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.
- 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!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
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
But, of course, if that were the case his vote total would be lower in all of his district and it was not.
That's not how that works, different communities consume different forms of media and at different rates.
So, you're saying that people in the Bronx don't have TVs?
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.
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.
Look up public television viewership numbers based on income, ask me whether or not the Bronx WATCHED Latimer's commercials, or even saw them.
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.
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.
Again, if money was the reason, his whole district would have voted the same way. It did not.
Again, if the whole district could be marketed to the same exact way, you'd be right.
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
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.
No I agree, but he seemed keen to try and bring up facts, wanted to be sure we had receipts just in case.
Fair