this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
595 points (92.9% liked)

politics

19103 readers
4467 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nac82@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

But under what factual basis are you discarding a 900 person sample size?

I dont remember polls insisting Clinton would win, I remember dumb people saying thats what polls said, and your source makes me not feel shifted in that opinion.

A 3% margin on a poll in no way is declaring total victory to anybody.

Many of the polls you just shared have a 1% difference in support rate.

So you think a 1% better polling rate is " declared total victory for Clinton" but feel confident in discarding a 900 person sample?

If there was 10k people in the polls ypu are referencing, you are using 900 people as proof of absolute victory lol.

[–] Dive@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (11 children)

i dont know what point of mine youre arguing against

i dont trust political polls in general, and as far as political polls go this one is on the lower end. all i did was make comparisons to other (larger) polls that did not manage to capture the true distribution of voter intent

[–] nac82@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Did you seriously make claims about poll data without checking your source?

[–] Dive@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

i dont know what you're talking about.

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I just want to chime in and say I don't disagree with you. Your tone wasn't dismissive or condescending at all and the disparaging comments replying to you are pretty rude.

I've only been around Lemmy a short time so my sample size is quite small too, but I've seen a lot of rude condescending pricks around here so far. There's all these threads talk about a great lemmy is and how much better than Reddit it is but I'm just seeing a bunch of assholes so far tbh. That doesn't have anything to do with this post or thread, just venting.

[–] nac82@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Try reading the link you shared and reading your comment bright guy.

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why are you so aggressive and condescending? Bring it in will you, you're making lemmy a toxic shithole like Reddit and this community is like five seconds old.

[–] nac82@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

The irony.

His bad faith "i don't know what I said" shtick is just as shitty as your play the victim bullshit.

Get fucked loser

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)