Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by hackyhacky 239 days ago
Okay, so you're going to go with the classic "I will disregard all evidence that I don't like by making unsubstantiated claims of bias".

It's not hard to find research that supports conclusions based on polling from different time periods. [1]

Fact is most people don't have enough data points in their personal lives to make any kind of conclusion about the state of the economy. They haven't gotten a raise in two years and their cousin Dale got laid off last week, but no one would extrapolate that to mean the economy is bad.

> They do different jobs, live in different geographic locations with varying density and urbanization

Yes, but they don't typically all swap locations with each other when a new administration takes power. Nevertheless their opinions do swap.

> economy was good but perceived by idiots who didn't know better

That is, in fact, exactly what happened.

[1] https://isr.umich.edu/news-events/news-releases/partisan-att...

1 comments

Dude, I literally linked to FEC contributions. "Unsubstantiated" my ass. I think we're done here. Keep believing what you like.
> Dude, I literally linked to FEC contributions. "Unsubstantiated" my ass.

That's not evidence of bias, unless, you think that anyone who makes a political contribution is unable to perform accurate research or do their job. Would you casually dismiss the work of a cop or a professor just because they made a donation? If you find a flaw in the research method, let me know.

You're literally looking for any reason to justify your a priori decision to ignore research you don't like. That makes you the partisan hack, not the researcher.