Perhaps there will be another huge tariff raise again, in some months

I think they do not care and want as much money as possible ; I doubt many of them are capable of strong feelings of any sort

Rubber ducks, unite!

I don’t think its a communication problem, I thought that about myself for a few years and finally worked through it. Deaf ears cannot hear. Supporting my contention, is that I have seen people try to improve methods for counting ballots in the USA, and invariably, they give up after shouting to the void after a few years, usually less than five.

Some movements, like getting Virginia to use paper ballots, are rare victories, and are invariably regional in scope.

So, temporarily ignoring who is doing what in cheating, and how prevalent it is, and for how long it has been happening ( I have been against Texas electronic voting enabling cheating for the past generation, and its not hacking, but that is my own starting point into this).

I think anyone who understands the overall issue can agree that the average political participate, or spectator, in the USA, has absolutely no concept of democracy, and is basically an interesting study in psychology. Because, it takes mental gymnastics to overlook exit polls being off, and to just trust whatever process is going on, which they are neither interested in, or curious about. And yet be so hyped up about how many people vote, and for who. Its just a contradiction on so many levels.

For me, its been a singularly frustrating experience. Because I have one foot in the camp of people who do not care, and one foot in the camp of people who do care. I think that is what makes people like me rare.

The people who are worth something are already interested in the subject and have taught themselves more than is in the curriculum. AI will not change that.

I feel this is such a complicated issue I do not understand at all. One would think that republicans would take interest in why their candidates loose in the primaries, or the democrats would want to think really hard about the evidence coming from the famous close votes to control the senate or house. But, no.

I came from the computer side of things, with my criticism of voting software. For a long time I tried to talk about software. I figured early on that people were, like you described, just tuning me out. But, after I tried to change tack, and skip any technology or math, there was still no interest.

Over the years I have had many discussions and I concluded this was simply a taboo subject for those who are active in politics. However, those who are cynical, and not participating, readily see the value and truth, but see little value of the knowledge. We have no ready made audience for such discussions.

For a long time I just felt like there was something simply broken in political discussion. There is a wide disconnect between those who participate in American politics and everyone else. Its not math, its not science, its faith. We are challenging the faith of the politically active. What does that make us? Heretics.

We are heretics who speak of things that, if taken seriously, would invalidate the majority of USA elections. The truth would burn the country down. Its remarkable there is such tolerance as seen, and its just people ignoring the few who see the Emperor has no clothes.

And we will be ignored here, there, everywhere, for at least a generation or two, if not longer.

I’ve been trying to raise awareness about exit polls being off for years, as well as many states flunking statistical tests with precincts. All the major news in the USA stopped using exit polls to predict many races.

It’s not rocket science, and the numbers can be run by most people with a high school math level and a small level of programming. The raw data is readily available from both government and organizations.

But, this has no interest for any party activists, across the spectrum. Over a decade of trying did convinced me Americans who were politically active really do not want to know.

deliberate sabotage. People make a lot of money when large institutions fail

There is no way from here in the USA now to Scandinavian balance, using any path of democracy.

The title is click bait but the article is decent

Slightly amusing because most of the active users are perhaps AI powered bots now, run by Reddit.

If that is the case, then it seems to me that this is a repeat of the locking out of third parties, similar to the api change two years ago, but now for those that use bots?

Grammar edit

deleted by creator

I read some books by Alice Miller that discussed some childhoods of authoritarian rulers and they were all of unloved. They had not one adult stick up for them, be their advocate or helper, during their childhood years.

Many of us as children have been unwanted or unloved by our caregivers. Most of us had at least one adult: an uncle, grandmother, teacher etc, who truly tried to help at least once.

What the monsters in history had in common is an absence of evidence of even that happening for them. And their revenge as adults was terrible.

I’m just a lurker in these things, but it seems to me that what you need is a way to find YouTubers who don’t want to be paid, who think their message is important and who don’t rely on video revenue. Who seek new communities to grow their audience.

Religion of all types fit this bill. Especially the aggressive sects of Christianity, Islam and Hindu . Especially the nationalist sects

Cool theory. But should not work if the universe is much larger than what can be seen though? Unless it’s just our visible part of the universe is rotating in a mind boggling large structure? And why not? All matter clumps, and a huge universe should have countless structures that are the size of all we know

I have thoughts this is an excellent sample of those who watch Fox News

Our Omnibus draws samples entirely from the SSRS Opinion Panel, which has a probability-based recruitment methodology. No one can volunteer or sign up for the SSRS Opinion Panel; members are randomly selected and invited to participate. The panel recruits randomly selected panelists using a nationally-representative address-based sample (ABS) design with a randomly dialed prepaid cell phone supplement (RDD). This reduces the risk of bias and ensures that bots or fraudulent panelists are not recruited.

So, people who answer strange phone numbers. I think 15 years ago that would have been fine. But now, not so much, and I really don’t think this filter is talked about as much as much as I would like.

Try looking for “ssrs scams”, and mixed into that are actual experiences with the survey, by people asking about what they experienced. Also mixed into are the various actual scams that pretend to be legitimate.

A huge percentage of mentally healthy USA adults would not participate

It’s too early to say it, and I hope it never comes to pass, but I hope somebody made future contingency plans to transfer this to another country.

It reminds me of the spate of articles 8 years ago about this; how headlines made mountains out of molehill changes in stats.

The fact is, about of a third of Americans would be pleased with orange-face no matter what he did or who got hurt.

All these leopard-eating-faces articles are just modern day morality plays ( the performance of drama about how the wicked or sinners get their justice, or tearfully beg for forgiveness). People been enjoying this even before the printing press

Coal.