• mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    You see it referenced all the time as a bit of democratic dogma. There was even a meme about it that hit the top of all/active like a few days ago on Lemmy. I like how this article

    Imma stop you right there

    Yes, I am aware that it is a popular narrative in the media and on Lemmy. My question was, do you have numbers for it?

    Because my assertion that it isn’t actually true, and people are saying it anyway, and that the discrepancy and the reasons for the discrepancy is an important fact.

    • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Yeah I referenced two articles talking about it in multiple ways.

      You acting like it’s a new thing that’s never been discussed was what I was referring too. It’s absolutely a thing! That’s a bit of goal post moving on your part to go from “wow I’ve never heard of this before!” To “I don’t think that’s status statically true.”

      https://lemmy.world/comment/11132168

      Like correct me if I’m wrong, this is you right? Are you also going senile?

        • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Ha. It was too complex for me to want to get into it, and I feel like I already said what I said about it… but honestly, it’s sort of a fair question / point that I just dropped the conversation. Here’s what happened:

          So the NYMag article is full of some fascinating statistics, including the fact that voter engagement overall is going steadily up over the last few elections, and that Democratic likeliness to vote is way higher that Republican. It also includes a qualitative narrative about (slightly oversimplified) why that’s bad news for Democrats or something. To me, the numbers it was citing didn’t match the narrative.

          But anyway I didn’t want to play the game of going to some vague citations and digging through them for specific numbers to argue against, so that I have to do the work of both sides of the argument, and just kinda lost interest. If you or @AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world want to cite some statistics that might back up the media narrative that Democrats aren’t “energized” in the sense of planning to vote in the election, whatever articles you want to draw them from, I’m good with that. If you or they want to send me some articles and pretend that you win if I don’t feel like digging through them for those statistics (or alternatively if those articles just repeat the exact narrative that I’m acknowledging the existence of but not the factual backing for), I’m good with that too.