and the Biden crime family…
- Quite a lot of republicans are bordering on sociopathy if not pure evil. The party in particularly, and not the voters, know they’re peddling bullshit but they don’t care because it’s going to get them more money/power, which is the only real goal/ideology. Then you have the white supremacists and fascists that are just evil and are doing this for ideological reasons.
- Systems are designed in this country to perpetuate this. Literal minority rule is a founding principal of this country.
Calling on my fellow Canadians to grab their shovels and dig a trench along the boarder so we can push off into the ocean and away from this clusterfuck.
repubs are dumber than dogshit.
I’m sorry but if you’re going to try to overthrow thus democracy, you’re not going to do it with a bunch of lawyers.
They have been voting “red” and “blue” liars for a century sure they are stupid…
Keep in mind though that they are victim of propaganda, the whole system is rigged and needs to be healed
Okay, before people start beating me up, I’m not arguing for complacency, but this headline is more than a bit click-baity.
This is a small poll, and per the poll’s methodology (scroll down, keep scrolling… nope keep going… ok… there you go - emphasis mine):
The New York Times/Siena College poll of 1,329 registered voters nationwide, including an oversample of 818 registered Republican voters, was conducted in English and Spanish on cellular and landline telephones from July 23-27, 2023. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.67 percentage points for all registered voters and plus or minus 3.96 percentage points for the likely Republican primary electorate.
Not only did they over sample Republicans, their margin of error is almost 4% within that group.
This feels like the NYT attempting to establish a narrative based on a very small, biased sampling of data. Remember that the mass media wants to amp up the uncertainty levels (which drive engagement and advertising revenue), and with Trump basically blowing out the primary, they’ll need another spectacle to ensure that it appears to be a close contest down to the finish line. The timing of the poll release and the headline is also suspect, especially as this poll was taken before the news of the latest indictment, yet presented as if it’s a reaction to today’s news.
That being said, I think it is an accurate portrayal of sentiment from those who still consider themselves Republicans. I don’t believe, given the small sample sizes and admitted bias, that it’s an accurate picture of the country.
Again, that’s not an argument for political complacency - rather, it’s one against media driven narratives relying on biased polling that make you scroll down six pages of tables to find their methodology.
It’s also a telephone poll…that guarantees it’s mostly people 50 and older because who the fuck under 50 answers phone calls from unknown numbers?
I rarely answer calls from known numbers
I don’t even answer calls from me.
It’s OK, I don’t answer calls from you either.
That’s especially good since I haven’t been calling you, which means that’s a spoofed number
I’d answer your calls. Just call me 1-900-FAT-CHIX.
You’ll only make your mother cry.
Man, I actually answered a telephone pole a couple weeks ago. I was so excited to get his stupid poll while I was driving, and stuck in traffic. I figured I might as well sacrifice my 5 minutes (they claimed) to help get some more lefty numbers in their poll numbers.
Then it turned out it was a fucking poll for a natural gas company trying to greenwash their image and were looking for support for their anti-environmental ad campaign.
I was so bummed. Plus it took 45 minutes, fuck polls!
Why in God’s name did you give them another 40 minutes after finding out they lied?
I mean, I wouldn’t encourage any one to relax when it comes to Trump, but based on what’s up today, there is extremely low likelihood that Trump wins. People should realize just how unlikely it is for an incumbent to not get re-elected. Trump would have skated to re-election had he just not so catastrophically fucked up COVID and thus the economy. Again, not even be competent at it, just be less incompetent.
Biden probably has this in the bag barring some act of god. He’s going into '24 as one of the most legislatively accomplished presidents, great economic numbers including avoiding recession, etc. Then there is the whole “Trump might be in jail by the election” thing, and even if not in jail, he’s going to be so mired in legal proceedings it is unlikely he’ll be able to effectively campaign. DeSantis is a distant 2nd, and seems to be only widening that gap every time him or his campaign opens his mouth. The rest in this primary are auditioning for roles on Fox or lobbyist positions.
Again, I would not relax because if somehow Trump is elected we probably just sealed the countries fate into a full fascist dictatorship, but it’s just not likely.
Seriously.
I was thinking about this after my first comment.
“Was it mostly land line polling?”
Boomers. Nothing but Boomers and their lead ravaged brains. You could probably run the electricity for the Eastern seaboard with the amount of spinning happening in the graves of their parents.
This can’t be true,
Trump is a convicted rapist and known criminal that emboldened domestic terrorism.
Biden is actually doing a great job.
These two things are not equal.
I’m you from the future, people are really really really stupid.
They’re incredibly stupid in the present moment too. Stupidity is the great filter
Always has been.
👨🚀🔫👨🚀
…but, but, but Biden told those railroad workers to go back to work so the economy didn’t collapse, so you know, he’s just as bad as Trump!1!!
/s
I guarantee you that topic is going to come up more than a few times over the next few months from people who never intended to vote for Biden either way and instead are cherry picking bullshit topics to help sway others.
And we have to be ready to counter with the fact that Biden continued to put pressure and ultimately got the rail workers their sick days.
wow this is the first I’m hearing about this, thanks.
You don’t have to convince me. The problem is that the damage was done. FOX News will use this issue to attack Biden as being supposedly anti labor.
…while actively being anti-labor. Don’t forget that part. Conservatives don’t have a platform, they have the need to be angry at anything.
Legit didn’t know about this. It was one thing I was genuinely disappointed of
Trump is a convicted rapist
This is factually inaccurate. I’ll agree he is likely a rapist, but he was never convicted of rape. He was found liable for sexual abuse in a civil trial, but he was explicitly found not liable for rape in the E. Jean Carroll case.
This is in no way a defense is Trump, but those words have a specific legal meaning, and I think there are a million other ways to call Trump that are actually accurate.
What’s this mean? “Judge clarifies: Yes, Trump was found to have raped E. Jean Carroll” https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/
The judge is just saying that what he was found liable for could be construed as rape as the word is commonly used even if it’s not legally. Regardless of that, this article also makes the distinction that he is not convicted of anything due to it being a civil trial and not a criminal one. Saying he is a convicted rapist is still not correct.
gotcha, today I learned. thanks.
Bruh, this is America.
Biden’s administration is a lot better than Trumps. That’s a very low bar to cross. He and his administration is still trash. We needed another FDR after Bush Jr. We got another Bill Clinton, another Reagan, and a third Bill Clinton.
Biden’s administration is actually the second most effective in economic growth and public works projects after FDR. And it’s not even close.
Remember Clinton? That guy whom every liberal loved? All he did was privatize everything and trash our economy going into the 2000 recession.
I absolutely disagree he is not doing a great job he is horrible for the environment, arguably worse then trump.
When we are faced with the possible collapse of all civilization through climate change he could be argued as one of the worst presidents ever cause the longer we go without seriously addressing the cause of climate change the more serious the action needs to be.
Dude…Trump actively fought against CA to try and get their fuel standards thrown out. Like actively worked as hard as he could against the environment. He failed since he is chaotic and unorganized with a cabinet of crazies but that’s kinda the only reason.
https://www.levernews.com/biden-admin-boosts-big-oils-colorado-river-scheme/
And Biden just keeps expanding oil production.
Because trump was terrible for the environment, I’m never going to deny that, Biden needed to undo the damage done before him and make huge steps to protect the environment. He has failed on both.
One is convicted the other is not but they are both criminals and pedos.
Inform yourself, your country is corrupted as fuck, all politicians are liars, both “red” and “blue” have been pushing the same authoritarian measures and many of the key people working in the government never change
Being educated means knowing bOtH sIdEs is a bullshit erasure of nuance and serves no one except Republicans
All it takes is for Biden to develop a sudden health problem, as old people sometimes do; then it’s Trump vs Kamala Harris and we’re fucked.
Trump is only 3 years younger. They’re both old as fuck.
That and Biden still jogs and bikes. Trump has a hard time shuffling down a ramp.
And drinking water with one hand.
Similarly Trump could fall over dead tomorrow and then it’s old man Biden vs young . This is the current plan for any Republican currently in the race, the hope that Trump takes himself out, either via the legal system or just poor general health, and then they can swoop in and be Trump “lite”.
Trump could fall over dead and his cult of followers would still vote for him.
That would be good, wouldn’t it?
Yes, but I think the point they were making is that the plan to wait for trump to die is kinda pointless.
Well not if the dead guy actually won!
Similarly Trump could fall over dead tomorrow
Hamberder/Coronary for the win!
Yeah, but if it’s DeSantis the GOP is still screwed. Normal people hate him, too.
As long as the same two parties rule the country in a cycle you will always be fucked
There are different levels of fucked though.
And there’s also the possibility of not voting these two parties
Yes but no one here said they wanted to guarantee an advantage to Republicans, unless that is what you are saying?
How does not voting for these two parties advantages one or the other?
First Past The Post voting means that if you have one right-wing candidate get 40% of the vote, and three left-wing candidates get 20% each, the right-winger wins.
It’s not the system we want, but it’s the system we’ve got, and until we have the power to change that, it’s the rules we’ll have to work with.
Enough of this bullshit, any party has the same chances of winning the vote don’t trust the propaganda
You split the vote. If you would have voted for one of the parties but you instead vote for a third party, third parties are not going to win in this day and age and your vote can no longer support whichever of the two parties you prefer. If enough members of one party does that (because they have simmilar views), the party that doesn’t have some of their voters voting for a third party gains an advantage. It’s kinda dumb but it’s also why it was inevitable that this voting system would become 2 party.
We need Ranked Choice Voting for presidency ASAP. I am super happy to see that it’s making it’s way into some states lower votes. But to be honest out of all the things I vote on, the most important one feels like the President and that’s the one I want RCV for.
As long as people like you keep drinking the propaganda made by the two parties system that no third party can win, then no third party will ever win
Oh! Oh! You’re one of the 10k today! Watch this please. It’s awesome and 6 minutes. If that’s too long, watch it at 1.25x speed.
I’ll never understand why the DNC didn’t start grooming someone for 2020 immediately the day after the election in November 2016. Yet another tactical blunder that is so characteristic of the party.
They did. She didn’t stand out
Who are you referring to?
If anything this should scare the Democrats. Imagine if the Republicans nominated someone even slightly decent?
I said it after 2020 with all the trouble he had getting elected, Biden probably should be a 1 term president and not run for re-election.
Someone who is even slightly decent doesn’t have what it takes to get the Republican nomination.
I originally said “not Trump” And probably should stick with that. Basically that election was a 4 year referendum on Trump. That energized a lot of the Democrat base, and got the vote out. And Biden still struggled, when he probably should have destroyed him.
It honestly feels like both parties are choosing the weakest candidates over the last eight years.
It’s because the rich have essentially captured both parties. There are a HANDFUL of candidates in the democratic party and among independents who have not been basically bought and paid for, and still more out there who pretend to be to the left .
The democratic party’s only hope is REAL left-wing massive policy passage - the kind that cannot be ignored, that ignites a depressed, cynical voting base.
Instead, they constantly try to find some shitty halfway point between pissing off incredibly rich donors, and making the working class not want to burn everything down. What that effectively means policy-wise is - is instead of things like “universal free healthcare” we get a clone of Romneycare… with the public option stripped from it by another bullshit Republicrat / “bLuE-dOg” democrat… where insurance companies get paid no matter what… but you still can’t afford insulin.
All that then does is make people not show up for them - thinking the Democratic party - the only party NOT advocating for outright fascism - isn’t going to fight for their voting bases real tangible needs.
The same thing is going on everywhere, tbh.
Right-wing populist arseholes are gaining traction because the political mainstream has just been fucking us all over for decades.
WOAH
It’s almost like politicians will say whatever to get elected or something…so weird! This is probably the first time in American history a politician has lied for votes…I’m sure of it…
Agree.
We need serious political reform before that is likely to change. A country of 300+ million people with only 2 parties, and a choice between 2 weak old men. It is deeply depressing.
I fear the reform. Mostly because most reform won’t really change what people expect and we’ll just have a big upheaval to be back in the same place.
Let’s say we get rid of First past the post. But still the people with the most money will still win the presidency. Libertarians constantly talk about "Well if ranked voting had a "… What happens when people vote only for their favorite and don’t throw a vote to the libertarians? I imagine it’ll still be mostly two parties.
I love looking at Britain’s parliament. I love hearing about the “Pirate party” got a seat or what not. But yet when you hear talk of them, it always seems like the Labour or Tories are the only ones who have real power. I know the theory, and how the smaller groups get SOME say, especially when one group isn’t holding 50 percent of the house, but it’s still MOSTLY the voice of two parties… so what’s the major difference?
I mean we’ll progressives, and liberals, and they’ll form a coalition and get power… and it’ll be different than the modern democratic party because… umm?
(There are probably reforms that may make a major change, but I do feel like we’ll see the same system evolve quite often)
Heads up friend, the UK also has FPTP. We’ve effectively got a two party system because we have the same way of voting as you do. Even where a third party actually has a seat (like the SNP in Scotland), it just becomes a two party race between them and whichever of the two big ones the third party didn’t locally displace
Northern Ireland is basically the exception, as it has separate parties and its very specific history
Maybe I’m not understanding it, I thought the UK had an election for parliament, and parliament was divided by the percentage of votes each one got. You don’t for a specific representative, but rather a party. So if 49 percent of people voted for party A, 39 percent voted for party B, and 10 percent voted for party C, even if they aren’t all in the same area, 10 percent of parliament would be party C (and thus party A and Party B has to cater to party C’s desires).
Maybe it was the EU, but I thought the UK also worked like that, and at the very least in that situation party C has more power, but also both Party A and Party B could enact things for the public good as long as party C could be persuaded.
It’s possible you heard about the Scottish or Welsh parliaments within the UK (like a state government in the US, although with somewhat more power I believe), which partially work like that. Or you’ve just gotten us mixed up with one of our European neighbours that does do it. Sweden and the Netherlands use a system like you described.
The UK’s House of Commons, which I’ll refer to as Westminster going forward, is our equivalent to the American House of Representatives. We’ve also got the House of Lords, which is our equivalent to the Senate, but it’s unelected (largely chosen by each outgoing prime minister) and far, far less powerful than the US Senate. It can’t make Westminster pass or not pass something. Anyway, Westminster is elected by first-past-the-post. 650 constituencies, each one is considered totally separately from the other, highest number of votes for a candidate in that constituency gets the seat. Whichever party has the most seats gets to try to form a government first, either with its own majority, in coalition with a minor party if it doesn’t have one (happened recently with the Conservatives and the Northern Irish party the DUP), or just as a minority government if the opposition is unable to form a larger coalition.
Situations like you describe where A and B try to win the allegiance of C do happen, particularly when the Liberal Democrats were still a significant force as they typically sit somewhere between our A and B on a lot of matters. For whatever reason, smaller parties have persisted in some specific areas despite having no chance whatsoever of winning nationwide. The Northern Isles of Scotland are committed Liberal Democrat voters, for example, even though they’ve not been anywhere near winning nationally for a century. The C is now a pro-Scottish-independence party that is absolutely never going to agree on much with A, and which B is going to be hesitant to work with despite a number of similar policies because B doesn’t want Scotland to leave either, so A and B are looking at the really small parties to work with when they need to.
The Scottish and Welsh parliaments use a mixed system. Two thirds of the seats are appointed with FPTP, but everyone makes two votes. Your first vote is for your constituency just like in Westminster or the US HoR, but you also have a second vote for your region, a collection of about eight constituencies which also gets multiple seats. The regional seats are weighted so that parties that parties that are proportionately overrepresented get less of them, so the regions loosely counteract the imbalances of the first round. In Scotland, for example, the SNP typically wins a lot of seats in both Scottish and British elections. In the British ones this results in the SNP having a huge majority of Scotland’s seats (upwards of 90% some years) while only getting a little around 50% of Scotland’s votes. In Scottish parliament elections, they other parties that lost to the SNP in the first round get boosted in the regional round and it comes a lot closer to being proportional, resulting in an SNP-Greens coalition government.
Again, Northern Ireland is entirely its own thing, and this comment is already getting very long
Another reason to fear reform, the wrong reform might win and set us back further.
See, the leading candidate for election reform is currently Ranked Choice. RCV can lead to worse election outcomes than First Past the Post, and has lead to worse results in several US based elections already.
It’s a deeply flawed system that, on the surface, looks like an upgrade. And when people experience the flaws first hand, it makes them not want to try actual better systems.
Want a super simple system that easily outperforms RCV and FPtP? Try Approval, It’s been tried in a few US elections to good result.
If you want to be able to rank your candidate choices against each other and have it matter, try STAR, a voting system designed to be easily used and easily understood. Designed to take advantage of basic human psychology to get the best result.
The choice for the star rating to be 0-5 was very specific. Humans tend to group ratings at the edges and the middle in ranking systems. For instance, a rating system of 0-100 would see lots of 0, 1, 50, 99, 100. And that would be about all the points of the scale used. You might have one person out of a hundred who will use more, but mostly it’s going to be ratings at either end of the scale, and then smack dab in the middle. So the best rating system is actually the scale of 0-5.
Anyway. STAR takes that rating, then adds them all up for each candidate, the top two move on to the second round, where each ballot is examined to see who placed higher on that ballot. You count those ballots as their vote total. You also count the ballots where they were scored evenly and release that info as a “no preference” so that the winner knows what sort of mandate they actually have.
If you want to change things up, you could also do the average in the first round. It slightly changes how the votes are counted, with ratings of 0 actively hurting a candidate, but in testing it doesn’t seem to actually change the result.
Anyway, this whole tangent was about how RCV is bad, and saps political will from being able to implement actually good systems, which makes RCV even worse.
Oh, a final thought, with Approval and STAR, you can also ditch the primary elections. They can both handle more candidates natively, and perform better the more you have. RCV actually performs worse the more candidates you have, which has led to several of its failures.
Talking about different reforms, the tv show QI was talking about the best system for election… and they suggested choose someone at random from the populace. It would make bribery to get elected impossible, it’d eliminate the contentious elections, and a random selected person is likely more moral and a better leader than someone already in power now…
Not going to say it’s the best system, but I wouldn’t mind seeing it attempted once or twice, I do honestly believe it couldn’t be worse than the current systems.
Republicans can’t, though. I mean Trump started a literal insurrection on Jan 6 to try and overturn the last election. Do you really think he’ll just bow out gracefully if he somehow looses the primary?
I don’t know, and honestly it’s a long ways away still. However I don’t think he is that stupid. A lot of people make swipes at him, but people really underestimate him. The dude won the presidency in the first place, it’s like people calling George W. Bush a moron because of his verbal mistakes when public speaking. They may be dumb for presidents but they are presidents.
If the Republicans nominate Desantis, Trump could burn that bridge and fuck him over, or get behind him and play the “I helped him win” card and make him look like a “Kingmaker” whether he did anything or not. But I think completely screwing a Republican nominee over will harm his following a lot, as well as his legacy, and I imagine both of those are things he still cares about.
Or maybe he’ll go Scorched Earth because he really is that stupid… who knows, but I don’t think he’s really THAT crazy.
Being elected because your a genuinely awful person is not an indication of intelligence.
He really is as stupid as people say. Look at all the stupid shit he says. That’s not an intelligent person speaking. His sound bites sound even dumber in context than out. Like that time he very seriously suggested injecting bleach as a cure for Covid.
And no. Trump’s ego won’t let him take a back seat to anyone. Again: he incited an insurrection to over turn the last election. He’s a sore looser and will absolutely go scorched earth if he’s not handed the nomination (and/or looses the ‘24 election)
But I think completely screwing a Republican nominee over will harm his following a lot, as well as his legacy, and I imagine both of those are things he still cares about.
He’s old as dick, I don’t think he much cares about the next go round.
When people get older they stop caring about their current life and start thinking legacy. Tom Brady didn’t play his last two-three seasons in the NFL because he needed the money, or fame… he did it to prove a point/build his legacy/brand.
Bill Gates is a massive piece of shit, but there was a point he left Microsoft and started to care more about his legacy. He gave millions to fight diseases in Africa, and pretty much white washed his image… if it wasn’t for Jeffery Epstein… (but seriously Bill Gates is pretty horrible person his time at Microsoft show who he really was, also there’s a history of sexual harassment, as well as just adultry with staff under him, there that people forget about). This happens to almost every person over time, but it’s the truly rich who have the ability and luxury to realy decide their legacy.
Trump is pure ego… But I almost guarantee that he wants books to be written about him as a great president by someone. He doesn’t want to be seen as Nixon and vilified by almost everyone.
Piss off the Republicans, and he’ll have no one singing his praises.
deleted by creator
But a non Trump candidate wouldn’t fire up the Democratic base either, and steal some of the voters away from Biden at the same time.
There’s many democrats that even today say they didn’t vote for Biden, they voted against Trump and that was who the democrats picked. They might be saying that, but I think even someone like Ron Desantis might have good odds of winning. Basically it’s probably going to be a tight race if the Republicans don’t nominate Trump… And yet Trump’s the most likely nominee right now.
💀
Hey I didn’t say they WILL, I said IF.
Most republicans are registering democrat to throw a wrench in the primary and give RFK an artificial boost against Biden. Shitstain McGhee (trump) is just a distraction. They have their sights on the DNC itself. That’s where everyone’s attention should be at the moment.
The electoral system is built to favor small-population states. Since most of those states are deep red, Republicans have a massive systemic advantage. That’s how they stay competitive. Democrats have won the popular vote eight times out of the last seven out of eight straight presidential elections. Biden will most likely win the popular vote again, but the electoral count may say something different.
It makes me crazy that we’re even talking about this and it’s more than a year away. Our election cycles in the US are too damn long.
This is what happens when political parties are treated and viewed like sports teams
The USA votes it’s president in with the Electoral College. Every poll talking about “voters … tie … blah …blah …blah” doesn’t mean shit, cause the voters don’t get to pick the president. Their representatives do. And guess what, their representatives don’t have to represent them. They can vote however they want. They can even get elected and then switch parties to the bad guys team. Also, fuck the GOP.
clickbait
Also most of these surveys admit bias towards the right because it’s generally them that are stupid enough to do phone surveys.
what does doing phone surveys have to do with being stupid? what a dumb take
I think they are trying to relate being on the right to being stupid and that the right also tend to do phone surveys. Not relating being stupid to taking phone surveys specifically.
Not that i have any opinion one way or the other.
Just felt like you took the meaning of their comment in a way that was not intended.
they said “people that are stupid enough to do phone surveys” - this is pretty explicit in my view.
What they actually said was
Also most of these surveys admit bias towards the right because it’s generally them that are stupid enough to do phone surveys.
So, breaking that down, surveys are mostly done by people on the right. And its “generally them that are stupid enough” (so people on the right are stupid) “to do phone surveys”
So whilst op does seem to think you have to be stupid to do phone surveys, what they are trying to say is that people on the right are the only ones stupid enough to do them. Because people on the right are stupid.
Their representatives do.
Electors, not representatives.
And guess what, their representatives don’t have to represent them. They can vote however they want.
That depends on the state. While there are no federal provisions on how an elector should vote, several states do have rules requiring them to follow the popular vote. Additionally, the popular vote is used to select which electors (a.k.a. which parties electors) are sent.
Is this another landline poll? Those are notoriously and increasingly useless.
You mean you don’t take 15 minutes out of your day to answer random questions when a random phone number calls?
At this point I hope for pollsters to contact me just so I can see how the process works.
I think I got texted once about the 2020 election and that was it. People who don’t have landlines are invisible when it comes to polls like this.
I get texts ALL. THE. TIME. for surveys like this. It’s just another spam text. I actually went through all the hassle of filling the goddamn thing out one time because they were asking about a local office and I really cared about the candidate I wanted to win.
It was like 30 pages of questions asking the same three questions from every direction possible, and when I went to submit it there was an error and it told me I would not be able to submit or retake the survey.
I don’t do it anymore.
The New York Times/Siena College poll of 1,329 registered voters nationwide, including an oversample of 818 registered Republican voters, was conducted in English and Spanish on cellular and landline telephones from July 23-27, 2023. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.67 percentage points for all registered voters and plus or minus 3.96 percentage points for the likely Republican primary electorate
Landline and cellular plus an oversample of republicans? Maybe someone better at statistics can say why that was needed
Probably because the ratio of r:d is higher for actual voters than for registers voters.
If you have access, the ny times article goes into all of the methodology
Cross-Tabs: July 2023 Times/Siena Poll of the 2024 Race and National Issues https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/08/01/us/elections/times-siena-poll-registered-voters-crosstabs.html?smid=nytcore-android-share
Do they still really do landline polls? No one I know has a landline anymore. My neighbor tried to get one and the phone company told her it wasn’t possible.
It depends on your area. I live in a more rural area currently, and landlines are decently common. They’re more reliable than a cell phone depending on where you’re at. Some people even have them run out to their barns/buildings, just in case something happens.
Propaganda works great, doesn’t it?
These numbers never really matter.
They don’t, but it’s still interesting.
This should not even be possible. The propaganda machine in place since Nixon apparently works. People are fucking stupid.
With such a small sample all you can really take from this is that both parties will receive votes. This says next to nothing about how close the race will be.
I was going to point out that basically every reputable poll shows Biden with a strong lead but…
Oh MAH GAWDZ!!! FUCKFACE MIGHT WIN AGAIN!!! So everyone better get out to vote come next November. And while you are at it, also vote for all the local candidates and the like.
I am unsure what you are trying to say here. The “MAH GAWDZ” thing makes it seem like you are ridiculing the concept of going out and voting just because some polls say Biden has a strong lead. Yeah, doesn’t happen unless you vote.
Regardless of what polls say, vote…every time. Vote.
I feel like he’s saying that no matter how sure you are that bidens going to win, you should still go out and vote instead of staying home like “he’s winning even without my vote why bother?” because there is a chance however small that Trump might pull ahead.
Could you link to said reputable polls? Just for the sake of being thorough
None of this matters. I mean the DNC could run some octogenarian and Dem voters would happily vote for him/her. The RNC could run some octogenarian who was twice impeached and thrice indicted and the Republican voters would happily vote for him. It’s crazy town.
Without clicking the link, my assumption is they are both tied at 0, because neither of them should be running in the first place. Is if these are the two best candidates the DNC and RNC and produce, than maybe those two organizations shouldn’t exist anymore.
The DNC IS running an octogenerian, and I’ll vote for him, but not happily. Because the alternative is fascism.
On the other hand, it will be fun to vote against Trump a third time. Looking forward to the fourth time in 2028 as well (if he’s still alive)!
All of the polls are horribly off. Trump is way behind. Biden"s approval ratings are also way off. They are much higher than the media portrays it. This is just corporate media selling us a horse race and FUD for ratings as usual.
Don’t suppose you can back any of that up with, you know… facts?
Learn how to read poll numbers.
Here is a great example on this very poll. https://lemmy.world/comment/1956223
Polling is basically horrible. It is basically marketing. Its either marketing for a candidate or for news media. It is a tool used to control what you read and believe, rather than to inform.
