By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Torillian on 20 August 2025
Edit Thread
Chrkeller said:
Torillian said:

Data collection can be hard, but that's no reason to substitute with vibes. 

Don't give a shit personally about your other arguments about democrats in general. I'm just telling you your "I think the Midwest doesn't like ____ because I lived there" is an intellectually lazy way to discuss something. And then when people try to share actual polling with you you ignore it and talk about how the democrats losing the popular vote just must mean you're right. Or maybe it has nothing to do with the point being made but you can't stop yourself from going into it again and again. Either way it's again not a good argument to what's being discussed. 

Out of curiosity: Can you maybe apply that rationale in the bolded and consider why polling is more likely accurate than your personal recollection from living there?

You are a walking conundrum.  You are calling me intellectually lazy but while openly admitting that you are ignoring the vast majority of points being made.  Gee whiz, remind me to introduce you to kettle some day.

And you know what is super fun?  For months in 2024 I said vibes were bad for harris, especially in middle America.  People did nothing but show me polls "proving" I was wrong.  People demanded that I admit my vibes were wrong.  I tried, much like now, to talk about how inaccurate polls are.  I was told polls are more accurate than my vibes and liberals were fine.

Remind me scooter, who won the election?

Edit 

You know what else isn't a good argument?  "Dumb people."  You know what the data doesn't support?  "Dumb people."  Yet you don't have any issues with the laziness there.  Funny how that works.  

Alright, one last attempt I'll just spell it out for you. The reason personal vibes is not the way to find out the truth about something is that the issues with surveys you mention "sample bias and sample size" are so much worse for any one person's experience. Those who do surveys are aware of these limitations and do their best to counter them in different ways. On the other hand you just lived your life. Your vibes being right once doesn't upend the entire field of statistics. 

I can try to defend the dumb people idea if you want. Here I'll try to demo for you how to get beyond vibes and defend a thought you had. I'm already aware that those with higher college education tend to vote more liberal but that probably isn't satisfying so let's go with IQ vs. political tendency. First study on google and we get:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39130356/

And check it out, social liberalism is associated with higher scores on average. Now to be fair it would depend how many standard deviations you qualify as the marker of "stupid" but the trend is there. 

As you go through more of the studies you get:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9548663/

Which was trying to determine if IQ correlated with economic conservatism because as they mention: "Indeed, empirical evidence supports the view that a link between cognitive abilities and political attitudes exists (e.g., Kanazawa, 2010; Meisenberg, 2015). More specifically, most studies indicate that lower cognitive abilities are linked to the endorsement of conservative political views (for overviews, see Onraet et al., 2015; Van Hiel et al., 2010)."

So there you go. Dumb people tend more to vote conservative. 



...