Would be insulting if you read it... lol
After 4 years of Trump, they are still fatigued? That makes sense to you? You think moderates picked Trump? Trump ran as a moderate, pushing workers rights and acting like Hillary was a satanic extreme.
Democrats are learning the wrong lesson from Donald Trump
https://www.vox.com/2019/7/2/2067765...remism-penalty
I can’t read your mind dude...
It’s a strawman, because you are making it empirical. It is an indicator... no mater how much you hate it, it simply is. Arguing as if it’s empirical is an obvious strawman, because you know it’s bad indicator. How many times do I have to say it’s just an indicator, for you to stop? Is it enough, saying it’s obvious?
Yeah, as an indicator... it would be a strawman, if I argued that you think social media means Bernie would win. I’m not doing that... unless you think I should?
You can’t answer so you react, I’m not taking it personally.
- - - Updated - - -
This is irrelevant... The fact that they are unaffiliated is the point... this is math... pretty basic... it’s how groupings work...
They shift... they don’t fall off the scale... that’s why what I’m saying is universally true... in
any randomized data set. It’s why I highlighted the “all over the board”. The point is the amount of units that comprises the data set, not the density of the number set. The middle will always occupy more, because it’s
bidirectional.
Maybe it’s why I linked the article doing exactly that?
Edit: There is nothing to the left of extreme left and there is nothing to the right of extreme right. The center contains both, the center left and center right. The only way that the extreme could occupy more people, is if this isn’t random... the only way this is not correct, is if there is a
significant lean to the left or right extreme.
Edit 2: Just think about it being bidirectional. There will always be more people within the same distance of center, as there are on
each extreme.