By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
irstupid on 15 October 2018
Edit Thread
deskpro2k3 said:
irstupid said:

And what is your proof that Barkley was responsible for his win? Was he down like 10 points before the endorsement and then immediately after won? 

Correlation does not imply causation.

Who says that guy would not have won without Charles saying a word?

 

PwerlvlAmy said:

Sorry. That wasn't because of Barkley. Celebrities have zero impact. Never have and never will.  Doug Jones was a shoe in to win no matter what. 

 

This is hilarious.. When a celebrity endorses a candidate or encourage people to register to vote. Your answer: "Nothing never happens"

When people do register to vote, and said candidate wins. Your answer: "They were going to win anyways"

 

I'm kinda busy right now so I'll come back later with more sophisticated proof. (even though it may not change anything)

Oprah Winfrey's endorsement of Obama in 2008 was found to increase overall voter participation and number of contributions received by Obama, and an estimated overall 1 million additional votes.

Another example is Hillary who had many celeb endorsement won the popular vote by over 3mil.

Oprah better not be your proof. Oprah is like a 1 in a billion person.

You can't seriously be trying to compare Oprah saying something and Charles Barkley saying something. Barkley is only loved on TV as a sports caster because he says such stupid shit and people laugh at him. Do you ever watch TNT and him talk about basketball. It's always a good laugh. But regardless if you like Barkley or not, he is NOT Oprah.

And by your own words, Oprah only increased votes by an estimated 1 million votes, and that was over the entire united states. We are talking Charles Barkley and one state.