Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

WhoWhatWhereWhenHowY t1_ivn1l2i wrote

It's an estimate. There is a statistical chance they are wrong. Each network/organization likely has an error they are willing to tolerate when they make a call. Say 95 percent certainty.

Now let's pretend we live in a fictitious nation composed of two states. This country also has the same two parties we have. Let's call the first state Texas. 80 percent of the people there have historically voted Republican. 20 percent Democrat. State two is just the opposite. We can call state 2 California where 80 percent vote D and 20 percent R.

Now after ballots are cast California votes start to get counted and with only 50 percent of the California vote (25 percent of nation vote) counted, an upset has occurred and all 40 percent have voted Republican. Now without even 1 single vote counted in Texas you can feel comfortable with calling the election for the Republicans because you know it is unlikely Texas would swing.

Now substitute states for towns, add in a lot more towns and various other certainties, tweak models and BAM. You can statistically predict the outcome of an election with very limited data.

42

tahitidreams t1_ivpr9zq wrote

So with this explanation, how does a state that will vote either way historically report a winner with only 1% in?

1

WhoWhatWhereWhenHowY t1_ivqx5na wrote

That's where polling ahead of time/exit polling is likely used. In our governor race Sununu had such a large lead in the polls that in reality even waiting for 1 percent is kind of a formality. Again, polls can be incorrect but the likelihood of them being wrong by 10+ percent is unlikely.

This is also why different organizations call things at different times; they each have different standards to when they feel confident enough to call the election.

1

jeveret t1_ivnerj2 wrote

Basically they figure to have any chance of wining the democrats need to be way ahead in the 15% of the state that is more democratic to have any chance. If they aren’t even ahead in the small part of the state they had a chance in then they can safely assume the margin will just increase. It’s like a triathlon where democrats need to pull far ahead in the swim portion because republicans are way better at the bike and run. So if you are behind at the end of the swim you have no chance to make up ground even though the race isn’t even close to over.

31

dangerzonebjj t1_ivo4h63 wrote

This is 15% of precincts not 15% of the total state votes. Some precincts are very populous

5

Adeling79 t1_ivpsfji wrote

Is this right? Not saying you're not, just didn't realize that...

2

dangerzonebjj t1_ivqso2w wrote

Yes. 15% of precincts reporting means 15% of all voting districts submitted their tallies. If Manchester and Nashua are in that 15% you can call anything that's not close

2

bendadian1 t1_ivo9o2u wrote

The best explanation that answered the question exactly how OP asked it be answered!

3

truelikeicelikefire t1_ivohbc3 wrote

It's done by having a statistically significant sample size.

31

Ordinary-Garbage-685 t1_ivonxti wrote

Look at all of those free staters who voted libertarian… oh wait… they didn’t.

27

[deleted] t1_ivooybx wrote

[deleted]

26

mackerdoots t1_ivp280a wrote

I could have sworn I saw post after post of people claiming they were swarming across the state like the 3rd Reich

10

Ordinary-Garbage-685 t1_ivoqlih wrote

I think, and I could’ve misread/remembered, but aren’t there like over 11,000 in NH? Wouldn’t they want to hold true to who they are?

I ask because I believe most of them lying two faced bastard who turned our beautiful state into testing ground of policies we didn’t ask for.

9

USA-cubicle-worker t1_ivqm5qz wrote

The libertarian candidates are fucking morons. The head of the libertarian party's website is a fucking matrix movie red pill blue pill gif. Fucking morons...

3

CrunchyCrunch816 t1_ivoechh wrote

He won by a large margin making it easier to call, they essentially assume incoming votes that haven’t been counted will hold similar ratios

25

-Codfish_Joe t1_ivmu9yp wrote

Statistics and demographics.

Candidate A and party A tend to get X% in demographics Y and Z. Candidate A won precincts 1, 2 and 3 by B% last time, and did 2% better this year. That lets them predict several other precincts, and when enough precincts can let them see enough trends, they can make pretty reliable predictions. It doesn't work when things are too close, so the closer it is the longer it takes to call.

Sometimes no one calls a race that night, sometimes they call a race at the moment the polls close.

22

[deleted] t1_ivobrxm wrote

If you already counted the districts around the cities and the R is ahead you’re pretty much done.

Edit:spelling

21

TheRealKingVitamin t1_ivord6x wrote

Likewise, if you have counted the rural areas and the Dem is ahead…

It’s established voting patterns plus a thing called margin of error. You allow for a certain amount of variance, but everyone in NYC suddenly voting GOP is something like a 0.000001% chance event, maybe even less.

12

renton444 t1_ivo6a5h wrote

The bigger cities typically report some of their precincts faster than other parts of the state. Those cities typically lean Democratic, so when Sununu had a lead in those cities, it was pretty much over.

17

dangerzonebjj t1_ivmtls0 wrote

15% of precincts reporting =/= 15% of the ballots counted.

Done precincts like the ones Manchester or Nashua are extremely populous.

14

dduubbz t1_ivmw7dr wrote

Because let’s be honest, Sununu was up like 20%

12

pbsolaris t1_ivp5ef5 wrote

I'm not a free stater but I'm tired of the lesser of two evil bullshit mentality. If a politician doesn't act accordingly to their promises, OUT! We the people need to not be afraid to vote 3rd in protest.

10

savingeverybody t1_ivpe3i6 wrote

Then you support ranked choice voting.

28

pbsolaris t1_ivphlj5 wrote

Yeah I need to learn more about it, but what I did here sounded interesting. I think it could bring a lot more volatility to our elections, reinforcing checks and balances, which our country needs.

5

anarchyinyourhead t1_ivr4pi8 wrote

I like the idea a lot but the two controlling parties will never support it. It’s a threat to them. I doubt it would actually result in a 3rd party candidate getting elected (at least within a near timeframe) but what it would do is show the support they and their policies have with the general public. That support would like not align with those of our corporate masters and they’d rather it stay suppressed.

1

Undaedalus t1_ivp7s1r wrote

>"I'm not an X, but..."

This is just saying "I'm an X" with extra steps.

−2

the_umbrellaest_red t1_ivq8tix wrote

Normally I'd agree with you, but frustration with the two party system certainly goes beyond free staters.

5

EntertainThis493 t1_ivqkatn wrote

It's really more like supporting what they're saying, but not what they're doing.

0

littlebethy1984 t1_ivpl56w wrote

I was really hoping Sununu would finally be out. We need better.

10

BeeMoney25 t1_ivq8obz wrote

exit polling and where the votes are from that are being counted. If Sununu is getting better than expected results in areas he was expected to lose it's pretty likely he's going to win.

9

damnbeautiful t1_ivmt4g6 wrote

Basically sources predicting likely outcomes to get extra media attention. They might be right, they often use lots of data, exit polls, historic trends, all sorts of info. But they can also be wrong.

7

sctlndjf t1_ivo8rd1 wrote

Depends on the news outlet. The AP is pretty conservative in its calls, even when they’re early like this, so they typically aren’t the ones to have to retract. That’s more often the news networks like CNN or Fox. Some outlets want the scoop and take more of a risk (calling at 80% likelihood or whatever) while others wait for 90 or 95% so they can present themselves as more reliable. Both are calling what’s likely, but in the former, every now and then you’ll get some races wrong. For the higher percentages it’s much more rare.

2

Clauss_Video_Archive t1_ivo4pxo wrote

His dad was a popular politician and they have the same last name. Oh, and he has money.

6

AFascistPig t1_ivp1q2o wrote

Also, he’s just liked by both sides of the aisle.

2

IndependenceNorth165 t1_ivq6bmi wrote

God his dad is one of the worst humans to ever live. How he was so popular baffles me

2

reficius1 t1_ivn5efh wrote

some of the other major races, almost 50% precincts, one candidate over 10% up, but they're all too close to call apparently

3

sctlndjf t1_ivo7s0d wrote

It really depends on which precincts are reporting, how big they are, and how it’s comparing to what’s expected. If they remaining half of precincts leans toward the candidate behind, and neither candidate is performing unexpectedly, they would let it play out before calling because they would expect it to tighten up.

2

Zealousideal_Order_8 t1_ivrbf01 wrote

The number crunchers look at the number of votes available in each area to determine if there enough uncounted votes that lean blue to overcome the red lead.

3

Zaius1968 t1_ivo8qgd wrote

Because that’s how elections have went in those areas for the last 100 years. See your point though…should wait until there is sone semblance of a victory.

2

joshdamnmit t1_ivra396 wrote

Well, it's like you have your dick pulled back between your legs (pictured above). Not sure how but man does it need reform.

1

smartest_kobold t1_ivmqdj9 wrote

Exit polls.

−2

khamer t1_ivnb9fr wrote

AP Press doesn't use exit polls anymore.

5

heelllooooooo OP t1_ivmqm91 wrote

So theoretically this could be not true? Not being hopeful just trying to understand

−1

[deleted] t1_ivmr4ot wrote

Pretty much. It "being called" by a talking head doesn't mean its legal, it's just a projection.

6

valleyman02 t1_ivmsmzx wrote

I agree I think they called that way too early Wmur said that ABC called it. But it does look like Sununu is starting to build a lead. But no it's not over.

3

Admiral_pumpkin t1_ivo92sc wrote

I had to laugh. Massachusetts called for Maura Healy last night saying 0% had been tabulated. Glad I don’t live in Ma.

−3

repthe732 t1_ivolux4 wrote

Well she did win in a landslide. As of now it looks like she has 63% of the vote and Diehl only has 35% with 86% reporting

16

Admiral_pumpkin t1_ivoowow wrote

I would assume. When you sure she won when0% of the vote had been tallied what are the odds that she wouldn’t win!

−2

repthe732 t1_ivq3cq1 wrote

Pretty high since every poll including the exit polls had her winning in a landslide. Diehl ran a horrible campaign for MA. He was a Trumper running in a state where centrist Republicans do significantly better

1

nhmo t1_ivog4nv wrote

Probably had enough info from exit polls alone to show it wasn't going to be even close.

7

Doza13 t1_ivp9g9f wrote

Are you saying that wrong? Or just laugh because you are wrong?

3

Catduardo t1_ivp3eom wrote

As a masshole I was like … dang they really got this called already?

2

tahitidreams t1_ivpqz04 wrote

Thank you! I don’t understand that either. I’m like, if they already know with 0% why even vote?

2

lantrick t1_ivrjdqs wrote

lol when the media "calls it", it's not the official result. It's only unofficial guess.. It's just a "projection". the only "they" that matters is States election officials , not the talking heads on TV.

2

P0Rt1ng4Duty t1_ivmrxl5 wrote

If they know how many votes were cast in total and one candidate gets more than half that number, the remaining votes can't turn into a win for the other candidate.

If ten people voted on what to get for lunch and the first six votes are for pizza, you know pizza's for lunch.

−4

heelllooooooo OP t1_ivmt07h wrote

I get that, but if the 10 people that voted are only 15% of the people coming lunch, then what?

1

SkiingAway t1_ivmwcto wrote

It's not 15% of the ballots randomly distributed across the state.

It's typically that some places have reported all or nearly all of their votes, some haven't reported anything yet. We know how those places have voted in past elections and how their demographics are (or aren't) similar to other places in the state.

Have enough of those, and you have a pretty good picture of how the state is voting. And if they're running ahead of the numbers they were expected to need to win in those various places....odds are that's going to happen in the unknowns as well.

Example:

Imagine Portsmouth has voted D+20 as an average of the past couple elections, and Dover has voted D+15.

If you have 100% of the vote in for Portsmouth, and it's only D+10, Dover is probably D+5, and it more generally suggests Dems are doing far worse than usual. If the overall race was supposed to be D+2, statewide you might be looking at R+3.

(in reality, you would want a bunch of different kinds of places to make these sorts of inferences for the state overall).

This is also how you can get calls while the actual counted votes are the still opposite of who they're calling it for. - because they're way underperforming where they need to rack up votes, even if they're ahead in the total count at that time.

It's pretty rare for major media outlets to miscall races. Not non-existent, but uncommon.

11

5nd t1_ivmsm57 wrote

Yeah but 15% isn't enough to do that, they just guess. Media isn't official they're just estimating.

−2

NotUnlikeGames t1_ivqdipm wrote

It's easy, pre-decide the winners ; )

−5

Liberalparasite t1_ivqqdc7 wrote

Nice a red state unlike the shit hole New York

−10

Fuzzy-Scar3055 t1_ivmsgzu wrote

Math is hard

−12

heelllooooooo OP t1_ivmsse1 wrote

Care to explain?

1

Fuzzy-Scar3055 t1_ivmwqi8 wrote

I was saying that on your behalf.

−1

WoobieBee t1_ivncnzg wrote

AP paid people to get results from individual polling locations.. maybe that?

−13

sctlndjf t1_ivo6zfz wrote

That would be the 15% reporting. It’s more about their understanding of which precincts have reported, how much population they represent (urban or rural precincts), and how those precincts would need to break down for one candidate or the other. Then they match it to what report is coming in and make the call if it fits (if Sherman’s strongest precincts were coming in and he was already losing there or underperforming significantly, that’s the kind of red flag they would look for to make an early call)

4

[deleted] t1_ivoyghl wrote

[removed]

−27

heelllooooooo OP t1_ivp59ec wrote

I think you’ve taken the meaning of this post incorrectly. I’m not asking a rhetorical question, I’m asking for an explanation on how the AP is able to announce the winners with 15% of polls counted. I don’t have a point to make, I didn’t understand the process AP takes in publishing these results.

18

NEED_TP_ASAP t1_ivpyhhw wrote

I believe (and I'm willing to admit I may be wrong) that it has to do with voting trends and polling. The 15% that has been counted were probably enough cities and towns considered battlegrounds that once Sununu won those areas that the rest of the state would follow certain trends that statistically meant he won. AP doesn't crown the winner, the state does, they just felt comfortable enough in their projections with the reported votes to call it. It's no different than in MA, AP called Healy the winner as soon as the polls closed.

2

NewHampshireAngle t1_ivq2roa wrote

You’re right. I’m just sick of elections. I was watching the coverage of the aftermath today streaming and was still getting the same damn ads we’ve been hammered by for months.

0

Doug_Shoe t1_ivo77w1 wrote

Yeah- If they get a little better at it then we won't have to vote at all. They can just tell us the winners. Yay! Think of the time and effort we will save!

I love it when it seems like one person is winning by a landslide. But that's all wrong and thankfully they catch it for us. Then at 2 or 3 am everything works out, and they tell us who really won. Whew! That was close! I love living in the age of voting machines with all of these benefits for us.

−28

chief57 t1_ivobhis wrote

Please do us all a favor and just stop, get off the internet and please just do something else with your life.

27

Doug_Shoe t1_ivog6w3 wrote

"Do something else with you life..."

Because of a post that required 10 seconds for me to type. LOL

−13

chief57 t1_ivogfwo wrote

You comment nonsense dozens of times a day on this sub.

15

Doug_Shoe t1_ivogwz7 wrote

wow. we are up to 3 minutes now

So if I'm a fruit fly your assertion is correct.

−14

chief57 t1_ivopg2z wrote

Nonsequitorial nonsense. Please just stop.

8

Doug_Shoe t1_ivopo0s wrote

??? You made a claim about me. I'm responding directly to that.

You could have just conceded the fact or moved on. If you want to die on this hill, that's up to you.

−2

5ammas t1_ivp3ncg wrote

That's right, be proud of the 3 minutes per day you spend being an idiotic nonsensical ass to internet strangers! Go you!

5

Doug_Shoe t1_ivp4zgl wrote

gots mirror?

−2

5ammas t1_ivp71t2 wrote

Check your bathroom right above the sink, it's probably there.

5

Doug_Shoe t1_ivp7mux wrote

oh, so you don't know where your own mirror is then? You can come use mine.

−1

5ammas t1_ivpcctc wrote

No worries, I'm just glad to hear you found yours after all! Cheers mate! 😊

2

Doug_Shoe t1_ivpco71 wrote

Yes because I'm the one dissenting voice being piled by many hateful people.

That's OK. I stood up to all the bullies in grade school and high school as well. I was kinda hoping everyone would grow up, but not everyone does.

Have a nice day.

−1

5ammas t1_ivpd16n wrote

Strawman

2

Doug_Shoe t1_ivpdahz wrote

LOL.

You know what sarcasm is?

Right?

No?

−1

5ammas t1_ivpe97u wrote

OMG

You don't know what strawman is!

Left.

Yes!

1

Doug_Shoe t1_ivpffsi wrote

No because sarcasm isn't literally making the assertion.

0

UnderratedLegends t1_ivnnxwl wrote

I really don’t understand how NH votes 2 democrats into the the house of reps, 1 democrat senator and 1 republican governor? Why is it split? And why is the #1 most free state in America voting Democratic?

−39

Bostonbakedbeanthere t1_ivnqg01 wrote

Maybe because Republicans are actively takiing away women's freedoms. And they don't want to end up like one of those shit hole Republican states? #1 most free state in America can change quickly.

24

UnderratedLegends t1_ivnqwni wrote

Not all republicans are pro life but you’d rather have a increased economic depression, increased inflation of 8.5% inflation, mortgage rates going to 10%, housing market at an all time and hardest time to buy a house for the upcoming new Gen Z. Increased interest rates of .75% BP every quarter this 2022 year, increased prices of food at the super market, increased prices at the pump, open borders with drugs and 94% of the opioid coming over. Makes no sense how democrats think.

−29

Bostonbakedbeanthere t1_ivnses3 wrote

Gee do you think all those Corporate taxcuts Trump gave away causing Trillion dollar deficits, had anything to do with inflation? Or maybe greedy Corporations jacking up there prices, while at the same time posting record high profits are the problem? Of coarse not. That's just how Capitalism is supposed to work.

Tell me what have Republicans done to fix any of that the past 2years? Nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nothing but their good old fashioned obstructionism of anything that would help normie people.

All Republiconned do is give tax breaks to rich people who donate to them, and try to roll back human rights to appease the religious extremists in control of their new Religiofascist party.

24

UnderratedLegends t1_ivntbsx wrote

Not at all my friend. That’s the worst argument I’ve heard. The rich or 1% who make over $539,901 pay 37% Federal Tax and that’s just one notch of it. Elon Musk is paying $11 Billion in taxes this year after moving to texas a state that has 0 state income tax.

So you’re argument is screw the greedy corporations of capitalism America while the Democratic Party over the last 2 years made it the hardest 2 years on record for the middle class and the poor class to live, put food on the table and pay bills. The percentage of people living paycheck to paycheck is now 63% and had there 401ks and brokerage accounts plummet thanks to this administration.

Like you make no sense. Why make it harder to live by voting democratic.

−4

Bostonbakedbeanthere t1_ivnu2ov wrote

Nah thats thanks to Republicans still controlling the Senate for the past 14yrs, stealing Supreme Court picks, stopping bipartisan legislation from moving forward, and all around fucking over the little guy.

Try watching something other than Fox and political adds for your over simplified political arguments.

Its also thanks to billionaire bootlickers like yourself giving our country away to them who enable it.

Case in point you couldn't help but lick Musks boots so quickly and unsolicited.

15

UnderratedLegends t1_ivnud7t wrote

You have absolutely no facts or arguments which just goes to show how most people who think like yourself which is emotionally without facts. Which is part of the problem in this modern day society. I’m disappointed.

1

Bostonbakedbeanthere t1_ivnvo9k wrote

Yawn.. id be more embarrassed to still be a Republican after Trump. Left that cult 20 years ago.

By the way my friends, family and my Country i served, will never be embarrassed of me not being in your Republican religio cult.

My family proudly has lgbt members, including my trans son, that we don't demonize or worse try to take away their human rights because of who they are, or who they love.

Does yours?

Edit: you removed calling me an embarrassment to my friends, family and country.

14

Nestormahkno19d t1_ivnvm0v wrote

You can blame most of that on Republicans

24

UnderratedLegends t1_ivnvtnw wrote

When republicans left the administration inflation was 1.5% and now it’s 8.5%

−3

mmsood99 t1_ivo6y2c wrote

You do understand inflation is a world wide phenomenon? And the problem is timing: the international slowdown that came from COVID in 2019-2021 caused problems in the supply chain raising prices. But that takes time to propagate.

And demonstrably the companies are taking the opportunity to price gouge, so some of the inflation comes from that. Are you blaming the companies at all?

20

UnderratedLegends t1_ivo8qjm wrote

Right that’s why our federal reserve printed the most money in a 2 year span in history. I’m not even going to get into this anyone anymore. I can’t believe how uneducated people are.

−4

Oh_So_SoDoSoPa t1_ivoehz5 wrote

And guess who appointed the chair of the federal reserve in 2018. Hint: it was a republican. Wow you are dense.

10

SamJackson01 t1_ivnwih6 wrote

And corporate profits are insane right now. The American PEOPLE are being fleeced right now. By the same corporations that take government subsidies and then jack up the prices. Oil companies are making massive profits at the moment. Good for them right? They take billions in subsidies from the government then still jack up the price. Why? Because it’s easy to point the finger at the people wanting to take your billions of corporate handouts away. It’s political market manipulation. It’s the same reason those stupid ‘I Did That’ stickers were ridiculous. The President doesn’t control the price of gas. The corporations do.

19

UnderratedLegends t1_ivnwnr7 wrote

So what do you suggest before my rebuttal? As well how do you think the democrats handle this issue as opposed to the republicans?

2

ThatDrunkRussian1116 t1_ivo5znz wrote

How dumb can you be to really think that’s how any of this works?

9

UnderratedLegends t1_ivo624i wrote

You sound dumb and ignorant yourself

−1

ThatDrunkRussian1116 t1_ivo6bke wrote

What an amazing and unsurprising response. Please fit the stereotype harder

9

UnderratedLegends t1_ivo6e0g wrote

Bro you literally called me dumb and then I can’t say you’re dumb 😂😂😂 what kinda double standard

0

ThatDrunkRussian1116 t1_ivowi9k wrote

Right so me calling you dumb for not understanding how inflation works is the same as you calling me dumb for saying your dumb? Why didn’t I think of that?

3

Nestormahkno19d t1_ivou1gv wrote

Explain how that’s Democrats’ fault and explain how, in detail, Republicans would fix it. I doubt you can do either beyond basic Fox Noise talking points

5

Nestormahkno19d t1_ivnvk72 wrote

Because you don’t understand how politics actually works in this country

20

UnderratedLegends t1_ivnvnm9 wrote

I think that’s you buddy

−23

Nestormahkno19d t1_ivou5u7 wrote

Yea I just have a bachelors in political science and a masters in public administration but what do I know?

3

UnderratedLegends t1_ivou7yr wrote

What school?

0

Nestormahkno19d t1_ivpeh4z wrote

I’ll tell you but first explain why you think that matters because I’m guessing you’re feeling insecure about your GED right now so your only means of response is to try to label the school I attended as some kind of “cultural Marxism” factory and therefore invalidating my education and opinion. Is that about right?

2

UnderratedLegends t1_ivpf3g6 wrote

No I just wanted to see if you went to an actual accredited university, but since you couldn’t say. I’m going to assume that was a no and I also have my masters an MBA definitely better than a MPA. You’re a waste of my time.

−1

Nestormahkno19d t1_ivpnho1 wrote

Literally first thing I said was I’d tell you if you answered my question. UNH Durham for undergraduate, UNH Manchester for masters. And I know more than enough people with MBA’s to know that not impressive but enjoy your little fantasy. I also don’t have student loans because my veterans benefits paid for my education. Hope your MBA makes you loads of cash so you’re not trapped in debt

2

TravelingTequila t1_ivonxo5 wrote

It's common for one of the most independent states in the country to have split tickets. Not common nationally anymore.

Some people here think about the candidates rather than just blindly voting a party line. That's a good thing.

8

livefreethendie t1_ivpmj6j wrote

Nh would probably go straight republican if the candidates were more like sununu and less like trump.

3

checdc t1_ivn82n4 wrote

The real question is how do people keep voting for democrats with how fucked the last 2 years have been 😂 Yall have the memory of a fruit fly

−48

Bostonbakedbeanthere t1_ivnqn1e wrote

Better than Republican fascism. Who'd rather no one votes and we just make them leaders for life.

12

checdc t1_ivo6jr9 wrote

Oh fascism comment. I don't think you have a clue what fascism is honestly. Can you tell me a historical fascist trait the gop has?

−6

SheeEttin t1_ivoycwu wrote

> Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

Militarism is the easy one. "Support the troops" and military hero worship has been a GOP standard for decades.

If you disagree with that characterization, feel free to provide your own.

5

checdc t1_ivp27an wrote

Ah he went with the Wikipedia definition that's cute. You don't find any bias in the definition? Do you think 10 years ago that definition started with far right or maybe that's just a punch word for the left? Fascism is not supporting service members who go to war so you don't have to. Fascism or the military industrial complex has been pushed by both sides for decades so pinning that on one side or another is just stupid. Both sides make money on kick backs from military and war contracts. Hence why the war in Afghanistan was never won. They wanted it to go on forever. So they could continue to profit off it. I remember Obama saying he would bring all our troops home in his first 4 years he never did. Fascism is usually described by a dictator which we haven't had in America until Joe Biden. I can't remember any president in my lifetime ever mandating Americans to do something and if they didn't threatening their very livelihoods. The only thing he didn't do was have the military force this on Americans. He did how purge the military of anyone who didn't get a vaccine. He tried to purge the entire country by getting those people fired. What do you call it when one side purges the other from existence. I remember from history the jews were purged much in the same way from society by the Nazis. Nazis are often Referenced as fascist but in fact were socialist. I can point out traits of fascism from both side but something tells me you are incapable of seeing the monster on your side.

−1

SheeEttin t1_ivp67ex wrote

Let's see, we've got "it's biased", "both sides", "the Nazis were actually socialist", and comparing vaccinations to the Holocaust. Keep going, I've almost got a bingo.

I also note that you don't deny the militarism of the Republicans, nor provide your alternative definition of fascism.

But hey, if getting worked up with fascist apologia is what helps you get your jollies, who am I to judge?

3

checdc t1_ivp7uj5 wrote

No I don't deny the right has pride and appreciation for those in the military and those who serve their community. Police, fire fighters, emt, nurses, military they are thankless jobs. Appreciating someones sacrifice to take on that occupation doesn't make you a fascist. This is the same thing the left tries to do with nationalism. Pride in one's country is not a evil thing but the left tries to demonize it and portray a picture of evil with terms. If they can dehumanize the other side it makes it much easier to rally support behind eradicating them.

I didn't compare vaccine mandates to the holocaust. The holocaust came after. I compared it do how the Nazi party divided the German people. Their greatest accomplishment was how the took control of the youth in Germany through schools and athletics. Truly is fascinating how they controlled the whole population and its very easy to compare with how the left has sized control of the public school system here in America. I know you won't look into any of this cause you're lazy and close minded but it was worth a shot. Although something tells me you would have no problem with those on the right being rounded up and put in a gas chamber. Just seems like that's the kinda person you are. Go a head and admit it to the world.

0

CrotchetAndVomit t1_ivngt3b wrote

Give 4 examples of "how fucked" it is with sources please.

9

_Fried_Ice t1_ivnirbw wrote

funniest comment I have seen in 2 years.

EDIT: Thanks for the down vote, it really does reinforce the comment above, that "Yall have the memory of a fruit fly". Now I can definitely provide some links but that would be futile, because you will say my sources are not good.

4 things that demonstrate how fucked it has been, but I am sure some mental gymnastics will be played to dismiss these facts:

  • Inflation, all time high of 40 years
  • Withdrawal from Afghanistan (not the withdrawal itself, but how it was done was a complete disaster and utter disgusting failure)
  • Complete and utter mishandling of the covid-19 pandemic
  • Huge increase in crime specifically after Biden was elected, mostly in Blue states
  • And an extra one just cause, the border has been and still til today is in shambles
−19

los-gokillas t1_ivo1y7w wrote

Do you mean the withdrawal from Afghanistan? Not Iraq? Handling of COVID-19? Trump was in charge of that through the entire first year. Almost all lockdowns and stimulus happened under trump. The border isn't in shambles it's just a republican talking point because they're scared that white people are having less babies.

Inflation and the economy overall has nothing to do with either administration and everything to do with capitalism. There is always a boom and bust cycle in capitalism. Covid allowed corporations to line the shit out of their pockets, through the government, and because of that things are getting very very tight for the working class. Soon we'll have a huge crash which will allow the capitalists to buy up our assets like it's a fire sale. This is how capitalism has always worked

11

_Fried_Ice t1_ivo4xj2 wrote

Yes I meant Afghanistan, I was reading about Iraq at the time of writing the post, honest mistake.

>Almost all lockdowns and stimulus happened under trump.

Who said I agree with this? I don't agree of much of the handling of covid of the trump administration either, but that is not the only mishandling of the pandemic, most of the pandemic has been under Biden thus far. Trump never supported lockdowns either, so even IF that statement is true what was essentially done is trump left it to the states to decide, and did not nationally recommend them. Nor did he push for private companies to enforce vaccine rules even though he is pro vaccine.

I don't agree with your capitalism statement, lets just leave it at that.

>The border isn't in shambles

This is a false statement, you can look it up

−5

los-gokillas t1_ivo7md7 wrote

You don't agree with the boom and bust cycle of capitalism? It's indisputable. That's why there's a crash roughly every ten years. It has to happen for capitalism to continue to function. That's not a politically motivated observation at all just the simple truth. As you would say, you can look it up

Edit From investopedia, "The boom and bust cycle is a process of economic expansion and contraction that occurs repeatedly. The boom and bust cycle is a key characteristic of capitalist economies and is sometimes synonymous with the business cycle.

During the boom the economy grows, jobs are plentiful and the market brings high returns to investors. In the subsequent bust the economy shrinks, people lose their jobs and investors lose money. Boom-bust cycles last for varying lengths of time; they also vary in severity."

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/boom-and-bust-cycle.asp#:~:text=The%20boom%20and%20bust%20cycle%20is%20a%20key%20characteristic%20of,jobs%20and%20investors%20lose%20money.

3

Taladanarian27 t1_ivo1toe wrote

“I could provide sources, but I think you’re not gonna like them. Here’s my argument to convince you”

That’s basically what you said. As a scientist, I know if you can’t provide data to back up your claims no one will take you seriously. So when being directly asked for sources, and you dismiss the idea of providing sources, it practically invalidates anything you say.

I see your points listed. But I too would like to see sources. I want to be convinced, want to learn, want to evolve knowledge. That’s human nature (our desire as a race to innovate). So these bullet points cant really prove/disprove anything because you refuse to provide citations.

If you want people to take you seriously, I recommend being capable of backing up the words you say. If you say you CAN, then DO it. You don’t see me claiming to discover a new element and then being like “I could show you my results but you’d just be too shocked”. Nah. People wanna see. Wouldn’t you want others to see if your sources are true and legit?

5

_Fried_Ice t1_ivo3u4k wrote

I completely understand your point here so here are some sources, even though I don't completely agree with you statement.
We can leave the mishandling of covid-19 out of this as it can be seen as an opinion:

Afghanistan withdrawal failure: https://www.npr.org/2022/08/15/1117037318/for-biden-the-chaotic-withdrawal-from-kabul-was-a-turning-point-in-his-presidenc
https://www.vox.com/world/2022/8/15/23300236/no-one-held-accountable-catastrophic-afghanistan-withdrawal-biden-white-house

Inflation rates:
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/inflation-cpi#:~:text=Inflation%20Rate%20in%20the%20United,percent%20in%20June%20of%201921.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/u-s-inflation-at-9-1-percent-a-record-high
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3697972-how-responsible-is-biden-for-high-inflation/

Rise in crime:
https://www.bbc.com/news/57581270
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/crime-is-top-concern-many-americans-midterm-vote-how-bad-is-it-2022-11-01/

Border crisis:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61989673
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57408094

−5

MemeAddict96 t1_ivo57ne wrote

Your source on crime says crime rose during 2020 in both red and blue states. I thought Trump was president in 2020? It actually says there’s been a drop in violent crime. And it also says that public policy has little effect on crime rates.

I’m confused why you would post a source that would prove you wrong. Unless you don’t actually read things and just parrot the standard GOP talking points.

10

lizyouwerebeer t1_ivpdpy6 wrote

"The problem with all of these conservative critiques is that crime went up everywhere," said Thomas Abt, who worked for the Justice Department during the Obama administration and now chairs the violent crime working group at the Council on Criminal Justice.

It went up in red states, it went up in blue states, it went up in cities controlled by Republican mayors and cities controlled by Democratic mayors. It went up in cities, also in the suburbs, also in rural areas."

​

I don't know how that proves dems are behind the increase of crime.

2

[deleted] t1_ivobh9b wrote

[removed]

−60

manicmonkeys t1_ivpjib6 wrote

As someone who preferred Sununu, this is a stupid take.

1