General politics

[TheLeviathan]

 

It's an aggregate from a lot of sources. I'm really not interested in polls, but I wanted to look for a fair reflection. It feels to you all these sources have a pro Trump bias. That is certainly possible

Could it be that there is an anti-Trump bias here?

 

I don't think bias is the word you mean, it implies something else.  I think what you mean is "sentiment" and the answer to that is probably "yes".  You might get snarky responses from others about wanting agreement, but those same posters should hold up a mirror.

 

I appreciate here that most people embrace the disagreement.  Some of the best policies are born out of wedding two different approaches together.  

However, I don't think people here would be shy to say that they don't like Trump.  And putting aside disagreements on what "should" happen due to our politics, there are objective reasons to feel he's a liar and unfit for the job.  It's just how you weigh things.  For the 40% you refer to they look past the true, and truly, awful things about this man because they care more about having a Republican in office.  For another 40% he could probably achieve world peace and he'd still be awful.  For another 20% of us we try to be a bit more careful in why we think things.  Those here seem to be mostly of the 20% persuasion.

 

But you're welcome to join in even if you support Trump.  I just hope it's with good arguments, as with any stance someone takes.

[LaBombo]

It seems to me like presidential approval polls, however they're worded or conducted, are affected by other things besides people's perception of how good a president is at his job.

 

One is simply how well people estimate the country is doing, and that's often heavily influenced by their own personal experiences. Whatever people's opinion of an incumbent (within limits whose particulars are better left to the Trump thread), they seldom lose unless the majority perception is that the country needs a serious course correction.

 

But another potential factor for approval polling of incumbents in the second half of their first term is that people start to think of the sitting president in relative terms to the perceived opponents in the upcoming election.

 

That factor probably intensifies as the election draws closer and the field narrows, but this election cycle is different, at least so far. People are already seeing that whoever the Dem nominee turns out to be, the current field and their rhetoric suggest that said nominee will attempt to turn the country left in some key policy areas.

 

There are separate polls for that, and they suggest that at least some moderates and independents probably see even Trump as the lesser of two evils when the other one is a far lefty president. If Sanders in particular ticks upward as a legit contender for the nomination, Trump's approval polling will probably reflect that devil-you-know group of voters even more.

 

 

[Vanimal46]

Nobody deserves anything. It's up to them to earn it. Capping the high end where people who have actually earned value tend to be, so that the new person with no experience and only hope of earning value can immediately realize a higher quality of life is just promoting entitlement. Live in an efficiency, eat your ramen, do your job well, and you can be the person interviewing for the $150k chief job in a few years.

 

The government is here to provide infrastructure not take care of people.

I've been out and just catching up on this thread. Love this post. Love it.

[Vanimal46]

I'm not disagreeing with the last point, but part of makes society work is collective buy-in. Work is considered valuable, in part, because it does help the collective good. Now, if suddenly no one had to work (a claim I also find dubious) what keep society together if we aren't finding ways to contribute to the lives of others?

 

And that's where my question comes in - what are 7 billion people going to do with their time? And, if you have an answer for that, is it a sustainable foundation for society? Or do we go WALL-E? Or worse?

There will always be work to do... The type of work is just changing, and frankly I don't think our workforce is ready for it. AI/automation is going to play a huge role in the near and long term future. Almost every one of the blue collar jobs will be eliminated as a result, and the definition of blue collar will be different soon enough.

 

Instead of people slaying away in a factory working to create a product, they'll be providing different services to others...

[Craig Arko]

 

There will always be work to do... The type of work is just changing, and frankly I don't think our workforce is ready for it. AI/automation is going to play a huge role in the near and long term future. Almost every one of the blue collar jobs will be eliminated as a result, and the definition of blue collar will be different soon enough.

Instead of people slaying away in a factory working to create a product, they'll be providing different services to others...

No, robots will be doing that too...

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andreamorris/2018/09/25/prediction-sex-robots-are-the-most-disruptive-technology-we-didnt-see-coming/#357bf5b06a56

[ewen21]

 

I don't think bias is the word you mean, it implies something else.  I think what you mean is "sentiment" and the answer to that is probably "yes".  You might get snarky responses from others about wanting agreement, but those same posters should hold up a mirror.

 

I did mean bias, actually.  This is basic statistics, but let me clarify.....

 

I posted a link that provided an aggregate of various approval rating polls.  There was a graph that averaged out all the polls.  That is a more accurate representation of how the nation feels than what we have here.  I am not exactly sure the numbers, but reading through this thread I noticed that literally everyone is anti-Trump.  If we were to poll this site there would be a statistical anti-Trump bias that isn't at all representative of anything you'd get from a larger more random sample

 

I did not say the people here are biased against Trump.  That is something entirely different. 

[ewen21]

 

What do you mean by bias? If you mean I think he's a horrible human,yup. What's your point? This is a message board, not a news site.

 

Thanks for that.  If you want my point see my previous post.  Also understand I don't have a problem with it.  Minnesota Twins fans who post on Twins Daily are anti-Trump, generally speaking.

 

I am curious given your response to me.  Do you think it is possible for someone to be a Trump supporter an not be a horrible human?  Also, what do you make of the growing number of African Americans who are now embracing Trump?

[ewen21]

 

Bias is not giving something a fair shake because of a preconceived notion. It's not bias that leads people around here to disapprove of Trump, it's his actions, words, and policy.

I was talking about a statistical bias, which has nothing to do with what you thought I was talking about.  Look two post back and read what I said

[Mike Sixel]

 

Thanks for that.  If you want my point see my previous post.  Also understand I don't have a problem with it.  Minnesota Twins fans who post on Twins Daily are anti-Trump, generally speaking.

 

I am curious given your response to me.  Do you think it is possible for someone to be a Trump supporter an not be a horrible human?  Also, what do you make of the growing number of African Americans who are now embracing Trump?

 

I do think you can support him and not be a bad person, yes. You and he are not the same person (ha, I assume you aren't POTUS).

 

As for your last sentence, I have no opinion either way.....

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I am curious given your response to me.  Do you think it is possible for someone to be a Trump supporter an not be a horrible human? 

Yes, I do, of course.

 

I also think he’s horrible. I think he’s a product of the system, which is also horrible in itself.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

There was nothing inevitable about automation or robots or “technological progress” replacing jobs.

 

Putting more and more Americans out of work and into welfare, workers comp, opioid abuse and suicide is a result of policies endorsed by the pro-business and moderates of both parties.

 

The left has fought and fought to keep jobs and workers (remember unions n’ stuff?) but the battle may be lost. And it’s a sick ****ing joke on all of us that the people who run this country, politicians, businessmen or otherwise, have put the blame on the left for this state of affairs.

 

Just a friendly reminder for people.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I did mean bias, actually.  This is basic statistics, but let me clarify.....

 

I posted a link that provided an aggregate of various approval rating polls.  There was a graph that averaged out all the polls.  That is a more accurate representation of how the nation feels than what we have here.  I am not exactly sure the numbers, but reading through this thread I noticed that literally everyone is anti-Trump.  If we were to poll this site there would be a statistical anti-Trump bias that isn't at all representative of anything you'd get from a larger more random sample

 

I did not say the people here are biased against Trump.  That is something entirely different. 

 

I think you could've chosen a better term given the context you were using.  The phrase "anti-Trump bias" is unclear because it can be used to mean very different things.   Using a word like "bias" evokes many other meanings.  A better, clearer use of it previously might have saved you the several layers of explanation that were asked of you.

 

Yes, the posters in this forum are not a perfect statistical replica of America.  We lean more against Trump pretty heavily.  I doubt anyone would dispute that.....so why post it?  (And i ask because I think you were asked about "bias" because people assumed you were making a larger point of contention.  Perhaps not)

[PseudoSABR]

 

I was talking about a statistical bias, which has nothing to do with what you thought I was talking about.  Look two post back and read what I said

Sorry that you weren't clear.

[TheLeviathan]

 

There will always be work to do... The type of work is just changing, and frankly I don't think our workforce is ready for it. AI/automation is going to play a huge role in the near and long term future. Almost every one of the blue collar jobs will be eliminated as a result, and the definition of blue collar will be different soon enough.

Instead of people slaying away in a factory working to create a product, they'll be providing different services to others...

 

The philosopher in me does not accept this idea that "welp, no more work....we'll just paint and wait for government rations!" as much of a thoughtful argument.  Work has been a core part of the social fabrics we have built.  I question how much people have considered the layers of consequences to a world in which a society is built where robots do all the cooperative, societal enduring work and we.....what?  Lay around and reap our rewards?

 

Call me a cynic, but a world like that isn't one where my first concern is how will the government keep all of us happy and fed.  It's more like....in this new anarchy is it the robots that do away with most of us or each other?  Who gets the job done first?

[PseudoSABR]

 

The philosopher in me does not accept this idea that "welp, no more work....we'll just paint and wait for government rations!" as much of a thoughtful argument.  Work has been a core part of the social fabrics we have built.  I question how much people have considered the layers of consequences to a world in which a society is built where robots do all the cooperative, societal enduring work and we.....what?  Lay around and reap our rewards?

 

Call me a cynic, but a world like that isn't one where my first concern is how will the government keep all of us happy and fed.  It's more like....in this new anarchy is it the robots that do away with most of us or each other?  Who gets the job done first?

Along this line of thinking, all liberals (and anyone really) should read Melville's Bartlby the Scrivener to see how accepting non-work from certain people can have awful results. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Along this line of thinking, all liberals (and any really) should read Melville's Bartlby the Scrivener to see how accepting non-work from certain people can have awful results. 

 

There simply are not enough jobs right now for everyone, and that's only going to get worse (or better), unless we completely rethink work and hours and stuff......there just isn't. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Along this line of thinking, all liberals (and any really) should read Melville's Bartlby the Scrivener to see how accepting non-work from certain people can have awful results. 

 

That is an excellent example.

 

I make no claim to some marvelous answer to automation.  I'm just begging us not to make assumptions that we can just "fill our time" or other such notions so easily.  Work/Occupation is a critical component of our social contract because it forms bonds of trust, expectation, reliance, interconnected goals, etc.

 

Filling it with hobbies is not the same thing and it would be dangerous to think so.

[ewen21]

 

I think you could've chosen a better term given the context you were using.  The phrase "anti-Trump bias" is unclear because it can be used to mean very different things.   Using a word like "bias" evokes many other meanings.  A better, clearer use of it previously might have saved you the several layers of explanation that were asked of you.

 

Yes, the posters in this forum are not a perfect statistical replica of America.  We lean more against Trump pretty heavily.  I doubt anyone would dispute that.....so why post it?  (And i ask because I think you were asked about "bias" because people assumed you were making a larger point of contention.  Perhaps not)

I posted a poll and polls are rooted weeding out statistical bias so as to have accuracy.  I honestly don't know a better word to use because bias is the proper terminology.  If we used this site to represent Trump's approval rating there would be a bias due to the sample.  Simple as that.

[ewen21]

 

Sorry that you weren't clear.

 

 

Statistics 101

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

I posted a poll and polls are rooted weeding out statistical bias so as to have accuracy.  I honestly don't know a better word to use because bias is the proper terminology.  If we used this site to represent Trump's approval rating there would be a bias due to the sample.  Simple as that.

I've already demonstrated two better ways of saying it.

 

And I still don't see the point of it.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I posted a poll and polls are rooted weeding out statistical bias so as to have accuracy.  I honestly don't know a better word to use because bias is the proper terminology.  If we used this site to represent Trump's approval rating there would be a bias due to the sample.  Simple as that.

 

And yet, that is not the same as bias at all.....it's a small sample, as you say.

 

edit: Unless of course you mean leans, which might just be a better word to use. 

[ewen21]

And yet, that is not the same as bias at all.....it's a small sample, as you say.

 

edit: Unless of course you mean leans, which might just be a better word to use.

 

When sampling data to remove bias it's done randomly. This forum cannot be used to represent anything regarding the public sentiment for Trunp due to selection bias. It would be like asking people attending a Red Sox game at Fenway if they are Yankee fans. There is a bias due to the sample.

 

Pretty simple stuff

[Mike Sixel]

 

When sampling data to remove bias it's done randomly. This forum cannot be used to represent anything regarding the public sentiment for Trunp due to selection bias. It would be like asking people attending a Red Sox game at Fenway if they are Yankee fans. There is a bias due to the sample.

Pretty simple stuff

 

Not one person claimed it could.....it's a baseball site with a few thousand members.

[TheLeviathan]

This forum cannot be used to represent anything regarding the public sentiment for Trunp due to selection bias.

Whew....good thing you crushed that strawman!

[Craig Arko]

On the off chance anybody cares, here are some of the differences between statistical bias and cognitive bias. I’m guessing the use of the term may cause confusion.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias_(statistics)

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

 

Meanwhile, Buxton and Rosario hit home runs and Pineda hit 95 mph.

[PseudoSABR]

 

There simply are not enough jobs right now for everyone, and that's only going to get worse (or better), unless we completely rethink work and hours and stuff......there just isn't. 

Oh, I get it, and agree.  But from the mental health perspective, unemployment can be a tail spin.  We should first make shorter work weeks, and continue to divide up the labor to spread it out, even at the cost of efficiency (i.e. having to train and keep track of so many employees).  Having the government cover the cost of benefits would make this much more possible. 

[PseudoSABR]

 

When sampling data to remove bias it's done randomly. This forum cannot be used to represent anything regarding the public sentiment for Trunp due to selection bias. It would be like asking people attending a Red Sox game at Fenway if they are Yankee fans. There is a bias due to the sample.

Pretty simple stuff

Look, it's not that any of what you're saying is complicated, but you didn't express yourself very clearly, and you're blaming everyone for not divining what you meant.

 

And ANY internet forum will be useless because of selection bias, right? So I'm not sure what your point is.  

 

Among the thoughtful group of people that post in the Sport Bar at Twins Daily, Trump is disfavored; no one is claiming that is representative of American sentiment, which obviously, it is not.  

[PseudoSABR]

 

On th off chance anybody cares, here are some of the differences between statistical bias and cognitive bias. I’m guessing the use of the term may cause confusion.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias_(statistics)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

Meanwhile, Buxton and Rosario hit home runs and Pineda hit 95 mph.

Can we get some mod action on that last sentence. Wrong forum! 

[MMMordabito]

Along this line of thinking, all liberals (and anyone really) should read Melville's Bartlby the Scrivener to see how accepting non-work from certain people can have awful results.

I would prefer not to read that.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I would prefer not to read that.

As far as 19th century literature, it isn't bad.  Worth skimming.  When I would teach it, the students didn't notably cringe. (If the point isn't clear, it's main theme is that empowering those who refuse or can't work has dire consequences).