• whoreticulture
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      8 months ago

      To be fair, the question was “do you think violence is necessary for the US to get back on track

      Make America Great Again is the Republican line, so of course the poll is going to lean this way.

        • whoreticulture
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m looking at what the polling question actually is. Liberals, kinda by definition, don’t want the country to “get back on track” or return to a period of former greatness.

          • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            I would agree we’re pretty far off the track. Remember when the biggest scandals were presidential blowies and tan suits?

            • whoreticulture
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              8 months ago

              How about Watergate? There have always been scandals.

              Or on another note, how about when presidential blowies were a scandal, gay people couldn’t even get married? The appeal to an idealized past is a conservative thing.

              • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                I’m not saying turn back the clock, I just want politics to stop being so… I mean marjorie taylor greene exists, for fucks sake.

                Also let’s be real, Watergate is tame in 2024. Hell, PRISM wasn’t even as big as Watergate and it was 100x worse.

          • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            The liberals I know think it’s pretty off track. Specifically, it fell off the rails when Trump got elected.

            The track switch probably was thrown back in the 2000 election. We all hoped President Obama was gonna get us back on track.

            MAGA wants to revert the us to some racist 1950s version. Violence is basically required to achieve that vision.

            Liberals want to put the US back on track to equality, human rights and a secure future (see SCOTUS, for example of how off track the US is). We just don’t think violence is a good way to do take.

            • whoreticulture
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              I guess I wasn’t thinking about it that way, that “on track” could be that Democrats are imagining there was a time when liberal ideals were being actively worked towards. I don’t think that’s really true, but I now see that someone could think that way.

          • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            So, are you a foreign operative, fascist or tankie?

            There’s no way educated native English speakers could be as far off in either reading comprehension, or understanding of US politics, as you are.

            Half these comments read like the Reddit PsyOps campaigns of 2016, and the vote counts indicate the same.

            • whoreticulture
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              lmao you’re the one who doesn’t understand how language is used to manipulate polling and headlines

        • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Sorry, that jab wasn’t necessary. I think your comment was kind of a dick thing to say but I could’ve said it in a more constructive way.

      • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        So if the questions had been “do you think violence is necessary for hope and change” more dems would have said ‘yes’?

        lol

        Pretty clear the operative phrase was do you think violence is necessary.

        • whoreticulture
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I would have said yes to “is violence necessary” because in some situations it is, but I would have not even been able to answer the question as asked, or I would have said no, because I don’t agree with what they are saying violence is necessary for. The context is important, and flavored how people answered the question.

          My comment was for people who understand that polling can be biased based on how you word the question.

          “Do you think violence is necessary” is how the poll is being reported on, but that is not what was asked.

          • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            You think this phrasing was biased against republicans. I offered an equivalent phrasing that would be similarly biased against dems.

            Do you think more dems would have responded positively to political violence if it was just phrased a little differently?

        • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Unironically yeah it changes the answers a LOT. There are entire sections of sociology dealing with much smaller polling biases.

            • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              I’m genuinely unsure of what you mean by “against” here-- are you implying the original phrasing biased Republican answers towards or against violence, and do you consider that to be a good or bad thing?

              To answer your question though, I believe phrases that could influence Democrats to vote yes could be “Do you think violence is necessary to combat hatred” or as was suggested earlier “Do you think violence is necessary for hope and change”. Basically anything that ties violence to their desired values or outcomes.

              • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                I’m genuinely unsure of what you mean by “against” here-- are you implying the original phrasing biased Republican answers towards or against violence, and do you consider that to be a good or bad thing?

                Maybe read back up the chain if you’re this lost.

                or as was suggested earlier “Do you think violence is necessary for hope and change”. Basically anything that ties violence to their desired values or outcomes.

                I’d love to see that poll ;)

                • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Maybe read back up the chain if you’re this lost.

                  Fuck off

                  I’d love to see that poll ;)

                  If I make one I’ll send it in this community and you’ll get to see me proven right. Unfortunately you’ll be blocked so I won’t see your response.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s built into the slogan. “The grass is always greener” doesn’t have the same ring to it.