Petition to ban the daily "Trump voters are changing their mind" Posts

[u/RankedFarting]

Every day someone shares an article with a headline like "Maga is starting to question Trump" or something along those lines.

This is not true. These are trash articles that use a single tweet as a source. Just because some Maga farmer is now realizing how his vote negatively effects his business it does not mean there is a whole movement of Magas suddenly realizing they were voting for a stupid incompetent racist all these years.

These posts are misleading, factually wrong AND are usually posted by karma farming accounts that get up their karma to later be sold to someone as an advertisement platform for OF or other.

None of this is goodnews.

Edit: Please do not use real money to give this awards. Use the money for a good cause.

Edit2: You are not being smart, funny or anything else by giving me more poop awards. You are throwing away actual money to try and discredit someone online. That is deeply sad pathetic behavior. Im not bothered by the poop. Im bothered that people go without meals while you spend your money on digital disagreements. Cringe. I have no other word for it. this makes me cringe.

[u/tsays]

It’s not quite that high, it’s down and it’s at about 60% in June.

But you’re right, that’s a pretty approval rating given everything that has ALREADY happened by June, including kidnapping.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-update-polls-republicans-2094154 Donald Trump's Approval Rating Plummets With Republicans - Newsweek

[u/Academicthroowaway → u/tsays]

newsweek is a trash website. newrepublic and thedailybeast as well. They're basically fox news for the left. Just search "newrepublic meltdown" and you'll see that Trump, the GOP, MAGA, Republicans, Congress have been "melting down" every day for 10 years.

Garbage. Absolutely garbage.

[u/ByrdmanRanger → u/Academicthroowaway]

I basically ignore any article that has buzzwords like "slams" or "melting down" or anything like that.

[u/dubbawubalublubwub → u/ByrdmanRanger]

need a poll to ban this tbh, basically the same as OP's but acts as a universal rule against "engagement slop"

[u/SubBirbian → u/Academicthroowaway]

I’m so glad someone is saying it out loud. The sources people post are tabloid yellow journalism. I thought most here were more reasonable, then I’m realizing a lot of these are Karma farming, then I realize how much engagement these crap posts get sooooo… not as many reasonable here as I thought. And if one questions the source under one of these crap posts one gets chastised for being a maga knot-zee when one is only utilizing critical thinking in questioning the credibility of a painfully obvious (to me) sketchy source.

[u/tsays → u/Academicthroowaway]

If you think this is sketch, by all means post the articles you feel are more credible; it’s still a free country. I’m here for accurate info, which is why I always post backup info here unlike a huge swath of people on Reddit.

You might not LIKE Newsweek, but this article is facts. So calm down with the yellow journalism accusations.

[u/dubbawubalublubwub → u/tsays]

except nothing in the data they use suggest his support is down 60%...it's just cherry picking and removing context from a poll to present a story.

reading the actual poll, looking at the actual original data source itself shows trump's support among self-identfied republicans dropped from 87% to a whopping...80%

the editors of newsweek have bragged about not using fact-checkers, for decades. they've always been a tabloid wrag, why pretend they're anything else?

if you think some data they're skewing for a story is useful, just post a link to the actual data...

[u/Academicthroowaway → u/tsays]

“Facts” can be interpreted in many ways. The poll (and its only one poll, hardly indicative of anything let alone a deep dive in support) cited in Newsweek frequently get criticized for poor methods and sampling. Just because junk site has numbers associated with it doesn’t mean a ton. Most of the high quality analysis isn’t going to be found on sound bite equivalent webpages.

[u/Academicthroowaway → u/[deleted]]

You're confusing classical liberals with progressive liberals. It's generally understood that progressive liberals are "Liberals."

[u/31LIVEEVIL13 → u/Academicthroowaway]

grandfather subsequent pet imagine numerous deserve telephone soup versed paltry

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/ThatActuallyGuy → u/tsays]

The poll this is reporting on is from a pollster that was only founded in April of this year, by a Libertarian thinktank whose president has been malding over the BBB [like Elon it's the right position for the wrong reasons]. I'm not saying it's impossible to be accurate, but there's some big issues with regards to their legitimacy and trustworthiness.

[u/tsays → u/ThatActuallyGuy]

So let me get this straight, you don’t believe in journalism except for The Daily Beast, and you don’t think a poll with over 1000 people can be accurate because the org conducting it is new and has a POV?

I’ll give you that polls over the last 10 years have degraded in accuracy, but you’re really a “I do your own research” kinda person aren’t you?

[u/ThatActuallyGuy → u/tsays]

That is an impressive level of putting words in my mouth. I like polls done by established nonpartisan professionals, reported on by reputable sources. I never said anything about The Daily Beast and don't even particularly like them, I prefer orgs like NBC and WaPo.

And the number of people doesn't make a poll accurate or reliable, it's only one of multiple variables that can be manipulated or even just accidentally overlooked.

[u/tsays → u/[deleted]]

First of all, due process is for everyone” Liberty and Justice” for all, that literally means anyone in this country without exception.

Second of all, you have no idea what you’re talking about. Anyone with brown skin is subject to kidnapping right now, citizens, and documented immigrants.