sources: cnn exit polling for demographics, ap for total general result counts and https://www.uncommittedmovement.com/
title stolen from @[email protected] because i thought it was good
this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
171 points (79.4% liked)
Political Memes
5473 readers
2787 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That .46% still represents individuals who voted Democrat in the primary, but indicated non-commitment to any candidate as a way to voice their positions.
You cannot in sound faith compare the uncommitted turnout to the general loss margin and draw conclusions without further data, though I respect the inquisitive approach in doing so.
It is good to note the increase, as you have here. To use the increase as an attack or blame, as others have elsewhere, is ignorant and bigoted.
Likewise, you cannot in sound faith equivocate people's general election votes with people's votes in the Democratic primary.
People are complaining about how others voted in the general election, not about them voting uncommitted in the primary. I, for example, am complaining about people's general election votes, but I'm also part of that small fraction who voted uncommitted in the Democratic primary. Of course, I'm not bringing race into it - I'm complaining about everyone who didn't do the most effective thing to prevent Trump's election.
sounds like this post isn’t about you then :)
No, it's just a bad-faith strawman.
trust me man it sounds like i have no beef with you or your position. i list some examples of the rhetoric i actually do have qualms with here: https://lemmy.world/comment/13552387
feel free to check those out and understand the difference, otherwise feel free to keep being argumentative and abrasive. i have no investment either way it just sounds like you came on here for a fight rather than to discuss.
I'm not sure where in that thread with PugJesus (which I read before making even my first comment) you show any examples of that. You make statements that you dislike something they and I also dislike, but that's not the same as examples of the rhetoric.
This post is bad faith because it's implying that there's a large backlash against uncommitted primary voters but no backlash against white people who voted for Trump. Both of those are false, so it's based on two false premises.
those quotes that you and i both dislike are the backlash. those are real quotes i have seen written. my concern is the disproportional count of attacks against an ethnic minority, not that there is “no backlash against white people.” my concern is communicating solidarity and collective consciousness against a common enemy.
your concern appears to be making up things about me to be angry at, so your account is now blocked. i hope you have a really good rest of your week.
My concern is that you're making up things to be angry at, but keep up that projection mate!
Then what conclusion is meant to be drawn in this meme by bringing that data point up?
To expose the hypocrisy in people group A (white voters) getting less attack and blame than people group B (Arab American voters et al), despite being two orders of magnitude larger.
In other words, to expose leftist infighting that disproportionately benefits the status quo and could lead to unjustified xenophobic violence. Thanks for your question. :)
I mean, at this point, most of us talking about politics already know that the majority of white folk in the US are fascist (or, in terms the mainstream media prefers to use, 'Republican'). That's like talking about the sky being blue. No one is talking about the white vote because we already expected the majority to vote for the oppression of minority groups, like they have in the past (at minimum) 10 presidential elections. That minority groups have increased their support for the oppression of minority groups is much more noteworthy.
Is using it as an example of leopards eating peoples' faces an attack or blame, just to clarify?
I don’t know what that leopards thing is, or after googling, care.
An entirely different matter is “solidarity is over/I have no more sympathy for X ethnic group/I hope you suffer X hate crime.” Very real and material statements I have seen.
People who support something bad being surprised when that bad thing happens to them.
Then we're in agreement there. There's no excuse for that.
Hell yeah! Thanks 🤝
You're forgetting that this group deliveredMI because of their stunt. Dearborn has the largest concentraction of Arabs ooutside the Middle East. Note Talib won her seat easily in contrast to Harris despite both being Democrats. It's not bigotry, it's just math
I am in fact not forgetting about Michigan.
https://www.270towin.com/ Here is an interactive map of the 2024 election. If you can use your math to get it to show a Harris win by just switching Michigan, I will change my position. 😄
seeing an awful lot of downvotes in ratio to a dearth of screenshots proving me wrong 😉 it’s okay to be misinformed; take your time to learn and grow ❤️