this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
1385 points (98.6% liked)

politics

31403 readers
2498 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago (5 children)

“Currently, there is no consensus on the face of the Democrat Party, as a majority of voters either give the title to AOC (26%) or simply say there is none (26%),” Co/efficient concluded.

Never heard of Co/efficient, but “Democrat Party” is a bit of a red flag. From mediabiasfactcheck:

FiveThirtyEight, an expert on measuring and rating pollster performance, has evaluated 20 polls by co/efficient, earning 0.7 stars for accuracy, indicating they are Mixed Factual by MBFC’s criteria. They also conclude that their polling moderately favors the Right with a score of -2.7, which equates to a Right-Center polling bias. In general, co/efficient is considered moderately accurate and demonstrates a right-leaning bias in polling.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

MBFC gives The Guardian and Breitbart equivalent ratings for factuality, which is patently ridiculous

It's not a reliable gauge of anything, and it's harmful to trust its rankings

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Who fact checks the fact checkers?

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Wikipedia. Which says MBFC is unreliable and has a pro Israel bias.

[–] hexonxonx@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago

All of those sites are right-wing propaganda operations. Every single one of them.

Factual news is almost always going to be liberal biased. Sites like these encourage journalists to bias their news stories to the right for no good reason.

I'm surprised so many people are falling for this.

[–] Absaroka@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

However, co/efficient also states that it provides research for mostly Republicans, such as Gregory Steube (R-FL)

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Democrat Party

This "red flag" is meaningless to people broke the age of 50 or so. I am a Democrat. I vote for the candidate who is a Democrat. Obama was a Democrat.

I don't have time to get pissy over the difference between the noun and the adjective. If that's all the points they can score on us, they are welcome to them.

The review by 538 is a much more important judgement.

[–] gobbles_turkey@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This “red flag” is meaningless to people broke the age of 50 or so. I am a Democrat. I vote for the candidate who is a Democrat. Obama was a Democrat.

I get it man. I'm over 50 too and my team is the White Sox. I support the White Sox no matter that. Whats important in sports is that you support the team of your home town. Sure they were the worst team in 2024 and not entertaining to watch. Doesnt matter.

Anyone who writes scathing articles of the sox pathetic performance in the newspaper is wrong and disloyal, and is missing the whole point of sports. Its not about celebrating human athleticism and competition in striving to to be the best a human can be, its about adherence and loyalty to the corporation who owns your local team.

Adherence to your political party is similar. Government is not about advancing or serving society, its about eating rotten scraps off the floor and being grateful for having that much.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think you missed the entire point of my statement, which, amusingly, proves my point.

The older generations get pissy about being called the "Democrat party" rather than "Democratic party," which, to be fair, is the proper name. But it's really a stupid thing to get worked up over.

The fact that you didn't even realize that I we talking about such a silly little thing is reasonably good evidence that it is, in fact, irrelevant to modern democrats.

[–] gobbles_turkey@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

ok but I'm in my mid 50s.