[mikeash]

It has also been claimed that every single person who voted for Trump was actually an extraterrestrial wearing a convincing human suit. "It's been claimed" isn't exactly convincing.

(For anyone who wants a source on that claim, it's me, I'm claiming it here.)

[grzm]

And I read about it on Hacker News. That's two sources.

[mikeash]

Quick, someone call CNN.

[alphapapa]

When you're done value-signaling to each other, google it and see for yourself.

[mikeash]

OK: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/nov/18/...

Did I do it wrong?

[alphapapa]

IMO, yes and no. While they make efforts to sound fair and reasonable, the "fact-checkers" and "truth-o-meters" are quite biased. Before the election, they were basically stumping for Clinton, making it sound like Trump was the fount of untruth while she was a mere trickle of truthiness. How wonderful to be the self-declared arbiters of truth!

As I said, it has been claimed that 3 million non-citizens voted, and a lawsuit is pending, so we shall see.

If it is true, then obviously that is a significant problem, and obviously Clinton would not have won the popular vote. And obviously that would vindicate the Republicans' efforts to institute voter-ID laws, and it would condemn the Democrats' repeated attempts to prevent such laws, and basically implicate them in election fraud. (Not to mention the Scott Foval videos.)

And that is one of the issues surrounding the repeated claim that Clinton won the popular vote, and the implied problem.

[mikeash]

Is there any reason to think it is true, besides the claim? Like I said, it has been claimed that all Trump voters are ETs, but I wouldn't expect you to give that any credence.

[grzm]

Personally, I was having a bit of fun. I thought about deleting it because it was too light-hearted and non-substantive, not because I thought I was being snarky. I understood his response in the same vein. (And where did all this "signaling" language come from? I must not be reading the right forums.)

[mikeash]

I assume they meant to say virtue signaling: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling

In short, it implies that we're not sincere when we make fun of far-out conspiracy theories, but rather that we're only doing it to enhance our social standing.

[alphapapa]

I think you're quite sincere. :) But, yes, the virtual dogpiling is quite detestable. It's an ugly form of self-congratulatory virtual bullying, like any playground scene where a bunch of kids gang up on another, push him down, and start kicking him, then walk off, high-fiving each other, secure in their social status as demonstrated by their "correct" behavior. In principle, it's no different than this: https://youtu.be/C7zEibNcejA

And the double-standard is evident here, as in any other situation, such "unsubstantive" comments would bring down the chastisement of the mods and the community downvotes. But since the victim is not left-leaning, it's okay.

[photogrammetry]

Does repeating the stale "value-signaling" HN/sociology meme make you feel better about yourself?