this kind of analysis is pretty useless. four isn't enough of a sample size. you might as well say, "twice dems ran with a candidate with a hard k sound starting their name, and lost."https://twitter.com/HeerJeet/status/1216399399661686785 …
-
-
polls strongly suggest they don't weigh it that heavily. voters for Trump were mostly motivated by racial animus, not by FP. you know this.
-
I like Sanders! I loathe Biden! But there's little evidence that 2020 voters are especially polarized around Iraq war voting, and I don't think it benefits anyone to pretend they are.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
That same electorate also supported the war, too.
-
Electorate supported the war in part because they trusted national leaders like Bush, Clinton, Kerry and Biden. Once the war turned bad, people naturally came to distrust those leaders. This isn't hard.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Do you have any data showing Iraq is a big issue for voters in 2020? It was a bigger deal in 08 for obvious reasons.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
And why is a plurality of Dem voters preferring Biden now? I guess we’re supposed to take from this that Dems love the Iraq war, Republicans loved the Iraq war before them, and in order to get the peacenik independent votes needed to beat Trump, we must nominate Bernie.
End of conversation
-
-
-
Your hypothesis carries as much statistical, and thus predictive, significance as the hard "k" one precisely BECAUSE you can't derive, in an intellectually honest way, what "the electorate" weighs how.
-
Just for starters, we can't know whether supporting the war is a variable dependent on generally more liberal politics, for example. And why can't we know it? Because the amount of data points is too small.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.