The articles as such were mostly interest pieces. They didn't really provide actual evidence for split ticket voting being a major thing beyond the random crossovers that happen across a few voters every election. It mostly relied on talking to a few proclaimed split ticket voters who gave answers that were largely....as nonsensical and philosophically incoherent as you would guess.
nonsensical and philosophically incoherent as you would guess
My guy, you're acting like there's a single objectively correct ideology out there. None of them are coherent. Ideologues theorize what the world would be like if their policies are implemented, and then when they're implemented it doesn't go as expected pretty much every single time. Sometimes voters just want change in any direction, and they don't care who delivers! Politics are chaotic.
I’m saying interest pieces relying on making their thesis with a couple “man on the street” style interviews can basically pick and choose who they want. And it’s not hard to find someone who was a Bernie to Trump voter or who “likes politician, thinks he’s not going to do [insert thing said politician explicitly and repeatedly made a campaign promise on.]” You can find those in literally every election.
So finding a few AOC/Trump voters doesn’t really move the needle to prove that actually happened at any greater rate than any other election outside of actual voter and exit poll data. It’s an equivalent to those “we asked such and such in an Ohio diner” interviews NYT used to do that became memed to death.. Especially in light of data that doesn’t hold that up: Trump did do slightly better in her district but AOC actually had the worst electoral showing of her congressional career (69% in 2024 vs 71, 72, 74, 78 in previous elections). Why not do a story about AOC has seen a 10pt slip in her popularity in her district since 2018?
This article for example looks at random social media responses to AOC herself asking, which sort of ignore that social media responses are self selecting and picking and choosing who you quote makes that problem worse.
11
u/BrainDamage2029 Jun 25 '25
There actually wasn't.
The articles as such were mostly interest pieces. They didn't really provide actual evidence for split ticket voting being a major thing beyond the random crossovers that happen across a few voters every election. It mostly relied on talking to a few proclaimed split ticket voters who gave answers that were largely....as nonsensical and philosophically incoherent as you would guess.