politics
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.
- 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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
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):
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.