139
submitted 3 months ago by mozz@mbin.grits.dev to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 61 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

This poll is a notable outlier... The article is basically just a blog post from the polling outfit itself...

Here's results on 65 different polls for Michigan:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-michigan.html

The vast majority of polls have Trump leading Michigan, but a lot of those are also within the margin of error and otherwise very close.

What is with Lemmy's insistence on pretending that the debate either didn't hurt Biden, or actually helped him?

It's like a lot of people here actually believe that by pretending nothing is wrong, that means nothing is wrong.

FYI that New York Times link is simply an easy aggregated URL that shows the results for, and then directly links to 65 different polls for Michigan.

[-] NataliePortland@lemmy.ca 27 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Sister it’s kinda crazy to me. Lemmy will downvote news posts with credible polls showing Biden dropping, and upvote any questionable source that says otherwise. I’m also a Democrat but to me a credible news story should not be disparaged for saying something I dont want to hear. It doesn’t do any good to hide from the truth. “You must know the enemy in order to meet him on the battlefield”- Sun Tzu or idk maybe I just made that up.

I mean what is pro.morningconsult? I’ve never heard of that ever. And I’ve seen Rueters posts get downvoted! Rueters!

[-] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I wasn't kidding, it is actually the blog of that market research/polling firm.

It's dressed up a bit to make it seem like it's delivering news, but it's primarily just writing up their own market research and polling data in the form of articles, or more accurately, blog posts.

Yeah - and for that reason I downvoted the post

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz -1 points 3 months ago

The results of a poll are news and usually as factual as you can get. Their poll might be an outlier or they might have a polling bias, but unless you think they're drawing conclusions unsupported by the poll or think their methodology is wrong, there's not much to criticize.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev -3 points 3 months ago

You need to tell Media Bias Fact Check that stuff; they have it way wrong then. They’re treating them like some kind of news source, and even analyze the accuracy in hindsight of their polling and everything.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 months ago

Morning Consult is a well known polling company. If you've followed polls and aren't familiar with them I'm amazed. They do some sort of online polling which makes them cheap and fast, but there's nothing suspicious about them and they haven't shown any bias I've recognized. It's not a questionable source, but is just one poll so it might not be accurate.

[-] hypnoton@discuss.online 1 points 3 months ago

Anyone can sign up to Lemmy. Including image management consultants.

If you think Biden's corner doesn't have paid professional image management consultants I have a bridge to sell you.

Don't be discouraged! Stand your ground and rep your political position diligently and constantly.

[-] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 months ago

I usually don't assume malice what can adequately be explained by copium

[-] hypnoton@discuss.online -3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Getting paid shills to rep your interests for you is sleazy when not done transparently, but I would not say it's malice. It's manipulation. Manipulation in the world of politics is as common as air, and if manipulation is malice all of politics is malice.

Of course we don't want to be manipulated. Just like no boxer wants to be knocked out. But if a boxer gets knocked out, that's just how boxing works and it's not malicious. Politics is a contact sport like boxing. Politics is dirty. It will always be dirty.

[-] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 months ago

I don't assume manipulation what can be explained by copium either

[-] hypnoton@discuss.online -1 points 3 months ago

Assuming the most benign motivations is copium and hopium.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's much more likely that they're ordinary people acting according to well known psychological patterns of tribalism. People can hold different beliefs or values without being paid actors.

this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
139 points (82.9% liked)

politics

19127 readers
4500 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