• Count042@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Given that every point of data shows Trump winning in a landside, and probably getting the house and Senate, if Biden stays in suggests that people advocating for Biden staying in want Trump to win.

    See what I did there?

    Fun fact, actual data supports one and only one of us.

    Are you a Russian bot that wants Trump to win?

      • Count042@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        So… Let me get this right. Your only response is literally a named fallacy?

        What does your gut say the stock market will do next month, oh wonderful and correct Oracle?

          • Count042@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Your response was irrelevant. It’s not even data. It’s a literal named fallacy.

            “Trump won once, so he will again” is literally the same statement.

            Take a critical thinking class, cause you really don’t know how.

            • UsernameHere@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Again, I’m pointing out that the predictions you’re using are inaccurate and changing candidates this late in the game would cause a clusterfuck so big it would be a guaranteed win for Trump.

              • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Referencing a time when an election turned out within the margin of error of polling isn’t really pointing out that the predictions are inaccurate. It’s pointing out that you don’t have the media literacy to interpret polling results.