If you can read this you are too close

  • 0 Posts
  • 234 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 7th, 2024

help-circle
  • I feel this is such a complicated issue I do not understand at all. One would think that republicans would take interest in why their candidates loose in the primaries, or the democrats would want to think really hard about the evidence coming from the famous close votes to control the senate or house. But, no.

    I came from the computer side of things, with my criticism of voting software. For a long time I tried to talk about software. I figured early on that people were, like you described, just tuning me out. But, after I tried to change tack, and skip any technology or math, there was still no interest.

    Over the years I have had many discussions and I concluded this was simply a taboo subject for those who are active in politics. However, those who are cynical, and not participating, readily see the value and truth, but see little value of the knowledge. We have no ready made audience for such discussions.

    For a long time I just felt like there was something simply broken in political discussion. There is a wide disconnect between those who participate in American politics and everyone else. Its not math, its not science, its faith. We are challenging the faith of the politically active. What does that make us? Heretics.

    We are heretics who speak of things that, if taken seriously, would invalidate the majority of USA elections. The truth would burn the country down. Its remarkable there is such tolerance as seen, and its just people ignoring the few who see the Emperor has no clothes.

    And we will be ignored here, there, everywhere, for at least a generation or two, if not longer.













  • Our Omnibus draws samples entirely from the SSRS Opinion Panel, which has a probability-based recruitment methodology. No one can volunteer or sign up for the SSRS Opinion Panel; members are randomly selected and invited to participate. The panel recruits randomly selected panelists using a nationally-representative address-based sample (ABS) design with a randomly dialed prepaid cell phone supplement (RDD). This reduces the risk of bias and ensures that bots or fraudulent panelists are not recruited.

    So, people who answer strange phone numbers. I think 15 years ago that would have been fine. But now, not so much, and I really don’t think this filter is talked about as much as much as I would like.

    Try looking for “ssrs scams”, and mixed into that are actual experiences with the survey, by people asking about what they experienced. Also mixed into are the various actual scams that pretend to be legitimate.

    A huge percentage of mentally healthy USA adults would not participate