Quote from: Barrister on May 15, 2024, 03:21:26 PMQuote from: Sophie Scholl on May 15, 2024, 02:27:00 PMIsn't one of the big issues with modern polling that it is conducted via landlines only which tends to skew toward older and rural folks with those demographics being much redder than the voting population as a whole?
No.
There are faults with polling, but they have not relied on landlines only for years and years.
Proof: I am somehow on a list of people that answers pollsters, so I get calls pretty regularly. A few years ago we were the Canadian equivalent of Nielson family that tracked our TV viewership.
Anyways - the fact I am regularly called by pollsters, as a middle-aged, middle-class cis-hetero white guy, might reflect a certain bias.
But they only ever call my cell phone.
Quote from: Jacob on May 15, 2024, 01:52:03 PMSo Minsky, how big is the risk of blatant and significant voter fraud in your view?
Quote from: Josquius on May 15, 2024, 02:41:51 PMIs it just me (does Google have me wrongly profiled?) or is the Internet very Indian these days?
Basic searches without qualifiers will often prioritise very Indian results for me.
Such as when I wanted to find out what ntr meant having read a comment about manhwa saying this was way too common - turns out it's some Indian actor....
It actually means cheating and is a Japanese porn term which seems to have found use for the act in general. Who knew.
Quote from: Sophie Scholl on May 15, 2024, 02:27:00 PMIsn't one of the big issues with modern polling that it is conducted via landlines only which tends to skew toward older and rural folks with those demographics being much redder than the voting population as a whole?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 15, 2024, 01:35:44 PMQuote from: Barrister on May 15, 2024, 01:11:03 PMUltimately it all comes down to the USSC. It does have a 6-3 conservative majority. It has so far NOT been Trump's lackey, ruling against him on several issues, but I understand the concern.
It has definitely slanted towards Trump. The scheduling of the immunity case and the handling of the questions presented, are hard to explain absent a motive to deliberately delay the criminal case. It's true that as to substance, the Court will not rule whatever Trump says because they are aware of the implications that such a precedent will set for other Presidents. But there are many things they can do and have done to help Trump short of that.
QuoteQuotePeople still bring up 2000 Bush v Gore, where it was a literal razor's edge election, and by all accounts the USSC got it right.
Right in what sense? The opinion didn't make a lot of sense in terms of reasoning or precedent, and even the majority was sufficiently embarrassed to take the extraordinary step of declaring it to be non-precedential. The Court got it "right" in that the after of fact recounts didn't support Gore and it's true there wasn't any plausible scenario where Gore would have won the election regardless of how the Court ruled. But it was far from a shining moment of glory for the Court.
Page created in 0.088 seconds with 15 queries.