US midterms: which polls are sound?

True compassion is all that matters now. Good luck.

@Noflaps said [^](/forum/redirect/post/6W7XWczZ) True compassion is all that matters now. Good luck.

I think not tearing up the wonderful institutions of Western Civilization and not fostering leftwing authoritarian solutions is important, too. I wish America, Britain and France good luck, too.

clousems

@Noflaps said ^

@spidersarepeople2 writes, apparently to me, that "It's obvious you don't really believe what you say, and clear you're just here to spread propaganda."

I'm QUITE sincere about everything I wrote that you didn't refute.

I'm not employed as a "propogandist." I simply disagree with some things that you appear to believe.

Notice how, instead of refuting the points I make, you attempt to turn t...

Again, this way of defending your points just doesn't hold water.

Complaining about people resorting to ad hominem in response to acknowledging flaws in your own arguments is pretty much just arrogance.

Much like you accuse others of doing, you haven't solidly refuted much of anything in this thread. You assert much, but without providing evidence. You make a bunch of invalid comparisons. Then you complain about nobody refuting claims that you generate (even though nobody is required to refute your claims, especially the ones that are already flawed from a logical perspective-- for example, insinuating that inflation isn't high because there was one point in US history that it was higher, and using that to mock Democrats who are worried about cost of living; nor are we required to refute those that have no bearing on anything, such as the fact that Trump has held large rallies), while mocking the left at every turn.

At this point, I think questioning rationality and objectivity is warranted.

FWIW, Google Gemini identified 19 propaganda statements in your first 3 posts, so the internet thinks you're a propagandist, as well. It even generated a nice little list categorizing each instance of propaganda technique, if you're interested.

@Noflaps said [^](/forum/redirect/post/6W7XWczZ) > @spidersarepeople2 writes, apparently to me, that "It's obvious you don't really believe what you say, and clear you're just here to spread propaganda." > > I'm QUITE sincere about everything I wrote that you didn't refute. > > I'm not employed as a "propogandist." I simply disagree with some things that you appear to believe. > > Notice how, instead of refuting the points I make, you attempt to turn t... Again, this way of defending your points just doesn't hold water. Complaining about people resorting to ad hominem in response to acknowledging flaws in your own arguments is pretty much just arrogance. Much like you accuse others of doing, you haven't solidly refuted much of anything in this thread. You assert much, but without providing evidence. You make a bunch of invalid comparisons. Then you complain about nobody refuting claims that you generate (even though nobody is required to refute your claims, especially the ones that are already flawed from a logical perspective-- for example, insinuating that inflation isn't high because there was one point in US history that it was higher, and using that to mock Democrats who are worried about cost of living; nor are we required to refute those that have no bearing on anything, such as the fact that Trump has held large rallies), while mocking the left at every turn. At this point, I think questioning rationality and objectivity is warranted. FWIW, Google Gemini identified 19 propaganda statements in your first 3 posts, so the internet thinks you're a propagandist, as well. It even generated a nice little list categorizing each instance of propaganda technique, if you're interested.

Noflaps

edited

@clousems writes, apparently directed to me, that "Complaining about people resorting to ad hominem in response to acknowledging flaws in your own arguments is pretty much just arrogance."

Please read that again. Some of those who question my "sincerity" and a call me a "propogandist" don't even try to genuinely address with specificity the points I try to make.

And now @clousems adds "arrogance" to the personal attack directed against me. Try to notice that.

People are worried about high prices. Those prices are high from a CUMULATIVE effect that began well before Trump took office. Much of the high prices we currently experience happened before Trump took office less than two years ago.

That's not an "illogical" observation. It's simple fact. Don't believe me. Bother to check.

Having an opinion, and stating it, doesn't make me a propogandist. Is everybody in the thread a propogandist, as well? Or just those who disagree with the Left.

Clousem's last post tends to support my previous point -- it doesn't really refute with any specificity and argument (other than vague insulting implications of "illogic" or a lack of "objectivity") any of the points I've tried to make. It merely expends effort to insult and call into question my ability to reason and my objectivity.

Inflation still exists -- but the current rate of inflation -- the rate of the CONTINUING increase in prices -- is quite a bit less than its peak under Biden.

Observing that isn't illogical. It's a simple fact. Don't believe me -- check.

Others can claim that I'm illogical and arrogant, if they wish, rather than truly address my points with specificity. I write a LOT and try to make many substantive points. But often, sooner or later, some responses turn to making ME the subject, in an unpleasant, insulting way.

Others are welcome to their opinions about me. And, increasingly, I don't expect to hear much else from many of those with whom I disagree. Some merely try to put in their "two cents" using scornful emojis. Is that substantive argument? Not that I can see.

However, I admire @tpr, even though we seldom agree, because he actually tries to respond substantively to the points I make, rather than just to insult or get personal.

@clousems writes, apparently directed to me, that "Complaining about people resorting to ad hominem in response to acknowledging flaws in your own arguments is pretty much just arrogance." Please read that again. Some of those who question my "sincerity" and a call me a "propogandist" don't even try to genuinely address with specificity the points I try to make. And now @clousems adds "arrogance" to the personal attack directed against me. Try to notice that. People are worried about high prices. Those prices are high from a CUMULATIVE effect that began well before Trump took office. Much of the high prices we currently experience happened before Trump took office less than two years ago. That's not an "illogical" observation. It's simple fact. Don't believe me. Bother to check. Having an opinion, and stating it, doesn't make me a propogandist. Is everybody in the thread a propogandist, as well? Or just those who disagree with the Left. Clousem's last post tends to support my previous point -- it doesn't really refute with any specificity and argument (other than vague insulting implications of "illogic" or a lack of "objectivity") any of the points I've tried to make. It merely expends effort to insult and call into question my ability to reason and my objectivity. Inflation still exists -- but the current rate of inflation -- the rate of the CONTINUING increase in prices -- is quite a bit less than its peak under Biden. Observing that isn't illogical. It's a simple fact. Don't believe me -- check. Others can claim that I'm illogical and arrogant, if they wish, rather than truly address my points with specificity. I write a LOT and try to make many substantive points. But often, sooner or later, some responses turn to making ME the subject, in an unpleasant, insulting way. Others are welcome to their opinions about me. And, increasingly, I don't expect to hear much else from many of those with whom I disagree. Some merely try to put in their "two cents" using scornful emojis. Is that substantive argument? Not that I can see. However, I admire @tpr, even though we seldom agree, because he actually tries to respond substantively to the points I make, rather than just to insult or get personal.

salmon_rushdie

@Noflaps said ^

What would that have to do with gas prices in California or New York?

As I already typed: "I don't predict much of an answer for that one." I was right, apparently. But the question won't go away -- why are many in blue cities SUDDENLY all worried about gas prices NOW, when they've actually been higher, for longer, under Democrat presidents. Don't believe me. Check.

I'm sure Democra...

he literally was never talking about gas prices in cali or new york

you can't just ignore someones point, refuse to elaborate and then posit a new question to them and hold them accountable to answering it

@Noflaps said [^](/forum/redirect/post/ACac4DNU) > What would that have to do with gas prices in California or New York? > > As I already typed: "I don't predict much of an answer for that one." I was right, apparently. But the question won't go away -- why are many in blue cities SUDDENLY all worried about gas prices NOW, when they've actually been higher, for longer, under Democrat presidents. Don't believe me. Check. > > I'm sure Democra... he literally was never talking about gas prices in cali or new york you can't just ignore someones point, refuse to elaborate and then posit a new question to them and hold them accountable to answering it

Noflaps

edited

@Salmon_Rushdie, the following post in this thread occurred BEFORE my post about which you now complain.

"there are things outside of polling that give very strong indicators - it's extremely clear that trump is incredibly unpopular right now... and prices are very high - the latter alone is usually enough to lose an incumbent control of congress."

Please specifically notice the mention of "very high" prices. Do you notice that?

I responded to that. Democrats are frequently complaining about "affordability" and "high gas prices." They do so with the apparent hope that it will sway public opinion AGAINST Republicans, which is what polls ostensibly hope to reflect.

My post RESPONDS by pointing out the irony of Democrats in society (not necessarily the poster, since I don't know his or her party) trying to move public opinion by complaining in the media about high prices -- especially gas prices, which are the prices that the Democrats seem to be complaining most about, now that egg prices have come down.

As you can now see, I hope, that I try to RESPOND to what I read. Some don't care for that, I guess. But such a response is hardly illogical or appearing out of thin air.

Do you have anything substantive to say about THAT point? Do you think California -- run by Democrats, mostly -- has shown great concern to curb high gas prices in its own governance?

Do you know that oil prices were high under Democrat presidents BEFORE Trump, apparently without the same handwringing from some of the same people in media who try to make political hay out of gas prices now?

@Salmon_Rushdie, the following post in this thread occurred BEFORE my post about which you now complain. "there are things outside of polling that give very strong indicators - it's extremely clear that trump is incredibly unpopular right now... and prices are very high - the latter alone is usually enough to lose an incumbent control of congress." Please specifically notice the mention of "very high" prices. Do you notice that? I responded to that. Democrats are frequently complaining about "affordability" and "high gas prices." They do so with the apparent hope that it will sway public opinion AGAINST Republicans, which is what polls ostensibly hope to reflect. My post RESPONDS by pointing out the irony of Democrats in society (not necessarily the poster, since I don't know his or her party) trying to move public opinion by complaining in the media about high prices -- especially gas prices, which are the prices that the Democrats seem to be complaining most about, now that egg prices have come down. As you can now see, I hope, that I try to RESPOND to what I read. Some don't care for that, I guess. But such a response is hardly illogical or appearing out of thin air. Do you have anything substantive to say about THAT point? Do you think California -- run by Democrats, mostly -- has shown great concern to curb high gas prices in its own governance? Do you know that oil prices were high under Democrat presidents BEFORE Trump, apparently without the same handwringing from some of the same people in media who try to make political hay out of gas prices now?

salmon_rushdie

edited

@Noflaps said ^

@Salmon_Rushdie, the following post in this thread occurred BEFORE my post about which you now complain.

"there are things outside of polling that give very strong indicators - it's extremely clear that trump is incredibly unpopular right now... and prices are very high - the latter alone is usually enough to lose an incumbent control of congress."

Please specifically notice the mention of "very...

Truth is, no one cares about the past when they are making decisions about now - continually bringing up the past (bringing up your political opponents past nonetheless) to justify the failings of the present is just a poor argument - no one pays kids any heeds when they get in trouble for something and their excuse is "But my brooooooother...." so why should we take these arguments seriously at all?

it doesn't matter if prices were high under biden or obama or whatever, and continuously pointing it out as if it justifies the present only convinces people more that there is no rational defense.

It doesn't matter if they're more expensive in Cali - everyone knows cali has specific gas taxes - that's not remotely relevant here - because they are uniformly high nationally, and they are uniformly high SPECIFICALLY because of Trump's policies.

@Noflaps said [^](/forum/redirect/post/LdaE8Fi3) > @Salmon_Rushdie, the following post in this thread occurred BEFORE my post about which you now complain. > > "there are things outside of polling that give very strong indicators - it's extremely clear that trump is incredibly unpopular right now... and prices are very high - the latter alone is usually enough to lose an incumbent control of congress." > > Please specifically notice the mention of "very... Truth is, no one cares about the past when they are making decisions about now - continually bringing up the past (bringing up your political opponents past nonetheless) to justify the failings of the present is just a poor argument - no one pays kids any heeds when they get in trouble for something and their excuse is "But my brooooooother...." so why should we take these arguments seriously at all? it doesn't matter if prices were high under biden or obama or whatever, and continuously pointing it out as if it justifies the present only convinces people more that there is no rational defense. It doesn't matter if they're more expensive in Cali - everyone knows cali has specific gas taxes - that's not remotely relevant here - because they are uniformly high nationally, and they are uniformly high SPECIFICALLY because of Trump's policies.

salmon_rushdie

@Noflaps

oh and lets not forget the elephant in the room

buying diesel from Russia to try and save your party face before an election amounts to straight up treason,

but of course the rest of us have always known he was subservient to Putin

@Noflaps oh and lets not forget the elephant in the room buying diesel from Russia to try and save your party face before an election amounts to straight up treason, but of course the rest of us have always known he was subservient to Putin

Noflaps

edited

Trump is not "subservient to Putin." Obviously.

And complaining about high prices that did much of their rising IN THE PAST, and then asking us to ignore the past as we complain about those high prices, presents an incomplete and consequently unfair argument.

Yes, inflation hasn't been zero under Trump. But it's LOWER. And it's high prices that actually hurt -- not current inflation numbers -- and most of our current high prices did not do most of their rising to that level during Trump's term.

So, using high prices to bash Trump exclusively, while trying to ignore the substantial past contribution of others to those high prices, seems quite unfair. But it just keeps on happening in the media. Which can quite unfairly affect public opinion and therefore affect polls.

Does anybody think wide open borders didn't affect rents, as many new millions joined the market for American apartments? Really? Well, was it Trump who essentially opened the borders? Nope. Trump secured the borders after years of permitted mass migration.

I'm just asking people to resist talking points without thinking carefully about all influences -- not just political convenience.

Anybody who believes that any Democrats who hate fossil fuels, and under whose governance gas prices are higher than in other places, and who have overseen a loss of refineries, will somehow really lower gasoline prices long term are much more optimistic than I am about that.

I find Democrat complaints about high prices to be rather ironic. Much of the price increases to reach current levels happened when Democrats were in control. Don't believe me. Check.

But it's the midterms, I guess. So, I'm sure disagreement will continue.

Oh, and by the way, taxes on gas raise gas prices to the consumer. That's just as real an increase as any other. It stings just as bad. And tax rates reflect government decisions, do they not? Which party is in charge of California? Do high gas taxes reflect a great concern with high gas prices, do you think?

Trump is not "subservient to Putin." Obviously. And complaining about high prices that did much of their rising IN THE PAST, and then asking us to ignore the past as we complain about those high prices, presents an incomplete and consequently unfair argument. Yes, inflation hasn't been zero under Trump. But it's LOWER. And it's high prices that actually hurt -- not current inflation numbers -- and most of our current high prices did not do most of their rising to that level during Trump's term. So, using high prices to bash Trump exclusively, while trying to ignore the substantial past contribution of others to those high prices, seems quite unfair. But it just keeps on happening in the media. Which can quite unfairly affect public opinion and therefore affect polls. Does anybody think wide open borders didn't affect rents, as many new millions joined the market for American apartments? Really? Well, was it Trump who essentially opened the borders? Nope. Trump secured the borders after years of permitted mass migration. I'm just asking people to resist talking points without thinking carefully about all influences -- not just political convenience. Anybody who believes that any Democrats who hate fossil fuels, and under whose governance gas prices are higher than in other places, and who have overseen a loss of refineries, will somehow really lower gasoline prices long term are much more optimistic than I am about that. I find Democrat complaints about high prices to be rather ironic. Much of the price increases to reach current levels happened when Democrats were in control. Don't believe me. Check. But it's the midterms, I guess. So, I'm sure disagreement will continue. Oh, and by the way, taxes on gas raise gas prices to the consumer. That's just as real an increase as any other. It stings just as bad. And tax rates reflect government decisions, do they not? Which party is in charge of California? Do high gas taxes reflect a great concern with high gas prices, do you think?

spidersarepeople2

@Noflaps said ^

Trump is not "subservient to Putin." Obviously.

How is this obvious?

@Noflaps said [^](/forum/redirect/post/PhTTAPIg) > Trump is not "subservient to Putin." Obviously. How is this obvious?