It has been said a gazillion times over the last few months, but is it getting through to those who need to hear it?

  • davidagain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The only possible conclusion from your own data is that every non-Democrat voter who disapproves of Trump is three Republicans who disapprove of Trump.

    And? Do you think that there is a flaw in the data? Do you distrust the source?

    FFS, one person can’t be three people! How is this not obvious to you? Explain to me how 3.5% of people can fill 8.5% of the population without treble counting! It’s really, really absurd. So you just not understand the problem or something?

    • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You also completely ignored the most recent poll i provided you which bypasses all the math and gets right to the question of who do third party voters prefer more. Guess what? It wasn’t Harris.

      Did you look at that one? Do you have anything to say about that one?

      • davidagain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m not going to engage with your gish gallop.

        Do you have anything to say about your conclusion that one non Democratic voter equals three Republican ones?

        Admit you were wrong and that I might have sensible points to make if you want me to engage with more of your insane and impossible conclusions from your bad takes on opinion polls.

        • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m not going to engage with your gish gallop.

          I don’t know what you mean by gish but I’d be happy to discuss any other polls that you are more comfortable with… But you’d have to provide some for me to do that.

          Do you have anything to say about your conclusion that one non Democratic voter equals three Republican ones?

          I addressed your 1 = 3 already.

          Admit you were wrong and that I might have sensible points to make if you want me to engage with more of your insane and impossible conclusions from your bad takes on opinion polls.

          I will admit to being wrong just as soon as you make a compelling case. I’m sorry but you have not done so. All you have managed to do so far is throw a bunch of personal attacks and then zero in on this one = three which just not the gotcha that you think it is. Make a case. Instead of just criticizing me, perhaps. You don’t like my polls? Provide your own. Come on, get involved.

          • davidagain@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m not going to engage with your gish gallop.

            I don’t know what you mean by gish

            Then look up gish gallop.

            • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Hahahahha. That’s rich. I have presented you with a grand total of 4 polls; all intimately relevant to the discussion at hand. That’s too much for you to handle?

                • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Don’t switch your criticisms mid stream. Have i presented you with too much data or not? Am I actually guilty of gish gallop or was that just your excuse for ignoring 25% of the data i gave you?

                  E: conveniently it is the exact bit of data (the only bit provided anywhere yet) that directly addresses the question at hand: Do third partiers prefer Harris over Trump or do they not?

                  • davidagain@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    …gish gallop…

                    …too much for you to handle?..

                    At no point have you made a coherent argument based on them, though.

                    Don’t switch your criticisms mid stream.

                    No, this is exactly the same criticism! It’s exactly the gish galloper’s technique - make a series of nonsense claims, firing salvo after salvo of nonsense into the argument. There’s no point me engaging with any of your other claims until you accept that you were talking nonsense with the first. We don’t have a basis for discussion unless we agree what counts as sane or rational points to make from data. I think that any points that require one non-democrat to be three republicans can’t possibly have merit, and for a fleeting moment I thought you had accepted that your argument on that specific point was erroneous, but I just now read that you don’t recant that assertion at all. Why would I engage with other data if you can’t agree that that didn’t make sense?

    • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You’re ignoring my answers and just repeating your “one person can’t be three” gotcha. I’ll continue to explain ad-nauseum if you like…

      One person only needs to be three if you insist that two meta-analysis polls equal exactly a nice round 100%. There is simply no reason to expect that. In fact, if they did, they would be rather suspect.

      There’s only three options:

      1. The two polls show that there are NOT enough anti-Trump Republicans to account for at least half of the 3.5% anti-Trump non-Democrats. (Hint: the polls do not show this. But if they did it would be an argument for third partiers prefering Harris)
      2. There are exactly the right number of anti-Trump Republicans to account for precisely the 3.5% anti-Trump non-Democrats. (The polls do not show this either, and it would be suspiciously convenient if they did).
      3. There are MORE than enough anti-Trump Republicans to account for at least half of the 3.5% anti-Trump non-Democrats. (This is what they show).

      Now you can continue to insist that these two polls are meaningless because they don’t perfectly agree with each other, but it’s a weak argument. If you demand that the 8.5 and 3.5 number be closer together before you’ll believe it you can take a peak at the other poll i provided you which, if i recall correctly, takes that 8.5 down to about 4.

      • davidagain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I can agree that polls are unreliable and it’s hard to draw consistent mathematical conclusions from them if you like, but that does undermine your overall position somewhat, and I don’t find your fiddling of the numbers that you were previously quoting as gospel to frantically try and make them add up again terribly convincing, sorry.

        • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          You do realize that the only reason i posted polling data in the first place was because someone on your side of the argument stated that the polls show that there is too much favorability for Trump among Republicans for the all-voter unfavorability to be anything but due to third partiers, right? So, no, the general wishy-washiness of polling data does not, in any way undermine my position. Someone on your team used polls to prove something and i am simply reaponding to that claim with “hey, actually, the polls don’t show that.”

          You can go back in the threads and check this if you doubt me.

          I’m not quoting any one poll as gospel, either. Don’t be silly. I used the first polls i found from a reliable source and posted them. If anyone from “your side” was inclined to enter into this debate with their own data i would have happily dug deeper for some other options sooner, but no one has taken up that task on “your side” of things.

          • davidagain@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m not quoting any one poll as gospel, either.

            Says the person who did arithmetic with poll data from different polls that made no logical sense whatever.

            Out of interest, whose side do you think I’m on?

            • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Says the person who did arithmetic with poll data from different polls that made no logical sense whatever.

              One more time for the people in the back: this is the type of data that was referenced by someone claiming that third partiers are all Harris supporters. Did you want me to disprove them by using some other unrelated data? I looked up the types of polls that THEY rferenced and ahowed that those polls do not show what they claimed.

              You seem to have decided that third partiers favor Harris. So i am referring to you as being on “that side” of the argument. Is this not what you believe?

              • davidagain@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I don’t recall anyone saying they were Harris supporters. Why would they vote third party if they supported Harris?! No, the people you’re arguing with just said that they dislike Trump. I honestly don’t know why you find that hard to believe.

                • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I don’t recall anyone saying they were Harris supporters

                  You’re joking right? I mean, at this point you must be joking. The entire premise of the article in this post was that third partiers are, to large extent, Harris over Trump supporters. This is the exact premise i am calling into question. Nothing else. Here’s my exact quote: “And why is everyone assuming that all of the third party voters would be Harris voters if they were forced to choose between the two main candidates? This is where the logic goes south. It assumes that the third party voters are some homogenous bloc of disenfranchised “not Trump” voters.”

                  I never claimed that anyone thinks that third partiers secretly prefer Harris over their own third party candidates. Where do come up with this?

                  No, the people you’re arguing with just said that they dislike Trump.

                  I’m sorry, but you’re mistaken. The article is specifically stating that third partiers prefer Harris over Trump. In all of my original comments i call this assumption into question. And all commenters after that follow (or should have followed) that train of thought. If they don’t, then i have no quarrel with them because i am here to argue one thing and one thing only: the assumption that third partiers largely prefer Harris over Trump is a baseless claim. That’s it.

                  • davidagain@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    I think you should re-read the article. I don’t think it says what you think it says. I think it says that they dislike Trump and they dislike Harris and that they might be mistaken in their belief that they dislike both equally, and that they should figure that out and vote to stop the one they dislike the most by voting for the other one. It doesn’t at any point claim that third party voters support Harris.