view the rest of the comments
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
See, now here we have something that can be empirically proven with data from reliable public institutions. The cost of living for a place, and the people living there; how much money they make, and what they’re buying. All hard numbers.
And yet, we have reporting here on peoples’ opinion about financial situations. The subtext I read in this was that opinions are more important than facts and that reporting on the poll results was of greater import than the horrifying reality of creeping kleptocratic fascist psychopaths getting away with things that are the obvious cause of our limited and declining prosperity.
Here's the thing, people vote on how they feel. That's why you poll people in this way. It's a rather simple concept no need to attach a crazy amount of meaning to it.
Ideally the facts should be reported and people should be polled. Both are vital.
It's a valid comment, but I disagree that you have to reach that conclusion.
This poll gives a better picture of US citizens' ability (or lack thereof) to obtain and understand basic facts when you combine it with actual data. I.e., the facts alone tell us only what reality is, and the opinion poll alone only tells us what Americans think, but together they tell us how well-informed Americans are.
That, in turn, helps suggest (even if proof is harder) how effective right-wing information technology is, how seamless the Fox News/influencer/social media info bubbles are.
And, as depressing as it is, opinions (the perceptions of a party's or candidates' culpability and capability) decide elections where reality and opinion are in conflict. 2024 proved at least to me that we have reached an inflection point and entered the Disinformation Age, where propaganda actually can consistently win out against reality by sheer flood of disinformation, if it's not moderated or regulated.
As soon as a news story includes both the feeling and the fact, your comment becomes valid.
I get the snark, but honestly, we are all capable of synthesizing information from multiple sources - a story can be useful even if it supplies just one or more true premises of a valid conclusion.
Fair. Point me to a news story that contains the facts so that I may sufficiently synthesize.
Your comments are far too arrogant for how completely ignorant they are.
You wanna know why I believed that America would become a fascist dictatorship 25 years ago? Because of combining my opinion of watching Fox News (considering it to be fascist propaganda) with raw stats, like Fox News being the #1 cable news network, with numerous other opinion polls proving that R's perception of events were dependent on Fox propaganda, divergent from both reality and D/I opinions of reality. I knew R's were the most propagandized population in America because other populations opinion polling did not change anywhere near as significantly over time, nor did it mirror the changing narratives of propaganda. These have been reinforced continuously by the vast majority of both polling and other raw stats since then.
In statistics, all data points are some abstract proxy that attempt to measure reality. They are not reality itself, and none of them can be trusted to provide some end all be all proof of reality. Even math itself is an abstract representation (language) we use to understand and communicate.
What you wrote has fuck-all to do with Triumph's point that the entire media industry reporting on opinions INSTEAD OF facts means it isn't doing its goddamn job.
Well, we had the same idiotic bullshit of constantly talking about people's vibes on the economy during Biden's term, too, and lots of real thinkpieces about how the Democrats should not dare to bother to talk about facts, but just go with the vibes, and the vibes only, and shame on anyone for talking about reality. Most especially in the run-up to the election of 2024, of course.
I get that you have to poll people for their sentiments, though, but I wish the media would do a better job of explaining to people that there are, indeed, hard numbers we could talk about as well, and "alternative facts" are not a thing.
Of course, the state of media is deliberately degraded. There's a reason billionaires like to own all the news outlets.
If a sufficient portion of the population is ignorant or ambivalent of the fact of our creeping, kleptocratic, fascist, psychopathic, pedophile overlords robbing of us our rights and prosperity then nothing changes. People giving a shit does matter more than facts these days. That's not a valuation of opinion over fact, more of an observation of how our propagandized population works.
Just take it as a description of what people are perceiving, not a way of trying to derive the facts. You’re correct, there is data. If you haven’t figured out by now that data is not what governs people’s perception, then you aren’t paying very close attention. We are in a post-data, post-truth culture where knowing the fact is not enough. You have to poll, separately, how those facts are trickling down to perceptions.
I think it's because a poll showing that opinions are shifting that way gives people hope about things getting better, because the hope is that public opinion would drive politics.
It wouldn't really be news to people who are struggling that things are bad. But it is news (and good news at that) if other people's opinions are shifting to acknowledge that.
It's also about driving engagement, a vibes based article about a poll will have a lot more engagement when its shared around social media. Sure you'd still have some people arguing and engaging regalardless, but a large and very vocal portion of the internet has been trained now to just ignore facts that don't fit their narrative as being funded by George Soros or similar such non-sense, they see a title like "data driven research shows economic conditions worsening in key areas" they skip over it as boring and too complicated to understand, but if they see a title saying americans "feel" a certain way, then they as an american (or someone pretending to be american) can chime in about how they personally dont feel that way and anyone who does feel that way is lazy and stupid, and then it becomes a whole chain of people doing that and others citing factual data which then gets ignored.