Feel free to ignore/dismiss it. I realize Rob will find a reason either way. There will always be "insert reason A" as to why something is different if its the left. I expect it.
Originally posted by Robtard
Maybe Surtur could just post the source of this poll? Which is funny, as he always says polls suck and are unreliable when they tell him something that goes against his biased views.
Actually I've even been weary of polls that don't go against my views, but hey it's cool you tried your best.
Originally posted by Surtur
Well Rob I figured it was worth noting because since you love citing Trumps approval ratings I figured you have more faith in polls than me.
Did I approve or disprove of the poll you listed? No, I did not. Once again you've invented a position I didn't take and are attacking that because that's all you have in defense of your blatant hypocrisy, which I showed.
Originally posted by Surtur
But muh polls!
Originally posted by Surtur
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/05/survey-7-percent-of-reporters-identify-as-republican-188053Feel free to ignore/dismiss it. I realize Rob will find a reason either way. There will always be "insert reason A" as to why something is different if its the left. I expect it.
Wow, that's a really interesting poll. While 7 percent identifying as republican isn't very surprising, I was surprised that only 28 percent identify as Dem, and that there are so many independent ones.
Originally posted by Surtur
I can't help find you whining about hypocrisy funny though.Anyways, so how do you feel about polls?
I have to read the entire poll. But 28% Dem, 7% Rep, 50% Indie and 15% Other sounds reasonable, so I will accept it.
It also shits all over your '95% are Left' and "majority of our media leans left." claims, which is just golden as you've destroyed your own claims.
Originally posted by DigiI bet at no point in that series does it admit that fivethirtyeight and other sites as well as TV stations and radio shows etc. spent the whole ****ing year saying "This is the beginning of the end of Trump" and showing obvious bullshit polls that clearly don't represent the public's opinion yet idiots like the ones on this forum kept reaffirming the myth that Hillary would win or even Bernie!
The whole "Story of 2016" series from 538 - of which there are 11-12 parts - is an excellent post mortem on the election and various forces that surrounded it. Simply reading the headline(s) and shrugging as if it were common knowledge won't produce the nuanced complexity of the full rationale behind it. A lot of it speaks less to the particulars of this election, but more about how we produce and consume our information in general, which is applicable across a much broader range of topics.
I can't believe people still eat up this shit.
Originally posted by socool8520Bernie had the same position as Hillary on literally every issue but even more left leaning. His popularity was basically "Not Hillary Clinton" but after Obama had done the same thing 8 years previously I highly doubt he would have won the election.
Honestly, I think Bernie could have won, but from what I understand, he was railroaded by his own party. I'm not extremely knowledgeable about Politics though.
In fact, I believe he would have lost even harder. Dukakkis style.
Or, and I'm being generous here.....this: http://www.270towin.com/maps/Xx4JV
Originally posted by Surtur
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/05/survey-7-percent-of-reporters-identify-as-republican-188053Feel free to ignore/dismiss it. I realize Rob will find a reason either way. There will always be "insert reason A" as to why something is different if its the left. I expect it.
Originally posted by Surtur
Actually I've even been weary of polls that don't go against my views, but hey it's cool you tried your best.
you dismiss all polls and have said over and over that you don't care about polls.
now there's a poll which you feel validates your narrative, so you've decided that suddenly polls matter, and not only that but anyone who dismisses it is being intellectually dishonest.
definately the second most amazing act of self-contradiction i've seen today. unfortunately your comment was outshined by afro's beautifully simplistic paradox "We don't ever portray ourselves as a collective".
Originally posted by socool8520Well, considering how badly Trump treated Hillary in the debates, he would have treated Bernie even worse. Bernie would have been an embarassing president. Had the DNC picked him, there would have been lots of people asking for Hillary. Hillary was more popular than Bernie. Trump was more popular than both of them.
I figured they would vote for Bernie is because he would have been a less shady Hillary. A big talking point to destroy Hillary was the shady/criminal things she has done.
Bernie should have never ran imo.
Originally posted by Digi
The whole "Story of 2016" series from 538 - of which there are 11-12 parts - is an excellent post mortem on the election and various forces that surrounded it. Simply reading the headline(s) and shrugging as if it were common knowledge won't produce the nuanced complexity of the full rationale behind it. A lot of it speaks less to the particulars of this election, but more about how we produce and consume our information in general, which is applicable across a much broader range of topics.
Oh yeah, this series is brilliant. It's a "what's wrong with modern day politics" primer, essentially.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
you dismiss all polls and have said over and over that you don't care about polls.
now there's a poll which you feel validates your narrative, so you've decided that suddenly polls matter, and not only that but anyone who dismisses it is being intellectually dishonest.definately the second most amazing act of self-contradiction i've seen today. unfortunately your comment was outshined by afro's beautifully simplistic paradox "We don't ever portray ourselves as a collective".
I never said polls matter. I did give a poll though. You can take from it what you will.
Did you want to whine some more?