US Politics |OT|

[the-pi-guy]

Jimbo1337 said:

Torillian said:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/609914/women-become-liberal-men-mostly-stable.aspx

that's the link, you'll have to dig into their results. Do you agree that the American definition of moderate is not progressive? I mean basically by definition. 

That link was a very interesting read, but it unfortunately didn't provide the answer to the question I posed. Whenever I turn on CBS/NBC, I am informed that the older population votes more conservative while the youth are more liberal. That's the information that I am going off of and what caused me to make my initial statement.

Yes, because as the data shows: 

- Young women have gone from 29% liberal in 1999 to 40+% liberal in recent years. 
- Young men on the other hand are consistently 25% liberal. 

The net result is that overall young people are more liberal, but young men are not. 

Another big factor is that younger populations are less white, and white populations are the ones that tend to favor more conservative policies.

A random young person is more likely to be liberal today than 25 years ago, a young white man is incredibly likely to be conservative.

Men across all those brackets are very unlikely to be liberal.  

Torillian said:

This seems silly, the issue at hand is that there are really four facts that are relevant or possibly relevant that we know about this person and it's down to how you analyze each fact.

He's a young white dude
He donated to a progressive thing
He registered as a republican
He shot at Trump.

Each of you have to explain away some facts to make your theory work.

Ryuu: He's a generic shooter.
Shot at Trump but that's politically neutral, don't know why he donated to a progressive cause, but he's a registered republican so those two pretty much cancel one another out. Young white male was not included in the analysis, but I imagine a young white male is not a bastion of progressiveness on average.

Jimbo: He's a radical progressive terrorist.
Shot at Trump seems to be the most important fact to you and is difficult to square with anything other than democratic leaning. Registered as republican but that can be explained away and again is cancelled out by his donation to a progressive cause. Lastly his demographics make him likely to be progressive but that's up for debate.

In the end the same facts are there, and you're both just guessing at the other parts. The main contention is whether or not the target indicates political leaning. Under Ryuu's hypothesis it doesn't have to, under Jimbo's it is best explained with him disagreeing with Trump and most people that disagree with Trump are progressive so that's the best guess.

They're both just guesses and the only issue I see is that Jimbo wants to talk about how his thing is based on only facts and Ryuu's is opinions. They're both opinions based on the same set of facts and explaining them in different ways.

This is what I was saying a few pages ago.

I could probably come up with 4 different stories that fit those facts about as well as each other. 

He could be a liberal who registered as Republican to vote against Trump in the primaries. This requires putting more weight on the donation; which I think it makes more sense to put less weight on it as it happened years ago. People at that age tend to change as they start exploring more politics. 

He could be a Democratic turned into an alt right Republican who thinks Trump isn't terrible enough. There's unfortunately very common for that age bracket, because lots of terrible people like Andrew Tate are very appealing to young white men.

He could be some random nobody who wanted attention.

I have a few other stories in mind, but I don't want to condone that kind of nonsense.  

Last edited by the-pi-guy - on 14 July 2024