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!
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 really, blog posts.
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.
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.
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.
You went out of your way to find one of the very few polls showing positive news for Biden in Michigan and then posted links to their company website where they write blog entries based on the results of their market research.
Additionally, you're badmouthing anyone who points out that Morning Consult's latest Michigan polls are outliers.
Maybe they actually have the best current methodology, but unless you want to write up a white paper on why that is, stop speaking ill of anyone who points out that their poll is an outlier, or that your link isn't to a news article, but to a market research company's blog.
Especially when those commenters come with sources, such as the link to aggregated page of 65 polls that I posted. Which by the way, includes Morning Consult's figures as well.
There's nothing that would appear in a news story about the poll that isn't in their own release. Their releases are actually usually more informative because they run through multiple results from the poll, not just whatever the headline point is.
No. I am objective. You are committed to a narrative so thoroughly that you're trying to make me look like the out of step one.
I'm extremely concerned about Biden's performance in the debate, and his chances in November.
I'm also extremely annoyed by the news's wall to wall coverage which suggests that Biden's performance in the debate was an emergency. That, to me, is a much bigger, much longer-lasting, much more sinister and dangerous thing for our democracy than is the fact that Biden is old as fuck and did horribly in the debate. If you are hand-wringingly concerned that Biden did a bad job, you should be apoplectic that the media is as bad as it is, and trying as hard as it is to hand the election to Trump. They're doing infinitely more damage to Biden's chances than Biden himself ever could. He could have literally puked on somebody and passed out like George Bush, and it wouldn't have been as big a deal as what the media does every day.
The news -- and, presumably, you, although I don't feel like looking back in your history to check -- freaked the absolute fuck out about how Biden was doomed because of the debate, and started writing all kinds of articles with it as a foregone conclusion that he's fucked and we need to find a replacement. The electorate barely cared. He was like 0-2 points behind going into the debate. He was like 2-4 points behind after the debate. Is that a big deal? I mean... yeah, it's relevant. It's definitely not good. But to me it is shockingly small.
The media pivoted absolutely effortlessly from "OH MY GAWD Biden is tanking in the polls and it's a FUCKIN CATASTROPHE" to "OH MY GAWD Biden is 2 points behind in the polls like he's always been and it's a FUCKIN CATASTROPHE", without even having enough shame to acknowledge that there was any discrepancy. And you know what? It fuckin worked. Most of the American people were too stupid to even notice the bait-and-switch. Including, apparently, quite a lot of people right here in this thread.
I won't say Biden's not in trouble, and with him, the whole country. But the exact people who are so running-in-circles-wailing-in-panic concerned about how he fucked it all up, are doing their level best to create the fuckup and accelerate it as much as possible. I talked in the other thread about how unhappy I am, also, with our chances in November given Biden's performance in the debate.
Before I continue, how do you feel about agreeing to abandon any effort to pretend I said something different than that last sentence I said above, and talk about the polls without pretending I'm trying to put my head in the sand about the danger we're in because of the debate and the Democrats' prospects and options in the election?
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.
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.