Trump voters who either Approve or Neither Disapprove or Approve: 13%
Harris: 17%
Trump voters who Disapprove or Not Sure: 82%
Harris: 77%
All of these differences are within the margin of error. Good job falling for the outrage machine though!
Source: https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/Reactions_to...
From browsing Reddit, my impression was that the left strongly approved.
And that that the left is anywhere from 20% to 3x more likely to be undecided about the morality of an assassination.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knot_theory
https://corpslakes.erdc.dren.mil/employees/motorboat/pdfs/Ma...
I generalized this to #1/#2 = % difference between the #1 and #2. It's not so much logic as it is arithmetic, but let me know if you still disagree.
If the approval rate was 0.1% and 0.2%, does it give someone the correct impression to say "Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to approve of the killing?"
After saying that sentence, would someone draw a diagram that's even remotely close to the actual probabilities and support levels?
No. Of course not. That's called deception.
If you say, "5-11% of Harris votes vs 2-8% of Trump voters approve," would someone be able to draw a diagram of probabilities that's pretty close to reality?
Yes. They would. That's called honesty.
So all you're doing here is adding to the outrage machine in, again, a really transparent, unconvincing, and deceptive manner. I know you probably think this is all clever and whatnot, but it really is wildly unimpressive.
So the question is, "of the population of folks who approve of the murder, how many are left leaning vs right?"
So your own data says that the population of murder-approvers is left leaning by a huge margin. you are the one using tricks to obfuscate that fact.
further, you are trying to malign the entire trump presidency based on his dining with a single person (and known troll) while dodging the fact that a significant contingent of Harris voters support that murder. you can't have it both ways
Your numbers: they will draw something not even close to reality
My numbers: they will draw something close to reality
That’s the whole argument. You are engaged in, again, fully transparent, unconvincing, and unimpressive deception.
And it’s weird because I don’t know who you think you’re convincing. Hopefully it isn’t you!
Not even close. Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh have been blasted by their own fans and viewers for criticising Luigi Mangioni.
People who want a certain party to be in power should hold that party to a higher standard. Independent of the party. Being "better than the others" is not good enough.