• 78 Posts
  • 5.49K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 29th, 2023

help-circle
  • you’d triple down on your lie that I support Israel

    You are the one white-knighting for a democratic administration without which this genocide would be impossible. Who give a fuck what you said somewhere else. You started this thread white-knigthing for democrats.

    You can’t both claim to be a critic of Israel, and then turn and defend Democrats when people critisize them for their support of Israel.

    Like which is it? Are you opposed to genocide or not? If you are, you have to find criticism with the party shielding Israel from the consequences of running a genocide. Its not the Republicans doing that; its Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris, who just this week said “I would do nothing different” of the decisions made by the Biden administration. And if you are white-knighting for the Democrats every at bat, well its pretty easy to see where you stand. Anti-genocide as performance art only.


  • Ah, doubling down on the lie.

    About something you made up or imagined and then told me I claimed about you? Do you see the mental gymnastics? You are so fuckiing weird.

    And I dont’ give a fuck what you said some where else. You started this conversation with the below comment.

    What we’re talking about:

    Democrats won’t deport millions of brown people and force my child and those like her into conversion therapy. So yes, Republicans will be worse.

    And this “there’s only one genocide that matters” shit is getting old.

    Got it. You are cool with a genocide of so long as Democrats don’t deport millions or force your child into conversion therapy. And to put a finer point on it, you engage in a garnish of what-about-ism for your genocidal apologism salad.

    We’re not talking about something you said somewhere else. We’re talking about what you responded to my comment about blue dog Democrats.


  • You don’t seem to get that this conversation is progressing exactly how I would expect iit to. You aren’t capable of having a conversation in good faith. Its just you in this weird circle jerk relationship you have with literally everyone you troll, where you lay these demands on them thinking you’ve got them in some kind of “gotcha”. Its this weird, kooky, power dynamics thing you do in almost every trolling effort you make.

    But fundamentally, you are a troll. Right now you are sea-lioning. You aren’t here to learn or discuss or convince. You are here to try and steer things towards an editorial opinion. Its why you want to get a concession out of whichever discussant you are involved with. And its not a secret; every single comment you’ve made here is available for analysis.





  • You are a deeply toxic individual who has been doing work to hurt the Democrats chances of getting elected in November, by intentionally cultivating a culture that denies objective reality in an effort to shield Democrats from criticisms they rightly deserve on the mass slaughter of a people, an issues that is deeply hurting their chances of getting elected. You do so through your extraoridnarilly biased moderation, and almost constant white-knighting/ trolling to support the Blue-MAGA movement, a movement whose rhetorical approach has been singularly destructive to the Democrats hopes of getting re-elected in 2024.

    You aren’t just a part of the problem in why Democrats are struggling in November; you are at its very core. When its time to decompose what went’ wrong in the 2024 election and I’m doing my write up, I’ll be citing your profile of the quintessential example of how social media was employed to shield Democrats from their own bad decisions in such a way that it handed the Republicans the presidency in 2025.

    Your white knighting, pretending you are defending anything, is both narcissistic and toxic. You are friend to no-one as you continuously injure Democrats chances of being re-elected.

    {also, the form of trolling you were doing in your above comment is called sea-lioning}





  • Ok, so I’m just scrolling through the most recent polls and picking out numbers based on this. I’m just going to grab the most recent numbers from Silver Bulletin. I’ll grab the latest, most recent number for a given pollster, Harris & Trump only.

    Not red wave: 6

    The New York Times/Siena College

    Harris/ Trump:

    44%/ 49% (but also, I’m not sure whats going on with the repeat entries on this poll…)

    InsiderAdvantage

    Not in Nate Silvers database, cant find in 538’s either, different name?

    Emerson College

    Harris/ Trump:

    50.2%/ 48.6%

    Fabrizio, Lee & Associates/GBAO - While Fabrizio is a Red Wave pollster, GBAO is not.

    Harris/ Trump:

    45%/ 50%

    Quinnipiac University

    Harris/ Trump:

    47%/ 49%

    YouGov/Center for Working Class Politics

    Harris/ Trump:

    51%/ 48%

    Just Bad polling: 3

    Redfield & Wilton Strategies

    Harris/ Trump:

    46%/ 48%

    Research Co.

    Harris/ Trump:

    49%/ 45%

    Hunt research:

    47%/ 47%

    OnMessage:

    Can’t find in either database.

    Red Wave (2):

    TIPP Insights

    Harris/ Trump:

    48%/ 49%

    McLaughlin

    Harris/ Trump:

    48%/ 49%

    Doing the quick stats…

    Not Red Wave Polls:

    Mean:
        Harris: 47.44%
        Trump: 48.92%
    Standard Deviation:
        Harris: 3.09%
        Trump: 0.73%
    

    Just Bad Polling:

    Mean:
        Harris: 47.33%
        Trump: 46.67%
    Standard Deviation:
        Harris: 1.53%
        Trump: 1.53%
    

    Red Wave Polls:

    Mean:
        Harris: 48.0%
        Trump: 49.0%
    Standard Deviation:
        Harris: 0.0%
        Trump: 0.0%
    

    The Red Wave polls and the Not Rave polls are in good agreement. These polls are all with each others MOE, and would fail a t-test.

    Harris:

    t-statistic: -0.405
    p-value: 0.706
    

    Trump:

    t-statistic: -0.245
    p-value: 0.818
    

    Both p-values are significantly higher than 0.05, indicating that there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of Harris and Trump percentages.

    The article is wrong. Unless it meant to say that Times/ Sienna is a “Red Wave” pollster, this an article targeted towards Blue MAGA to give them something they want to hear.

    [Fuck, I’m annoyed. I did this for national, not PA.]

    Annoyed so I just made a generalized analysis for everystate:

    Codeshare link: https://codeshare.io/ONzAZ0

    PA results:

    No significant differences. 95% confidence intervals in the shaded area.