this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
70 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19144 readers
5938 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
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] riskable@programming.dev 32 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

In short: They're not. They're basically guessing at this point for anyone under 50.

Not only that but anyone under 50 who they do reach is the type of person who doesn't use an ad blocker. In other words, iPhone users and the ignorant.

[–] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I answered a phone call for a poll a few weeks ago. I knew it was a poll, but I wasn't doing anything too important and talked to them for a few minutes. I was receiving texts and phone calls that I ignored (blocked), but since I picked up the call, the volume has increased. I realized my mistake of trying to let them know my opinion. The increase from before the poll to after was pretty drastic for the first week. I won't make that mistake again.

That is why people don't answer even if we are free. No good deed goes unpunished.

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Weird clarification, but the iPhone has shitloads of adblock, much more so than Android. There are YouTube apps that block all video ads, for instance. iOS even has a vpn built into the OS.

[–] plz1@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

iPhone user here, with an ad blocker in Safari and DNS-based ad blocking. Don't assume all iPhone users are in that category...

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

ONE OF US

ONE OF US

[–] rustydomino@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

I mean, even if they “reach” you doesn’t mean you have to pick up the phone or respond to texts. As a matter of policy I don’t answer calls from numbers not in my contacts. If it’s important they’ll leave a voicemail.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Hey, don't forget about the lazy.

[–] Trebuchet@lemm.ee 25 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Tl:dr sample bias is people who don't use ad blockers

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So a conservative luddite bias.

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 weeks ago

Luddites weren't conservatives and they weren't anti technology, they were anti-technology being used to destroy the livelihood of workers rather than being used to improve their lives.

Imagine that AI / robots suddenly made your entire career field obsolete overnight and suddenly you couldn't find a job anywhere. You would be pretty upset, ya? Now imagine being called anti-technology just because you argued that technology should be used to help the workers that are displaced rather than leaving them destitute.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago

If anyone managed to send me a poll I would assume it is a scam to steal my identity or beg for donations.

[–] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 weeks ago

Alternative title: how annoying people have adapted to not being able to annoy everyone as easily as before.

[–] fubarx@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago

I remember when self-reported online polls were considered dirty and useless.

Oh, how the times have changed.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 weeks ago

Get drunk and throw darts at a dartboard.

[–] LunchMoneyThief@links.hackliberty.org 1 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

The goal, as ever, is to present to the public an accurate reflection of what the people as a whole think about candidates and issues.

Can this not simply be harvested from the endless volumes of online posts made to the public internet? Why do they act like they need to go on the hunt for something that is normally difficult even to avoid?

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago

The types of people that offer their political opinions online are not themselves representative of the whole voting public. This would introduce an instance of sampling bias.

[–] capital@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

No. Not even before now since you could make as many accounts as you want on a given platform.

But especially not now since the cost of text content generation has dropped to basically zero.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

Because based on online posts, Howard Dean, Ron Paul, and Bernie sanders all won by a wide margin?

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Because then louder people get counted more

[–] LunchMoneyThief@links.hackliberty.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What, you don't want audience participation voting?

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Fun fact, my hometown in NH still votes this way unless someone asks for a count

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago

The Conversation - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Conversation:

MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - Australia
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://theconversation.com/how-pollsters-have-adapted-to-changing-technology-and-voters-who-dont-answer-the-phone-240283
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support