News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on How the New York Times Sandbagged Bernie Sanders. Parent comment

Re:How the New York Times Sandbagged Bernie Sanders by untog on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @10:46AM (#11297718)
> People who get their information from the Internet tended to support Sanders. Those who got it from TV (usually 60 year olds, which is the networks' main audience), tended to support Clinton.

No. What you're saying there is that older people vote Clinton, younger people vote Sanders. There isn't any evidence to tie that to people's media habits, and "younger people vote for more liberal candidates than older people" has been true since time immemorial.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How the New York Times Sandbagged Bernie Sanders by kedean on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @11:25AM (#11298039)
He's not saying that, he's saying exactly what he typed. I know quite a few young Hillary supporter and older Bernie supporter. The young Hillary supporters are ones who don't spend much time on the Internet. The older Bernie supporters are ones who spend more time on the internet than their peers. I think it plays much more of a part than you are giving credit for.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How the New York Times Sandbagged Bernie Sanders by harryh on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @12:27PM (#11298525)
I'm very skeptical of this causation hypothesis. I think it's much more likely that there is a common-causal variable that causes people to both spend more time on the internet and be more likely to support Sanders.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How the New York Times Sandbagged Bernie Sanders by JoeAltmaier on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @10:47AM (#11297723)
'immemorial'
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How the New York Times Sandbagged Bernie Sanders by untog on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @10:56AM (#11297801)
heh, autocomplete mistake. Thanks!
[ Parent | on HN ]