this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
292 points (94.5% liked)

politics

18934 readers
3465 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rapidcreek 14 points 3 months ago (19 children)

In the NY-16 district election, Jamaal Bowman received 84% of the vote in the Bronx, a working class area. He did poorly in the suburbs of Westchester and ended up with 42% He lost in the suburbs. Why do you think that is?

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Spending. I think his outreach was unable to beat the advertisements paid for by his opposition, in part due to the absolutely bonkers investment from the AIPAC. So, that's my answer

[–] Copernican 1 points 3 months ago

simple people over simplify answers. money was one factor. but his outreach game sucked. he embarrassed himself in nationally visible ways (fire alarm). he took hard stances on divisive political issues (Israel/Hams) when his constituents had divided opinions. he district was redrawn so he lost part of his base.

[–] Rapidcreek 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

But, of course, if that were the case his vote total would be lower in all of his district and it was not.

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That's not how that works, different communities consume different forms of media and at different rates.

[–] Rapidcreek 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So, you're saying that people in the Bronx don't have TVs?

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I'm saying people in the suburbs seem more adept at picking up garbage takes

But more pointedly, suburban households are more likely to purchase cable television packages or engage in live TV coverage, where a majority of that spending took the form of advertisements.

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Hidayati, N., Kartikowati, S., & Gimin, G. (2021). The influence of income level, financial literature, and social media use on teachers consumption behavior. Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(3), 479-490.

In case you needed a source

[–] Cryophilia 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Nuts that anyone would need a source for "people with different incomes consume different media".

If you're too dumb to understand that, you're too dumb to read an academic study.

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No I agree, but he seemed keen to try and bring up facts, wanted to be sure we had receipts just in case.

[–] Cryophilia 1 points 3 months ago
[–] Rapidcreek 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I worked in NYC a lot. Which is the reason I still watch NYC TV. Local stations had quite a number of Latimer commercials, which you can pick up with an antenna BTW. The Bronx saw the same number of commercials. Yet they still broke Bowman's way when the suburbs did not. Occums razor.

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Look up public television viewership numbers based on income, ask me whether or not the Bronx WATCHED Latimer's commercials, or even saw them.

[–] Rapidcreek 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Occums razor still applies. What is more logical? That Bowman couldn't carry the suburbs because he didn't appeal to them, or because of advertising? Hey, I like the Bronx, and I know they get as much crap during political season as the next guy. It wasn't advertising, it was Bowman himself.

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Someone gets outspent by a factor of 7, and you think the most likely reason is the candidate? I don't know man, I think you're not applying Occam's* Razor appropriately.

[–] Rapidcreek -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Again, if money was the reason, his whole district would have voted the same way. It did not.

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe 2 points 3 months ago

Again, if the whole district could be marketed to the same exact way, you'd be right.

load more comments (16 replies)