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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
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
Caveat: I'm not a statistician, but my job requires that I interpret large pools of raw data to interpolate outcomes for even larger systems. Think using 30 respondents and a week of observation/collection to represent 2500-10,000 respondents over the course of a year. The way I collect, analyze, interpret, and present my data is scrutinized heavily from every angle (as it should be) but still very susceptible to biases. Fortunately, I'm super autistic and it's basically impossible for me to lie so I'm considered really good at what I do.
These surveys are typically done via methods that are prone to significant statistical errors. For the most part they use phone calls, Facebook ads, emails that most people under the age of 65 just delete (or never even see because it's caught by spam filters). This, combined with the fact that the type of people who will reply to these sort of questionaires are always more right-leaning skews the data even further.
If someone approached you on the street asking you to take a survey, about Pervert Hoover what would you do? Uncle Jerry, who's known for providing his unsolicited opinions about librulz and the gays, and Aunt Elaine who doesn't want to get backhanded at home so she just stands there usually count as two respondents.
That's not even touching the bias almost always introduced by the question and answer formats. "Do you agree with the President's policy of deporting people with legal residency status due to excercising their First Amendment Rights? (Y/N)" is a totally different outcome to "Do you agree with the President's national security policies? (Y/N)"
These articles are always written to imply they've surveyed everyone in the country, done the math to adjust for selection bias, and written the survey questions to be fair, but time and time again that's proven to be untrue, or at least inaccurate. The interesting (and honestly the only good news we hear anymore) is that even with all of the cards literally and figuratively stacked in the orange skidmark's favor, he's only getting as positive an outcome as he is.
And there's also the need for clicks and ad revenue.
TL; DR: these things are bullshit and always produce wildly inaccurate results skewed in favor of the dumbest outcomes.