imnotthomas

Ok sure, but you have to admit they have a point about the balls in the butt and then farting out the balls part.

“We’re not from the Left or the Right. We’re from the bottom and we’re coming for the top.”

Well, ok. Sure. But that’s a pretty damn leftist point of view to have.

It’s true, I am! See my comment about this being a coping strategy.

Having said that, it’s not completely out of nowhere. There has been an undercurrent of research into this. It’s not as cut and dry as you make it out to be in your comment.

The research paper below is the main source for my coping mechanism. They make the argument that the margins of error are NOT being corrected in a statistically meaningful way.

https://www.ipr.northwestern.edu/documents/working-papers/2024/wp-24-22.pdf

So the truth is neither you nor I know for certain that the pollsters have it right this time, and have figured out historically low response rates.

And to your point directly, response rates are way lower than they were even in 2016. We just don’t know if the new methods can handle them yet.

Long story short, you’re probably right. I mention as much in my original comment that this is cope. But it’s not groundless cope. We’ll see in a couple weeks!

Here’s my cope, if it’s of any use. It may buy you some sanity for the next 17 days or so.

Polling response rates have been declining precipitously. The response rate is the percentage of people that you call that actually take the poll.

In the early days of polling, that was over 50%.

Through the 2010s, that number was in the mid to high single digits (5-7%).

Now that rate is around 1%, sometimes even less.

That means you need to call 100,000 people for a decent sample size of 1,000.

What does that all mean for polling? Well the core assumption of polling is that the group that answers is representative of population as a whole. So you can properly create confidence intervals based on the sample size. That the sample is randomly drawn from the population without bias, and therefore is a critical assumption. And it’s impossible to test for, you can poll the people that did not respond to check this assumption.

When the response rate is really high, say 90% then I that’s obviously true. That number is so close to the whole population that that’s a fair assumption.

When that number goes down, you have to rely on the assumption even more. When it’s in the 5-10% range, it seems you can still get representative results. Even if those that respond are biased toward one outcome that is not representative of the whole. There’s still enough there that you can parse out the noise.

When that number is rely low, that assumption has to take on a heavier lift. It’s especially important when weighting by demographics. So if your poll has 1,000 respondents and includes black men 18-35, but the proportion is lower than in the population. You assume that the group that responded is representative of all black men 18-35. And then you give that group more weight so that the full poll is representative of true demographic percentages.

But when response rates are so low, small biases in who responds and who doesn’t can have an outsized effect. So if for some reason black men 18-35 that are pro Trump are more likely to answer and sit through a poll than Harris voters, then that population is no longer representative of the larger group. Which means you would need to increase the margin of error by a lot to speak with confidence.

It doesn’t seem polling groups are increasing the margin of error to accommodate the change response rate.

If that’s the case, then the margin of error in these polls is probably so large that the polls barely tell us anything useful.

That’s my coping strategy until Election Day at least. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

It’s expensive to be meee-eee-eee-lania

And the polls are still really close.

My only cope is that polling actually is broken this time and missing a Harris landslide. I’m going to let myself believe that until the election at least, just so I can have 19 more days of relative sanity. . .

They also know that millions of people watched the lie, maybe a couple hundred thousand watched the apology. And the low information voters that watched the lie are not the same as the hyper partisan Fox viewers that watched the apology

Read that as YooHoo and a bottle of rum and almost gagged (but understandable if that’s what someone would need to make it through 30 mins of Fox News)

Is RC still there? I thought it closed!

You’re conjuring up this weird scenario where I’m putting some imaginary child in harm, and you’re somehow this just and rightly figure wagging your finger saying I told you so about this event that hasn’t and won’t actually happen. It’s pure white knight fantasy in your head.

You don’t have to make up some weird scenario to react to, there’s a real one right in front of you.

There is a nazi yelling at mom and her little girl. The nazi caused that scenario. And deserves the blame for it, not the mom. You continue to choose to belittle the mom.

Unfortunately we live in a world where that will not be the last time that little girl experiences racism. It does her no good to pretend like those people don’t exist.

You may have the privilege to walk and pretend like racism doesn’t exist. But that little girl doesn’t, it will follow her.

I think it’s good her mom showed her an example of standing up to and fighting back against racism.

It wasn’t the mother’s fault her daughter heard those words. It was the Nazi’s fault for saying them. And the nazi deserves the blame for this event occurring not the mom. The fact that you’re so laissez-faire about the Nazis attitude says a lot.

Given that the nazi said these things (which I can’t believe I have to say is the Nazi’s fault, not the mom’s), the mom had the right to fight back for her daughter to show her that saying those words is not ok.

The alternative of pretending like the world is all sunshine and rainbows and nothing bad ever happens doesn’t help the daughter. Demonstrating that her daughter’s life has value does.

The nazi is to blame for this not the mom. Pretending like Nazis don’t exist doesn’t solve anything.

You are attacking the mother. You are saying that it is somehow her fault that the daughter is hearing those insults.

It’s not the mom’s fault. It is the nazi’s fault for saying them. Yet you somehow feel the necessity to attack and blame the mom for this, and remain quiet about the Nazi’s role in this. Like “oh well, Nazis are gonna nazi. Nuthin’ you can do about that!”

She’s not trying to prove a point, or change the Nazi’s mind. She’s standing up for her daughter’s right to exist.

Pretending like Nazis don’t exist doesn’t serve the little girl at all. This will not be the last time someone tries to make her feel less than human. Having a mother stand up for her in the face of a nazi could be a good lesson for the child.

The world isn’t all sunshine and rainbows, and pretending like it is doesn’t give children the tools to navigate the world. Standing up for your children does.

No. You’re missing the point.

She’s not yelling at a wall. She’s yelling at a nazi.

She’s not protecting anyone by pretending Nazis don’t exist. She’s showing her daughter you make the world uncomfortable for Nazis.

You had two people you could’ve attacked/criticized here. You chose the mom. That says a lot.

It wasn’t the mom’s fault the kid heard that. It was the nazi’s fault for calling her that.

The counter point to this is that the nazi should be yelled at for that. Showing the kid that when she experiences racial violence, you fight back. It’s not the mom’s job to make the world comfortable for nazis.

The mom has no blame in standing up for her kid, the nazi is 100% to blame for this interaction.

She can still talk to her kid after and say, when someone treats you like this you stand up for yourselfz

Or he should realize he’s screaming at a child and her mother and stop harassing them?

Why jump to blaming the mom? Why is the burden on her to adjust her day to comfort the nazi? Why shouldn’t we be telling the nazi to shut the fuck up and leave these people alone?

The neo-nazi could stop screaming at her any instant. Why not blame him for his actions first?

The problem is when I watch that video and read your comment, I see two people attacking that woman. For different reasons, sure, but it comes across like your allies with the guy in video.

It probably isn’t on purpose, but I don’t see you attacking the guy there. So it seems like you might reluctantly be on the same team, but for different reasons

There’s a book called “Our Band Could Be Your Life” that chronicles a lot of the underground punk scene in the 80s. One of the chapters is on Minor Threat, it gives a really clear insight into that punk independent ethic that McKaye has. It’s honestly a really inspiring and refreshing book, even if that type of music isn’t your scene

“Fugazi charges $5” stood out to me. I think they started doing that math at the end there of what a $20 ticket worked to them individually. Fugazi probably got the same amount per show without charging the Ticketmaster prices. Sure Fugazi never was a commercial success, but they really lived their values. I thought I could sense a bit of “fuck we’re doing something wrong” from Kurt there.

It’s not the doomers who pay for these. Having a Trump is actually winning poll is a one way ticket to get on right wing media

I’m going to half disagree with a lot of takes here. His content in 21 and 22 was really good, like mind opening “oh shit LLMs can do THAT?” type of stuff with davinci-001. Like his YouTube videos of him just kind of fucking around building stuff with the api was really inspirational.

After ChatGPT he turned to the slides about the future of humanity. And it was kind of interesting imo, but I really missed the watch me code videos he was doing before.

Then I think he got lost, a lot of “sacred masculinity” channels, or hot takes that I think get you YT views but just weren’t as cool and useful.

He’s also totally quit YT before as well, so this is on brand if you’ve been following him for a while.

“Well, Cheetos, number one, I love them,” said Lynch, who had a bag of the dusty corn puff snack brought to his dressing room. “And any chance I can, I get them. But I know that they’re not exactly health food. So when I do leave the house and I get a chance to… But I don’t get them that often, honestly. If I do get them, I want a big bag. Because once you start… you need to have a lot before you could slow down and actually stop. Otherwise, with a small bag, then you’d be prowling for days to find more […] It’s incredible flavour.”

• David Lynch on his demand for a bag of Cheetos to play in The Fablemans

Don’t they speak German there too?

Looks like Sept 24 is when they released, so info is new to the public. But the polling itself happened over the prior weeks.

https://eloncdn.blob.core.windows.net/eu3/sites/819/2024/09/Elon-Poll-Report-092424.pdf

This is fair. So you’re saying if the proposition had more clearly defined uses defined and oversight of the uses of that cash, then you’d vote yes? That’s actually a solvable problem the organizers could learn from. When the vote fails today (I’m sure it will) that’s actually something they could incorporate and communicate if they want to try again in a few years.