This is why it will take decades to undo the damage to the reputation of the United States on the world stage.
The world cannot count on Americans to vote for sanity.
this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2025
44 points (69.6% liked)
News
37350 readers
961 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Considered how many countries was couped or bombed by the united snakes, the reputation ahould have been so low for decades
load more comments
(10 replies)
This study is conducted using the Pew research American Trends Panel which is roughly 10,000 people around the US. Invitation is sent by mail. From this pool they randomly select participants for the study. While this panel is meant to be representative we must ask ourselves what kind of person is signing up for the Pew research American Trends Panel. Especially because invitation sent through physical mail. Full info in case I misread something
quoted study methods
For this study, we surveyed U.S. adults on our nationally representative American Trends Panel (ATP). We verified their turnout using commercial voter files that aggregate publicly available official state turnout records. The first analysis of validated voters was completed after the 2016 election. Turnout was validated for subsequent elections in 2018, 2020, 2022 and 2024. Each state and the District of Columbia compiles these publicly available turnout records as part of their routine election administration.
To validate 2024 election turnout, we attempted to match adult citizens who are part of the ATP to a turnout record in at least one of three commercial voter files: one that serves conservative and Republican organizations and campaigns, one that serves progressive and Democratic organizations and campaigns, and one that is nonpartisan.
A member of the ATP is considered a validated voter for a given election if they:
Told us they voted, and
Were recorded as having voted in at least one of the three commercial voter files.
Those who said they did not vote in an election are considered nonvoters. Nonvoters also include anyone – regardless of their self-reported vote – for whom we could not locate a voting record in any of the three commercial voter files. Those who could not be matched were also considered nonvoters. Overall, 94% of panelists who we attempted to match were successfully matched to at least one of the three voter files.
The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other factors. For benchmarks of partisan affiliation within racial and ethnic categories, we used estimates produced by the Center’s 2023-24 Religious Landscape Study of more than 36,000 adults. In addition, this survey is weighted to benchmarks for voter turnout and presidential vote preference.
Thank you, I was questioning the results too, and your info perfectly illustrates why. I’d bet dollars to doughnuts that the most difficult eligible voters to predict are the kind of people who don’t check their mail, don’t sign up for research surveys, and don’t want to tell you who they’d vote for. Eligible non-voters didn’t care enough to vote, so why would they cast a ballot with Pew research?
Pretty sure most poling data has been "adjusted" to fit the narrative of the oligarchy at this point. Think for yourselves kids.
Idk. I want to agree, but that's how we got Qanon. Thinking for yourself without data is just inviting biases to control what you believe to be true.
I want it to be true that America would not have actually chosen Trump, but the older I get the more I see, the more I realize we're surrounded by severely under informed, misinformed, disinformed, igorant, selfish, people. The moment nuance is required to actually understand a situation, you can bet it won't be. :(
I want it to be true that America would not have actually chosen Trump, but the older I get the more I see, the more I realize we're surrounded by severely under informed, misinformed, disinformed, igorant, selfish, people. The moment nuance is required to actually understand a situation, you can bet it won't be. :(
By design, unfortunately :(
Reminder, QANON started on the internet as a joke making fun of Republicans.
load more comments
(4 replies)
There is lots of data though. Trump had absolutely nothing and got laughed out of courts by judges he appointed.
There is a difference between attesting that people wouldn’t have voted for Trump and attesting that this survey does not prove anything. The latter seems to be the only thing we can deduce here.
This was the Pew Research Center, the most credible polling organization in the US, and in the article it explains how they compensate for potential biases.
They even surveyed 9 times the usual sample size to make sure this was a legitimate trend.
The article is from NPR, the most credible news outlet in the US.
People need to snap out of this denial that the US didn't willingly vote in a fascist because we were sick of stagnation
But what if the data itself is the problem? The Rockland county tampering case may show that the voting machines did not report the actual vote. In that case, we have very good analysis of incorrect data.
These were bias controlled groups of voters and non voters, this has nothing to do with voting machines
load more comments
(1 replies)
the most credible news outlet in the US
The most credible corporate-funded media outlet in the US.
You intentionally misread, that's so fucking disrespectful.
The Pew Research Center is not a news organization, and is controlled by a nonprofit.
"The Pew Charitable Trusts is an independent non-profit, non-governmental organization (NGO), founded in 1948."
If you would like to name a more credible US based polling org i challenge you to do so, i haven't seen one.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The article is from NPR, the most credible news outlet in the US.
No.
This was the Pew Research Center, the most credible polling organization in the US
The most credible car wash is still just a car wash. It’s not magic. Polls get it wrong all the time. 9,000 chosen respondents is as many people as there were in the local grocery store between 8am-5pm. It’s nothing. Yeah they fixed it with math, sure. Because they have all the variables and every one is dead-on. No.
People need to snap out of this denial that the US didn't willingly vote in a fascist because we were sick of stagnation
What
load more comments
(9 replies)
Fucking NPR goddammit.
The survey of almost 9,000 voters was conducted in the weeks after the 2024 presidential election.
You don’t see any problems with that?
Just remember information can be manipulated to say anything you want.
Just a reminder that it is, in fact, possible for the claim to be true as well.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Most people vote on vibes - that’s what the data always shows. They follow their peers, community, maybe a trusted authority figure. They are not, and have never been informed on issues, and they aren’t interested in learning more about them. I think those of us who do try to stay informed fall into the trap of thinking “if these folks were only better educated about this issue they would vote differently”. But that has never been and will never be true. Gotta project better vibes, baby!
load more comments
(4 replies)
“The only correct study pew has ever done.” - Trump
I do wonder whether the story here is that the non-voting population largely mirrors the popular vote. This was the first time in their survey the Republican won the popular vote and the first time their non-voting respondents went toward the Republican candidate.
Which isn't entirely surprising, as both that's probably driving the vibes and many non-voters are not apolitical, but just don't vote because their elections are not competitive.
view more: next ›