this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
440 points (83.3% liked)

politics

19072 readers
4542 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
[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 18 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

Geez, i expected more fighting in the comments, but everyone here's just dunking on op and calling them a "bad actor" so I'll start one.

Is there even a single comment about the content of the article? Some of y'all commenting on FUD and OPs contributions should take a hard look at their contribution to both this comment chain, and Lemmy in general. I hope it looks better than what i see.

Anyway, enough of how disappointed i am with you, all of you, and on to the article.

Most of the article is just polling opinions, so not a lot to see, but i thought this part was interesting:

Fewer voters also say “it really matters who wins” the 2024 presidential race compared to those that said the same at this point in the 2020 cycle. Back then, 80 percent of Trump supporters and 77 percent of Biden supporters said the race really matters — but those figures have now dropped to 70 percent each.

This is surprising. I thought most people considered this election even more important than the last!

Is there a record somewhere of "election importance"? How far back does it go? Is this 7-10% drop normal?

By the way OP. As someone often critical of Biden i too get called a russian or chinese tank sometimes, so i feel close to ya. Thanks for contentin' and shit. here's an upvote from me <3

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 13 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I think people forget how significant a moment 2020 felt.

Democrats are in for a rude awakening when the turnout plummets this cycle because normal people don't feel like it's the end of democracy like they do.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And then those normal people are in for a rude awakening when it is the end of democracy as we know it.

"I didn't think the Supreme Court would actually overturn Roe!" -- People in 2016 who said to not threaten them with the Supreme Court

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Democrats will have no one to blame but themselves for not running on anything other than scaremongering.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm sure that'll be a great relief to the normal people suffering who didn't take the warnings seriously.

And I don't know if I'd call it fear mongering considering the concerns about abortion and the Supreme Court came true. If someone chooses not to take warnings seriously after that, well... They shouldn't be surprised if this next set of warnings comes true as well.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Tell that to the dems, man! If their ~~scaremongering~~ warnings aren't winning over voters, maybe they should try popular governance.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-04-25/us-aid-to-israel-support-drops-as-outrage-over-war-gaza-grows?embedded-checkout=true

51% of likely voters in swing states "strongly or somewhat support aid to Israel". Considering that is the popular opinion among crucial voters, are you fine with Biden's position on Israel? It's just "popular governance" after all.

Maybe Bernie should've also said he was a through and through capitalist to try and win the primary through "popular governance"?

Very poor argument.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That link is paywalled, so unless you share the text i guess ill take your word for it.

Regardless, that's only "popular" if you limit your definition of popular to swing states. Nationally, only 46% of voters(note this is more accurate when limited to registered voters) support more aid to israel (Quinnepaic, April 24), even fewer when limited to democratic and independent voters.

Quinnipiac poll, support for aid to israel by demographic:

64% over 65 years old 60% Republicans 50% White 46% all voters 46% independents 42% Hispanic 36% Democrats 31% Black 26% under 35 years old

The Bernie point is actually interesting, because historically "capitalism" is broadly popular, but his socialist policies are extremely popular, which I suppose would suggest polling is kinda junk as a predictor for popularity anyway.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Honestly, true. Samples for polling have gotten pretty bad.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Democrats will have no one to blame but themselves

Not the people who actually took away abortion rights?

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Those are the people they're loosing against, not the reason why they lost to them.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

Although, as I've read, people who don't vote are more likely to vote for trump (basically the argument is that trump convinced them he was an outsider, and appealed to people who don't normally go out to vote because they feel there is no point), so a drop in turnout would actually favor Dems. And I do think Dems will be fired up more over abortion.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I spent a good amount of time calling OP a shill in this thread without bothering to read the article. The combination of thehill.com + OP's bias + polls aren't really indicative of anything let alone deserving of the "multiple updates multiple times per day" conceptual weight they're being given in OP's posting history, led me to feel it was a better use of time to just talk about why are we talking about this again and why do we think OP posts this so much, as opposed to just obediently feeling like I'm obligated to spend time talking about it again, because OP feels like posting it again.

I mean I will say in my own defense that earlier today when for the other multiple time OP posted a whole story about how bad Biden's doing in the polls, I engaged with that story purely on its own merits. Here's the conversation that ensued:

  • Me: It seems like this poll is polling everyone, not just likely voters, which is a relevant flaw in it
  • Someone: "You should read articles before posting them" "You should also believe in science"
  • Me: (Asks a question to try to Socratically teach them the point I was originally trying to make)
  • Them: "What are you confused about?" (illustrates that they still don't get the pretty straightforward point I was making)
  • Me: (Asks the question again)
  • Them: (Finally answers the question, seeming to get what I was saying for the first time, but effortlessly pivoting to condescending about how limiting polls to likely voters is a bad idea)

And so on. It went on from there, but the point that I'm making is that engaging with this stuff on its own merits isn't the doorway to productive conversation it might appear to be. In my experience the shills will come out of the woodwork to make weirdly hostile bad-faith conversation with you for more or less an unlimited amount of time. I think blithely being okay with putting up with an unlimited amount of that isn't a fair thing to ask people to do.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

I thought most people considered this election even more important than the last!

The most important election in history is always the one happening next year.