World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Show me a MAGA politician, and I’ll show you a person bought and sold by Russian interference.
They can read the polls and can see that a plurality of voters seem to be against more aid.
Edit: -72 is breddy good, I'm quite impressed at how
resistant you guys are. It really IS the reddit experience.
Yeah, about ten guys who were bought and sold by Russia and a couple thousand other folks that fell for their con. By no means a majority and also by no means a reasonable stance.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/04/politics/cnn-poll-ukraine/index.html
Which sources: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23897329-cnn-ukraine-poll
No... page 10&11 clearly states that you're wrong. It's effectively a 50/50 split on Ukraine war with an actual majority 45/55 split saying no more funding.
These polls are as idiotic as the Brexit Referendum was.
People have no fucking clue what's going on and they answer by their "gut feeling". So it's all down to the way the question is formed.
And it's not a "yes" or "no" type of situation either.
So your argument is what exactly? That the poll is flawed... so there isn't a majority or plurality? You realize that both for and against could have been answering by their "gut feeling"... a 50/50 split kind of proves the point that it's not just a few thousand like was claimed.
Of course if you have a better source showing that Americans are happy with spending more money in Ukraine that's of higher quality I'm all ears.
A 50/50 split also kind of proves that the answers are as thought out as a coin toss...
So all 50/50 splits are coin toss decisions and not devisive topics? That's a hot take. Especially with n=1000+ polls.
Polls with a 50/50 split, are a poll structural fail. It means the questions are too ambiguous, and the poll didn't control for it. A split of 40/40 with 20% "undecided"? That would be a credible divisive poll. A 50/50? No way.
From the source you cited: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23897329-cnn-ukraine-poll
Look at the "trends" section on page 3, "not sure" between 7% and 14%, those are credible numbers. Now look at pages 10&11, 0% to 1% "no opinion"? That's BS.
So there's trends, meaning that these question (or types of questions) before weren't a problem... But magically... now it's a problem? And you have no other resources to corroborate your stance (since I asked for a better one and you've failed to provide).
But now, since it's a much more divisive topic... it's ALL over the media... talked about nearly every day from both sides... You think that the 7-14% wouldn't diminish at all? Hell giving you the 14% doesn't change the equation we're looking at here... It's still a Plurality, just not a straight majority. But even at 45/55 I wouldn't call it a straight majority.
It's funny because the pg 12 shows 2-5% "Don't know" responses. and page 9 shows up to 3%. But that's not the point... Even if we take the sampling error rate AWAY from the "anti-Ukrainian aid" side of this debate and give it to the "pro-Ukranian aid" outright... It's STILL a plurality at the very least and still a slim majority at that. 49% vs 51%... Even if we double or triple or quadruple that error rate to 39%... it's STILL a large amount of Americans (certainly qualifying for "Plurality") who feel that additional monetary aid isn't warranted. But the real litmus test is reading the questions yourself. Really don't see how
"15a. Do you think Congress should or should not authorize additional funding to support Ukraine in the war with Russia? " is ambiguous.
My point all along is that Plurality is a correct term here, yet was downvoted to hell... And even being absurdly generous to your argument we still see that's accurate. If you can find BETTER data then I'm all ears. But up to this point you haven't... and quite frankly your arguments were weak as we can see that even skewing the data in your favor MANY times over, it's still accurate to say that a plurality of Americans do not want to spend more money over there.
And before you start claiming I have some bias. I'm a dual citizen and hold a Polish citizenship. I'm not a stranger to Russia bullshit. But even Poland, who took in MILLIONS (doing well more than any other country) of refugees is starting to wear down and refuse aid to Ukraine.
My argument is that linking a shitty poll that paint the issue in black or white does nothing to help to paint the picture of public opinion on the russia's attack on Ukraine and how people feel about it.
Can you show how the poll is misrepresenting it as a black/white issue?
Do you have ANY better statistical resource?
Sounds like that's a no then...
If you can provide any evidence that it's misleading... I'll take it. But you've failed to do so and continue to whinge about it even though you've got nothing better to replace the poll as evidence.
I don't respond well to sealioning, my dear random keyboarder.
You don't respond well at all... When asked for anything to defend your stance, you got bumpkiss nothing.
I've already "defended my stance" (debate lord lol), but you failed to comprehend it. So I'm not going chew it up for you. If you're not smart to discern a good poll from a shit one, there's not much thinking I can do for you.
I'm sure you can find polls on facebook that will prove (to you) that 5G causes covid.
I didn't fail to comprehend anything. You claimed a poll was shitty... And have no alternative data. You can't claim a poll is shitty without either providing evidence of a flaw (you didn't) or having a better quality poll (you didn't). You didn't defend anything. You just claimed something with no source or evidence.
When I asked you to provide EITHER piece you needed to substantiate your claim.
Which on the internet is effectively the same as you have nothing.
Wow, now I know you're dumb. I don't need polls in that case because science says otherwise. You know with actual studies. You don't poll on facts, you poll on feelings or actions. However in this case we're literally talking about how people feel and thus need polls. Now if your argument was how many people feel that 5G causes COVID... then yes. But that wouldn't make you sound like a moron for making the comparison now wouldn't it? You know... since it's exactly the same premise.
https://images.hindustantimes.com/img/2022/07/16/original/picture-2_1657987511232.png
You came out of nowhere and shoved your statement into my conversation with someone else. You're truly a moron. You're the seal. In case you forgot I was communicating in response to @skulblaka and you butted your fat ass into the conversation. Don't be mad at me that you have no evidence to back your stance.
Debate lord in shambles after unsuccessful sealioning More polls at 12.
The majority support Ukraine. Fuck off Russian bot.
"someone said something I don't understand, they must be pro-Russian"
Flawless logic, kiddo.
Fuck off. You say something pro russian and then cry when people call you pro russian
Stating an obvious reason that democratically elected officials might have an opinion is pro-Russian.
I guess that elections are also undemocratic?
You're a loon and I thank you for helping me grow my Blocklist.
This Putin bootlicker is too stupid to realize he's helping America's long-term enemy. He thinks he's an American patriot, but he's actually just a Russian simp.