politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Probably not.
But when dealing with stats is best to err on the side of caution.
At most 38% approve, if the real number is lower and some maga tries to argue, it just turns out that it's even worse than I said.
If it was really 39% then that becomes the focus and there's no convincing.
So when in doubt, give the extra to the side you're trying to convince especially when the split is big enough a few points either way don't even matter.
It stops them from arguing over minute details and forces the larger discussion.
Wasn't doing it intentionally, it's out of habit
I do something similar. I'll often misstate numbers in the same way hoping that they will look it up to try and prove me wrong and succeed. They get a little dopamine rush when they see I'm wrong and that makes it easier for them to understand that if I had been accurate, it would paint an even grimmer picture.
It's not really that.
What I was talking about is I've amassed a huge amount of random knowledge. If I said:
Someone is gonna chirp up that in election year ____ there was only 28% non-voters so all that literal scientific research that happened is a moot point.
Shit like that gets tiresome. Especially when everyone assumes the only way someone would know stuff like that, is if they looked it up 2 seconds ago and have a handy source.