ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 4th September 2019, 09:05 AM   #1
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Are Anti-Establishment Sentiments Strong in Present Day America?

Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Maybe. Or maybe people have realized that picking "outside the establishment" wasn't a smart choice in the first place and wanted someone a bit more experienced and mainstream. (I don't know if that will happen, any more than you can know that a Sanders selection would bring in new voters who wanted someone "outside the establishment".)
Do we have any data on whether the general population is looking for someone more moderate, or establishment, or the reverse?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 09:16 AM   #2
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Specifically the banks. The banks loved the Clintons and Biden. They don't like Warren.
Yeah.

This is all really a question about what people view as "the establishment," and even more specifically, what they view as the problematic aspects of the establishment.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 09:16 AM   #3
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 50,708
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Do we have any data on whether the general population is looking for someone more moderate, or establishment, or the reverse?
It depends on who you talk to! That's the problem inherent in polling.

Things would be much clearer if when voting we had an opportunity to indicate why we voted as we did.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 09:18 AM   #4
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Do we have any data on whether the general population is looking for someone more moderate, or establishment, or the reverse?
Do you think there's been a significant shift in sentiment since 2016, turning the tide to be more pro-establishment?

I think the results of 2016 is the best data we have.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 09:24 AM   #5
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
And I don't quite get your crack about 'fiscal conservatism'. Biden might be more moderate than (for example) Sanders, but he still wants increased taxes on the wealthy and more infrastructure spending. The fact that he doesn't want to break up the banks and increase middle class taxes to pay for every possible social program doesn't mean he's a 'fiscal conservative'.
Biden wants to cut social security, too.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2019...cuts-3-ti.aspx
Quote:
...early Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden, who you'd expect to fight for core Democratic principles in resolving Social Security's imminent cash crunch, including raising or eliminating the earnings cap, has called for Social Security cuts on three separate occasions over the past 12 years.
More recently:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c47285...s-ruling-class

That's fiscal conservatism.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 09:55 AM   #6
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Do you think there's been a significant shift in sentiment since 2016, turning the tide to be more pro-establishment?

I think the results of 2016 is the best data we have.
And what do you think the 2016 data means about my question?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 11:09 AM   #7
Cabbage
Graduate Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,509
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Maybe. Or maybe people have realized that picking "outside the establishment" wasn't a smart choice in the first place and wanted someone a bit more experienced and mainstream. (I don't know if that will happen, any more than you can know that a Sanders selection would bring in new voters who wanted someone "outside the establishment".)
I agree it's more complicated than simple anecdotal "people want this or that". All either of us can do is speculate based on polls and observations. But certain things are obvious, such that in recent years many are fed up with both establishment Rs and Ds. You certainly have a point with blowback from "anti-establishment Trump" hurting the anti-establishment image for some. On the other hand there's quite enough difference between Trump and either Sanders or Warren to make a case that they would be immune from being tainted along with Trump ("Sure, Trump sucks, but there's still some good anti-establishment candidates")

Quote:
And how exactly is Warren considered 'outside the establishment'? She's been a Democratic senator for years.

For one thing it's all about perceptions. The way he's hijacked the party, Trump could be considered an establishment Republican at this point. However, he's still perceived by many as the rogue, anti-est. candidate who will drain the swamp. Just like Warren, who's been a senator for years, is perceived as not being beholden to banks and corporations. (And I think it's more than a mere perception in her case). Still, perception (as opposed to reality) is of primary importance in voting.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 11:16 AM   #8
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
And what do you think the 2016 data means about my question?
More people (as counted by the electoral college, at least) are anti-establishment.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 4th September 2019 at 11:17 AM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 11:24 AM   #9
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
More people (as counted by the electoral college, at least) are anti-establishment.
I don't see how you've reached that conclusion. Almost half of eligible voters didn't vote, so maybe we can assume they don't care, and more people voted for the establishment than not.

Besides, that assumes that the major reason to cast a vote in 2016 was that issue. I'm not sure it was really a main issue to begin with.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 11:54 AM   #10
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Besides, that assumes that the major reason to cast a vote in 2016 was that issue. I'm not sure it was really a main issue to begin with.
I'm pretty sure Trump's base is extremely anti-establishment.

See:
Quote:
Donald Trump doesn’t visit Middle America. He descends upon it. His rallies are awesome spectacles. Gawkers come down from the hills. If NASA traveled the country holding showings of the first captured alien life-form, the turnout would be similar. The pope driving monster trucks might get this much attention.

Almost everyone in line is wearing 45 merch. Trump is the most T-shirtable president in history, and it’s not even close. Trumpinator tees are big (“2020: I’LL BE BACK”), but you’ll also see Trump as Rambo (complete with headband, ammo belt, and phallic rocket-launcher), Trump as the Punisher (a Trump pompadour atop the famous skull), even Trump as Superman (pulling his suit open to reveal a giant T).

Slogans include “Trump 2020: Grab ’em by the Pussy Again!” and the ubiquitous “Trump 2020: **** Your Feelings.”

One merch hawker — an African American man with a visor, wraparound sunglasses, and spiked, dyed-white hair — is snaking through the crowd, pushing a T-shirt: “Donald Fuckin’ Trump.” On the back, the shirt reads “Bitch I’m the President!” “Five bucks for hats, 10 for tees!” he yells. “ ‘Bitch, I’m the president!’ ‘Make America great again!’ ”

“Four more years!” someone in the crowd yells back, to cheers.
ETA:
Quote:
more people voted for the establishment than not.
1) I did say "More people (as counted by the electoral college, at least) are anti-establishment".
2) How many of the votes were really for the establishment as opposed to being against the sexual-assaulting, obvious con artist, serial failure of a human the troglodytes were trying to install as ditator?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 4th September 2019 at 12:00 PM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 11:57 AM   #11
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
I'm pretty sure Trump's base is extremely anti-establishment.
And I'm pretty sure it isn't the majority of the country. I've alreayd given you two larger groups and questioned whether anti-establishmentism was a major reason to vote in 2016, which you've ignored.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 12:03 PM   #12
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
And I'm pretty sure it isn't the majority of the country. I've alreayd given you two larger groups and questioned whether anti-establishmentism was a major reason to vote in 2016, which you've ignored.
People who don't care can't count as more for or against the establishment either way (and I said "more" are anti-establishment, not "most" are anti-establishment.)
Also see my ETA in the above post, asking "How many of the votes were really for the establishment as opposed to being against the sexual-assaulting, obvious con artist, serial failure of a human the troglodytes were trying to install as dictator?"
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 12:06 PM   #13
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
People who don't care can't count as more for or against the establishment either way
I didn't say they did. You ignored them, and I brought them up. They outnumber the anti-establishment types.

Quote:
(and I said "more" are anti-establishment, not "most" are anti-establishment.)
You're still wrong, since more voted for the establishment candidate than for the wrecking ball.

Quote:
"More people (as counted by the electoral college, at least) are anti-establishment".
Yeah, you can't count people based on the EC. It makes no sense.

Quote:
How many of the votes were really for the establishment as opposed to being against the sexual-assaulting, obvious con artist, serial failure of a human the troglodytes were trying to install as ditator?
Here's the thing: you don't know. I'm using your metric and your logic but it's flawed to begin with, which I've already addressed and you've now ignored twice.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 12:18 PM   #14
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I didn't say they did. You ignored them, and I brought them up. They outnumber the anti-establishment types.
And they're irrelevant. They're as relevant to this conversation as people who died in 1959, if they don't care.


Quote:
You're still wrong, since more voted for the establishment candidate than for the wrecking ball.
I'm correct because what I said was "More people (as counted by the electoral college, at least) are anti-establishment".


Quote:
Yeah, you can't count people based on the EC. It makes no sense.
Welcome to the nonsensical American electoral system.

We dwellers of major cities are 1/3rd of a person compared to JimBob in Nowhereville, Wyoming.

Quote:
Here's the thing: you don't know. I'm using your metric and your logic but it's flawed to begin with, which I've already addressed and you've now ignored twice.
I don't know for sure, but the 2016 data is the best data we have that I'm aware of.

There's also stuff like this, too, though:

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/45...-establishment

Quote:
Poll: 70 percent angry at political establishment
Quote:
The majority of Americans said they are angry at the political establishment, which they say benefits the well-connected class, according to a new poll.

Seventy percent of Americans said they feel angry because the political system seems to only be working for insiders with money and power, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released Sunday.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 12:21 PM   #15
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
And they're irrelevant.
They're not irrelevant to your claim. You said more people. Both pro-establishment and don't-care groups, by your own metric, outnumber Trump supporters. So no, more people aren't anti-establishment. And please drop your count-by-EC nonsense.

Quote:
Welcome to the nonsensical American electoral system.
No, no, no. You don't get to blame your illogical claim on the EC. The EC doesn't count people. It weighs the totals.

Quote:
I don't know for sure, but the 2016 data is the best data we have that I'm aware of.
Your interpretation is not data.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 12:31 PM   #16
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
They're not irrelevant to your claim. You said more people. Both pro-establishment and don't-care groups, by your own metric, outnumber Trump supporters. So no, more people aren't anti-establishment. And please drop your count-by-EC nonsense.
C'mon dude.

If there were the question asked "do you like vanilla ice cream, chocolate ice cream, or strawberry ice cream best?" and 50% picked vanilla, 30% picked chocolate, and 20% picked strawberry, it would be fair to say more people "liked chocolate" (felt anti-establishment) than "liked strawberry" (were pro-establishment.)

The vanilla-lovers are irrelevant to the question of strawberry vs chocolate here.

The "don't vote, don't care" people are irrelevant to the question of if people are more pro or anti the establishment.

Quote:
Your interpretation is not data.
No ****, Sherlock. lol

Your question was:

Quote:
And what do you think the 2016 data means about my question?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 4th September 2019 at 12:33 PM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 12:50 PM   #17
Cabbage
Graduate Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,509
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Here's the thing: you don't know. I'm using your metric and your logic but it's flawed to begin with, which I've already addressed and you've now ignored twice.


Here's another thing: You don't know either. Therefore, you don't know that being anti-establishment isn't as significant as I or kellyb claim it to be. That very well may have been the case in 2016 (indeed, I think anti-establishment was a very significant factor then), but that factor was simply trumped by anti-Trump sentiments who ended up voting Clinton instead. This is precisely why I think Sanders had a much better chance against Trump: He would energize the anti-establishment group as much or more as Trump. Hillary was never gonna do that.

Last edited by Cabbage; 4th September 2019 at 12:51 PM.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 06:24 PM   #18
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
If there were the question asked "do you like vanilla ice cream, chocolate ice cream, or strawberry ice cream best?" and 50% picked vanilla, 30% picked chocolate, and 20% picked strawberry, it would be fair to say more people "liked chocolate" (felt anti-establishment) than "liked strawberry" (were pro-establishment.)
But that's not what you said. You said:

Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
More people (as counted by the electoral college, at least) are anti-establishment.
You did not qualify it more than that. It's reasonable to expect that you were talking about a plurality. If you meant something more specific you should have said so.

In any case it's still wrong, as the pro-establishment vote (assuming, again, that a vote for Hillary is a pro- vote and a vote for Trump an anti- vote, something you are continuing to ignore) outnumbers the anti-establishment vote anyway. The EC changes nothing of that, and as things stand you have not explained how it does.

Quote:
No ****, Sherlock. lol

Your question was:
I'm responding to the bit I quoted. You talked about data but you seem to be more than one level of abstraction away from the data. You cannot look at raw data, interpret it to mean something, and then claim that this interpretation is the data you're using. It isn't.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward



Last edited by Belz...; 4th September 2019 at 06:26 PM.
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 06:25 PM   #19
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Here's another thing: You don't know either.
Yes, that's my entire point. Notice that I didn't make a claim, here.

Quote:
Therefore, you don't know that being anti-establishment isn't as significant as I or kellyb claim it to be.
I know that based on her premises, she's still wrong. I don't know that her premises are correct.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 07:06 PM   #20
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post

You did not qualify it more than that. It's reasonable to expect that you were talking about a plurality. If you meant something more specific you should have said so.

I said "More people (as counted by the electoral college, at least) are anti-establishment" with an unspoken "than are pro-establishment" at the end.

This is not that difficult, Belz.

Quote:
I'm responding to the bit I quoted. You talked about data but you seem to be more than one level of abstraction away from the data. You cannot look at raw data, interpret it to mean something, and then claim that this interpretation is the data you're using. It isn't.
I honestly have no idea what you're even talking about at this point.

Anyway, do you have any thoughts about this other piece of data?

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/45...-establishment

Quote:
Poll: 70 percent angry at political establishment
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2019, 07:12 PM   #21
Cabbage
Graduate Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,509
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Yes, that's my entire point. Notice that I didn't make a claim, here.
I'm sorry, this looked like a claim to me:

Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I didn't say they did. You ignored them, and I brought them up. They outnumber the anti-establishment types.



You're still wrong, since more voted for the establishment candidate than for the wrecking ball.



Yeah, you can't count people based on the EC. It makes no sense.



Here's the thing: you don't know. I'm using your metric and your logic but it's flawed to begin with, which I've already addressed and you've now ignored twice.
More voting for the establishment candidate than Trump is not sufficient evidence to prove there wasn't a very strong anti-establishment sentiment that continues today. Your premise does not support the conclusion that she's wrong.



Quote:
I know that based on her premises, she's still wrong. I don't know that her premises are correct.

I'm not sure I can go back and figure out which specific premises you refer to. If you're not sure whether her premises are correct, isn't it possible she's right? Maybe you're saying her premises aren't sufficient justification for her conclusion, I understand that, but her conclusion may be correct nevertheless.

I'm not sure we're discussing the same aspects here; I think maybe we're both misinterpreting what the other's saying.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 02:16 AM   #22
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 23,141
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
Speaking of which... Trump allies raise money to target reporters.

That's pretty much as the headline says. They're literally targeting the media itself with underhanded means. That's not the tactics of a group that's civil, reasonable, or, dare I say it... actually conservative.
From that link it is not clear to me what "go after" really means. Supposing they do find something, I dunno, dirty(?), about some reporter, so what. Will the very media they are targeting print the dirt. I doubt it.

The whole thing sounds like, "Way, way, some in the media don't like us." It's just another effort to pry money out of the fat cats to enrich the "campaign consultant" class.
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 02:27 AM   #23
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 23,141
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Do we have any data on whether the general population is looking for someone more moderate, or establishment, or the reverse?
Yes. There are polls saying one way and there are some saying the other way just like there are pundits who are all over the map.

It's like the bible. Pick your position, whatever it is. You'll find support for that position in the bible. Here, pick your position and there's a poll and/or pundit who will support it.

tl;dr No.
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 02:36 AM   #24
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 23,141
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
There's also stuff like this, too, though:

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/45...-establishment
Quote:
Seventy percent of Americans said they feel angry because the political system seems to only be working for insiders with money and power, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released Sunday.
I wouldn't hang my hat on that because I think that's probably a constant percentage over decades. Even people who benefit from government programs bitch about the government. Those kind of people are just background noise.
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 02:37 AM   #25
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
I said "More people (as counted by the electoral college, at least) are anti-establishment" with an unspoken "than are pro-establishment" at the end.

This is not that difficult, Belz.
No, no. Don't blame it on me. You omitted a crucial part of your claim. Now that you've made it clearer, we can move on, but don't dodge responsibility for your words.

Quote:
I honestly have no idea what you're even talking about at this point.
How about you address the point I've made over and over about you having no reason to think that a vote for Trump is a vote against the establishment, and that a vote for clinton is a vote for it?

Quote:
Anyway, do you have any thoughts about this other piece of data?
Yes: it's not supported by how people voted in 2016.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 02:40 AM   #26
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
I'm sorry, this looked like a claim to me:
I'm addressing Kelly's claims.

I asked a question about the general population and anti-establishment sentiments, and Kelly brought up the 2016 elections, which I thought was a bit silly given that Trump got fewer votes than the very obviously establishment candidate. In fact he got fewer votes than Romney in 2012, and he wasn't exactly exciting the base. And I brought up turnout because if there really was a strong anti-establishment sentiment you'd think you'd see more people turning out to vote against it. Then Kelly said that Trump got more votes if you go by the EC, but the EC doesn't tell you how many people are pro- or anti-establishment. It's a non-starter. And it remains that Kelly's argument is not only founded on unsupported premises (that a vote for Trump is an anti-establishment vote) but that even if the premise is correct, the data still doesn't support the conclusion. My only claim is that by Kelly's own logic and methodology, her claim is wrong.

Quote:
More voting for the establishment candidate than Trump is not sufficient evidence to prove there wasn't a very strong anti-establishment sentiment that continues today. Your premise does not support the conclusion that she's wrong.
Except that this wasn't her claim. He claims is that there was more anti-establishment votes.

I don't mind discussing this with you but please make sure you know what both of us are actually saying.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward



Last edited by Belz...; 5th September 2019 at 03:21 AM.
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 07:56 AM   #27
Cabbage
Graduate Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,509
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I'm addressing Kelly's claims.
Yes, I realize that. You, on the other hand, said you made no claim. To the contrary, you claimed she was wrong.

Quote:
I asked a question about the general population and anti-establishment sentiments, and Kelly brought up the 2016 elections, which I thought was a bit silly given that Trump got fewer votes than the very obviously establishment candidate. In fact he got fewer votes than Romney in 2012, and he wasn't exactly exciting the base. And I brought up turnout because if there really was a strong anti-establishment sentiment you'd think you'd see more people turning out to vote against it. Then Kelly said that Trump got more votes if you go by the EC, but the EC doesn't tell you how many people are pro- or anti-establishment. It's a non-starter. And it remains that Kelly's argument is not only founded on unsupported premises (that a vote for Trump is an anti-establishment vote) but that even if the premise is correct, the data still doesn't support the conclusion. My only claim is that by Kelly's own logic and methodology, her claim is wrong.

Not seeing more people turn out to vote against the establishment is insufficient evidence to demonstrate there wasn't a strong anti-establishment sentiment. You seem to be assuming that pro/con establishment is the only factor in play. It's not; there are other factors in play which can overshadow the anti-establishment sentiment (such as not wanting to vote for a moronic lunatic).


Quote:
Except that this wasn't her claim. He claims is that there was more anti-establishment votes.

I don't mind discussing this with you but please make sure you know what both of us are actually saying.

I don't recall seeing that claim (I'm not saying she didn't make it). I was referring to the claim of the existence of a strong anti-establishment sentiment; that's specifically what I am talking about. Pretty sure she made that claim and you disagreed (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about that.)so my comments are not irrelevant.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 08:42 AM   #28
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
I wouldn't hang my hat on that because I think that's probably a constant percentage over decades. Even people who benefit from government programs bitch about the government. Those kind of people are just background noise.
Congress has been historically unpopular for the past 5 or 6 years, and regardless of the background rate of anti-establishment sentiment, I think 70% being angry at the establishment indicates that there are probably more people who are looking for someone closer to anti-establishment than establishment.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 08:44 AM   #29
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,878
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Congress has been historically unpopular for the past 5 or 6 years, and regardless of the background rate of anti-establishment sentiment, I think 70% being angry at the establishment indicates that there are probably more people who are looking for someone closer to anti-establishment than establishment.
And that mattters... how?

Congress has an 11% approval rating but a 96% reelection rating. So they are massively popular in the only way that matters.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 08:53 AM   #30
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
No, no. Don't blame it on me. You omitted a crucial part of your claim.
No, you just forgot that you asked an "Is it more A or B" claim.
You had asked:
Quote:
Do we have any data on whether the general population is looking for someone more moderate, or establishment, or the reverse?
And when I answered "more the reverse" as the answer to that A or B question about what I think the data indicates, you tried to twist that answer into a bunch of stuff I never said or implied.

But I'm going to let it go, because this is frequently how attempts at dialogue with you tend to go, and I'd kind of wondered if we'd end up here if I tried to engage you.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 5th September 2019 at 08:59 AM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 08:55 AM   #31
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And that mattters... how?

Congress has an 11% approval rating but a 96% reelection rating. So they are massively popular in the only way that matters.
Fair enough.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 08:56 AM   #32
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Yes, I realize that. You, on the other hand, said you made no claim. To the contrary, you claimed she was wrong.
Based. On. Her. Own. Logic.

I've explained this to you already.

Quote:
Not seeing more people turn out to vote against the establishment is insufficient evidence to demonstrate there wasn't a strong anti-establishment sentiment.
I didn't say there wasn't such a sentiment. Again, I am addressing a specific claim and the data and methodology used to support that claim.

Quote:
I don't recall seeing that claim (I'm not saying she didn't make it). I was referring to the claim of the existence of a strong anti-establishment sentiment; that's specifically what I am talking about.
The two are part of the same claim. Specifically, the former was used to support the latter.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward



Last edited by Belz...; 5th September 2019 at 08:59 AM.
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 08:59 AM   #33
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
No, you just forgot that you asked an "Is it more A or B" claim.
You had asked:
You really shouldn't have quoted that. There are THREE options I named there, not two. So my initial interpretation was reasonable.

Quote:
But I'm going to let it go, because this if frequently how attempts at dialogue with you tend to go,
Ah, yes. When out of arguments, go for the ad hominems. If your claim and arguments were solid, you wouldn't be in this predicament. Why you insist on blaming that on me is a mystery.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 09:05 AM   #34
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You really shouldn't have quoted that. There are THREE options I named there, not two. So my initial interpretation was reasonable.
Oh, I thought you were using the "or" there as a "/".
It looked like you were calling moderate/establishment the same thing (especially with "reverse" being the final "option".)

I've never heard of "moderate" framed as half way between establishment and anti-establishment before. Usually moderate implies a bipartisan, centrist between left and right sort of middle (aka, where the "political establishment" basically is.)
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 5th September 2019 at 09:07 AM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 09:09 AM   #35
Cabbage
Graduate Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,509
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Based. On. Her. Own. Logic.

I've explained this to you already.
I recall you saying it was based on her own logic. I don't recall you elaborating further than that. Kellyb herself said you are twisting her words into things she never said. I'm responding to particular exchanges between you two. You're responding by referencing things I've never seen.


Quote:
I didn't say there wasn't such a sentiment. Again, I am addressing a specific claim and the data and methodology used to support that claim.



The two are part of the same claim. Specifically, the former was used to support the latter.
...and other things were used to support the latter, things you've dismissed and I am trying to redraw your attention to (such as the poll showing 70% anti-establishment sentiment. If you won't accept that as evidence, it looks as though you are immune to logical argument).

Anyway, I don't feel any need to continue, because as I have already said, I feel like we're talking past each other discussing different aspects and details. If you want to specify (with specific quotes) this or that you're referring to, I don't mind continuing. I'm not asking you to do that, however.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 09:10 AM   #36
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Oh, I thought you were using the "or" there as a "/".
It looked like you were calling moderate/establishment the same thing (especially with "reverse" being the final "option".)
No, I don't see them that way. In any case, the list wasn't even exhaustive.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 09:14 AM   #37
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
I recall you saying it was based on her own logic. I don't recall you elaborating further than that.
Yeah, because I have no position on the issue; I was asking a question, and then disagreeing with one claim because of the data and methodology.

Quote:
...and other things were used to support the latter, things you've dismissed and I am trying to redraw your attention to (such as the poll showing 70% anti-establishment sentiment. If you won't accept that as evidence, it looks as though you are immune to logical argument).
I responded to it in post 776. Joe made a similar point in response to Congress' approval rating.

And no, not accepting something as evidence that someone else accepts as evidence doesn't mean you're immune to arguments. It just means you disagree.

Quote:
Anyway, I don't feel any need to continue, because as I have already said, I feel like we're talking past each other discussing different aspects and details.
I'm not sure what details we should be discussing. My main objection to Kelly's claim is that the candidate you vote for has not been established to correlate to a pro- or anti-establishment stance. For some reason no one has responded to this, even though I mentioned it 4 times at least. My second objection is that even if we're to accept that, the fact that the presumably establishment candidate got more vote than the other one shows that the claim is wrong. As for the EC, it makes no sense to even bring it up in the context of this discussion.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward



Last edited by Belz...; 5th September 2019 at 09:15 AM.
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 09:17 AM   #38
Cabbage
Graduate Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,509
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post


I didn't say there wasn't such a sentiment.
OK, here's a specific case where I think we're talking past each other. You said:

Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
... if there really was a strong anti-establishment sentiment you'd think you'd see more people turning out to vote against it.
...which certainly sounds to me like you're saying there wasn't such a sentiment. That's exactly why I pointed out your premise is insufficient to support your conclusion.

If you meant something else you could have been clearer.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 09:22 AM   #39
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
OK, here's a specific case where I think we're talking past each other. You said:

...which certainly sounds to me like you're saying there wasn't such a sentiment.
Well, it isn't. It's evidence I'd expect if there was such a thing, but its absence doesn't mean the opposite is true.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2019, 09:26 AM   #40
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
My main objection to Kelly's claim is that the candidate you vote for has not been established to correlate to a pro- or anti-establishment stance.
But when looking at anti-establishment stances (the 70% poll):

Quote:
Quote:
Anyway, do you have any thoughts about this other piece of data?
Yes: it's not supported by how people voted in 2016.
Round and round we go!

LOL

It seems like you're not looking for "data" to discuss possible interpretations of, but rather rock-solid "proof" of...something, about...something.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:13 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.