Who cares? To a first approximation everybody who reads the NYT (really: any new...

UncleMeat · 2025-03-24T18:47:29 1742842049

The NYT amplifying a story in a ridiculous manner can convince democrats to stay home because "ugh, they are all crooks."

tptacek · 2025-03-24T18:56:40 1742842600

That's not what happened in the last election; in fact, the Democrats did marginally better with engaged voters. Anyways, I'm just saying, there's not much point to doing kremlinology about what the NYT is reporting.

egberts1 · 2025-03-24T23:01:50 1742857310

Democrats provided a negative 6,265,888 votes for better engagement in Election 2024 than in 2020.

But Democrat engagement was somehow negative marginally higher, at huge expense by independent voters.

https://web.archive.org/web/20250114165808/https://projects....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_president...

tptacek · 2025-03-25T01:37:36 1742866656

"Democrats" are not a coherent, monolithic entity. But we have data on which cohorts of that coalition did and didn't turn out.

egberts1 · 2025-03-25T13:58:51 1742911131

As ABC tried to subsume 538 out of existance for its accurate breakdown of coalitions.

UncleMeat · 2025-03-24T19:38:57 1742845137

The "but her emails" jokes in this context are all about the 2016 election.

s1artibartfast · 2025-03-24T19:56:09 1742846169

IMO, political influence can be discussed in terms of directionality and substance, and both are relevant.

Directionality is short term and simplistic, Does it change how someone will vote or poll.

Substance explains why they vote or poll, and is relevant because it has downstream consequences in an evolving world.