The Trump Presidency 2.0

amlove21 said:
I look at polls with healthy skepticism for sure, but I’m not in the ‘they’re total bs’ camp either.
Click to expand...

They were wrong in 2016, 2020, and 2024. The election polls, months and months' worth, were wrong but now the opinion polls are right or usually right? Nah.

The same media and the same polling companies botched 3 elections and people still think they have value, particularly where Trump is concerned? The most polarizing president in our lifetime, maybe ever in American history (can you imagine Andrew Jackson today?) and we're going to trust any poll results about the man? We approve, we disapprove, we hate him, we love him...words, words, words.

I think history has given us enough examples to not trust a single poll about Trump, no matter where the numbers fall.
 
AWP said:
They were wrong in 2016, 2020, and 2024. The election polls, months and months' worth, were wrong but now the opinion polls are right or usually right? Nah.

The same media and the same polling companies botched 3 elections and people still think they have value, particularly where Trump is concerned? The most polarizing president in our lifetime, maybe ever in American history (can you imagine Andrew Jackson today?) and we're going to trust any poll results about the man? We approve, we disapprove, we hate him, we love him...words, words, words.

I think history has given us enough examples to not trust a single poll about Trump, no matter where the numbers fall.
Click to expand...

Most polls were accurate in 2024, even if the outcome wasn't what they 'predicted' (wrong word, but it's 0800 and I am undercaffeinated), within the margin of error. Some polls were egregiously wrong and some were scarily good usually because of home-grown baking (bias).

Part of the problem wasn't the polling itself but rather the democrats cherry-picking and inflating the data which was magnified by an anti-Trump MSM.
 
Devildoc said:
Most polls were accurate in 2024, even if the outcome wasn't what they 'predicted' (wrong word, but it's 0800 and I am undercaffeinated), within the margin of error. Some polls were egregiously wrong and some were scarily good usually because of home-grown baking (bias).

Part of the problem wasn't the polling itself but rather the democrats cherry-picking and inflating the data which was magnified by an anti-Trump MSM.
Click to expand...
… which is called “astroturfing”.

@AWP nailed it with his post. I think we learned that you have to read in between the lines in every poll. It doesn’t mean you throw them out- it means you read them understanding the nuance and context and you don’t just take them at face value.
 
amlove21 said:
… which is called “astroturfing”.

@AWP nailed it with his post. I think we learned that you have to read in between the lines in every poll. It doesn’t mean you throw them out- it means you read them understanding the nuance and context and you don’t just take them at face value.
Click to expand...

I am not a young whippersnapper like y'all, I have zero clue what "astroturfing" means. I am still trying to figure out "on fleek".

I don't really blame anyone, really. Politicians and media are going to do what they do with the results-- spin baby, spin! --and the outlets put out words like 'margin of error' and 'bias' and 'sample' and no one takes the time to learn about polling or methodology. It took me three tries to find the wiki page, and it's actually pretty good.

So candidate X wins instead of candidate Y when the polls had called for candidate Y and everyone blames the polls. People do not care about nuance and context.

Sorry, this is one of my soap boxes because a lot of people think they know but really don't, and they really don't care to learn.*

*Not using this to throw shade at anyone here, either.
 
Devildoc said:
I am not a young whippersnapper like y'all, I have zero clue what "astroturfing" means. I am still trying to figure out "on fleek".

I don't really blame anyone, really. Politicians and media are going to do what they do with the results-- spin baby, spin! --and the outlets put out words like 'margin of error' and 'bias' and 'sample' and no one takes the time to learn about polling or methodology. It took me three tries to find the wiki page, and it's actually pretty good.

So candidate X wins instead of candidate Y when the polls had called for candidate Y and everyone blames the polls. People do not care about nuance and context.

Sorry, this is one of my soap boxes because a lot of people think they know but really don't, and they really don't care to learn.*

*Not using this to throw shade at anyone here, either.
Click to expand...
Haaha, dude you're more astute than you give yourself credit for.

@Salt USMC and I were talking about how (my contention) polls are influenced by astroturfing, the social media tactic of manufacturing online support (like when you have Tik Tok'ers all dancing to remixes of Kamala saying dumb shit) for the express purpose of fooling people into thinking a thing has wide-ranging support, or to denigrate something you want to discredit.

"Look at all these (paid) chicks dancing for Kamala! The vibes are so good! She's gonna win this in a landslide!" Then the media "reports" on this trend in glowing terms, causing further virality.

A bunch of creators get together and decide that drag queen story hour isn't only good, it's necessary. They coordinate the same message, the algorithm pumps it out as hard as it can, then the MSM further supports the trend, and then people who are largely unaware of this extremely small issue think that the country writ-large thinks drag queens grooming and sexualizing children is fine. You know what a "grass roots" movement is- well, if that movement was in fact fake, it's called "astroturfing".
 
amlove21 said:
Haaha, dude you're more astute than you give yourself credit for.

@Salt USMC and I were talking about how (my contention) polls are influenced by astroturfing, the social media tactic of manufacturing online support (like when you have Tik Tok'ers all dancing to remixes of Kamala saying dumb shit) for the express purpose of fooling people into thinking a thing has wide-ranging support, or to denigrate something you want to discredit.

"Look at all these (paid) chicks dancing for Kamala! The vibes are so good! She's gonna win this in a landslide!" Then the media "reports" on this trend in glowing terms, causing further virality.

A bunch of creators get together and decide that drag queen story hour isn't only good, it's necessary. They coordinate the same message, the algorithm pumps it out as hard as it can, then the MSM further supports the trend, and then people who are largely unaware of this extremely small issue think that the country writ-large thinks drag queens grooming and sexualizing children is fine. You know what a "grass roots" movement is- well, if that movement was in fact fake, it's called "astroturfing".
Click to expand...

Copy, and thanks for explaining. Not 'mansplaining' because it's not gender but age. "Youngsplaining"? "Millenisplaining?"

I definitely think the assumption of poll results are skewed by influences like you mention, and I do think the left has mastered that. My father-in-law had a saying, "the less you have to sell the more you have to advertise." They do well at this, drum up all of this social media excitement, then are legit dumbfounded when they realize it didn't work.

People who are willing to look at the world with a 50,000 view will sit back and say, 'wait a minute,' that rally (or whatever), I am not sure it was as meaningful as you think it was,' then get criticized for drinking the right's kool-aid when they were right all along.

I'd love to write a book on the sociology of the left over the last 10 years.
 
amlove21 said:
Haaha, dude you're more astute than you give yourself credit for.

@Salt USMC and I were talking about how (my contention) polls are influenced by astroturfing, the social media tactic of manufacturing online support (like when you have Tik Tok'ers all dancing to remixes of Kamala saying dumb shit) for the express purpose of fooling people into thinking a thing has wide-ranging support, or to denigrate something you want to discredit.

"Look at all these (paid) chicks dancing for Kamala! The vibes are so good! She's gonna win this in a landslide!" Then the media "reports" on this trend in glowing terms, causing further virality.

A bunch of creators get together and decide that drag queen story hour isn't only good, it's necessary. They coordinate the same message, the algorithm pumps it out as hard as it can, then the MSM further supports the trend, and then people who are largely unaware of this extremely small issue think that the country writ-large thinks drag queens grooming and sexualizing children is fine. You know what a "grass roots" movement is- well, if that movement was in fact fake, it's called "astroturfing".
Click to expand...
Canadian media and the government are currently astroturfing hatred towards the US and the whole 51st state BS. All for votes to keep our unelected Prime Minister and the Liberal's in power. So much that now Trump has embraced it.
 
Trump's job cuts are forcing the IRS to cancel several large audits, which could result in tens of billions in lost revenue for the government.

Excited Ric Flair GIF


LFG!!!

/s
 

Similar threads

Box
The Shocking Truth Behind “Dogs Playing Poker”: A Government Conspiracy to Create Superspy Canines
Replies
3
Views
791
Box
Box
A
THE SHERIFF IS A MONDAY!!!!!
Replies
1
Views
315
RackMaster
RackMaster
RackMaster
The Canadian Armed Forces announces the creation of the Paramedic and Combat Medic Occupations
Replies
2
Views
1K
RackMaster
RackMaster
Ooh-Rah
How a Top Secret SEAL Team 6 Mission Into North Korea Fell Apart
Replies
12
Views
3K
Ooh-Rah
Ooh-Rah
A
Bergdahl 2.0
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
Totentanz
Totentanz
Back
Top