The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down

Status
Not open for further replies.
dowie said:
No, but it's a reasonable estimate, I'm open to arguments for why some other figure might be a better estimate but I've not seen any so far. Just straw man arguments from one poster and then pointing out that there is some degree of uncertainty around the figure.

Not everyone donates to parties but that works both ways.

You could make the similar arguments about poll results too, I'd have hoped that that sort of thing would be kinda accepted, I wouldn't reply to someone posting a poll to point out that they only sampled 1000 people and didn't actually ask the whole UK population (granted polls come with a different set of issues but still).
Click to expand...
Democrats were twice as likely as Republicans to say they donated last year. In 2016, 22% of Democrats and Democratic leaners and 10% Republicans and Republican leaners reported making a donation.

Thats from 2016 so might not match for 2020

So it's more likely to be 97%/98% so you were way off :p

Just to note I agreed there would be a large Democrat lean I just object to stating it was 99% without all the data points

I wonder if there's a large company that has a 98% republican lean and what it would look like tried looking up some Texas oil companies but even some of those had a 20-40% democratic lean

Actually completely forgot to account for voter turnout which was at 86% for San Fran so that would put the total Democrats at Twitter closer to 84% but we don't know the exact % of Twitter employees that vote we can only really guess at a range of 80% to 90%
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
The poll is wrong because they didn't ask everyone in the UK, they only asked 1000 people...

I'm well aware that it is a subset of employees and I'm open to arguments re: why that subset is skewed (avg donation size, probability of donating etc..) but you don't seem to have any other than pointing out something that is already apparent. In fact, no one seems to be providing any other estimates/data.

If your only point is that there is some degree of uncertainty around that then sure, if you're going to argue that it's wrong in a given direction then provide an actual argument for it as it's pretty clear that twitter is overwhelmingly left-leaning, not just from the data we have but also from the anecdotal stories, leaks etc.. and the way they've handled some prominent incidents which clearly required some high-level decisions.
Click to expand...

My point is dowie that your statement that 99% of Twitter employees are lefty is simply wrong. A small sample, which is all that amount donated can give, can't lead to such a statement. Now can we just move on and not do the usual round and round, I know you won't admit you were wrong, that never happens but lets just move on now we agree that 99% or 98% of Twitter staff can't be said to be lefty. 98% of the staff that donated can be said to be lefty.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
98% of the staff that donated can be said to be lefty.
Click to expand...
sorry to throw a spanner in the works but that simply isn't accurate either. it's jumping to conclusions.

many people that voted for dem didn't do so because they are dem supporters/lefty, but instead because they didn't want trump to win. it's the beauty of trump. he brings out voters/donations for the other side.

you can't say those that donated to one side did so because they consider themselves to be leaning that side, just that at that particular moment, they wanted one side to lose and another to win. Why? well we can speculate, but i'd be willing to be a good chunk did so because trump is trump. I've posted before on here how i want to be inspired by the republican side, I want to see something I can vote for, policies that will entice me over. they need to remove trump so fresh faces can start making the narrative and start to present a strong opposition to the current biden admin. unfortunately they refuse to dump trump. imagine labour refusing to dump corbyn. it would be foolish and not good for anyone.

with the above said, it does just further show the original point you're making, which is that you can't claim 99% are x thing, because not only is the dated based on a limited percentage of staff, but you have very limited data in the first place. you don't have motivation, voting history, how they describe themselves.

i do not consider myself a labour supporter (yet), however i could see myself donating to them at the next election. am i now a labour supporter, or just someone that doesn't want to see bojo continue in power and will donate to someone who is likely to be able beat him?
 
deuse said:
99% is true. https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?...=2022&min_date=01/01/2021&max_date=12/31/2022
Click to expand...

or , at the company level , I don't see why the below (I assume everyones done due google diligence), doesn't redress the employee contribution imbalance -
having worked in 2 us high tech companies your actions are controlled by policy handed down from above (diversity, ethics ...) - that trumps my personal affiliations.

52044837677_7579f7baa4_c_d.jpg
 
Apex said:
sorry to throw a spanner in the works but that simply isn't accurate either. it's jumping to conclusions.

many people that voted for dem didn't do so because they are dem supporters/lefty, but instead because they didn't want trump to win. it's the beauty of trump. he brings out voters/donations for the other side.

you can't say those that donated to one side did so because they consider themselves to be leaning that side, just that at that particular moment, they wanted one side to lose and another to win. Why? well we can speculate, but i'd be willing to be a good chunk did so because trump is trump. I've posted before on here how i want to be inspired by the republican side, I want to see something I can vote for, policies that will entice me over. they need to remove trump so fresh faces can start making the narrative and start to present a strong opposition to the current biden admin. unfortunately they refuse to dump trump. imagine labour refusing to dump corbyn. it would be foolish and not good for anyone.

with the above said, it does just further show the original point you're making, which is that you can't claim 99% are x thing, because not only is the dated based on a limited percentage of staff, but you have very limited data in the first place. you don't have motivation, voting history, how they describe themselves.

i do not consider myself a labour supporter (yet), however i could see myself donating to them at the next election. am i now a labour supporter, or just someone that doesn't want to see bojo continue in power and will donate to someone who is likely to be able beat him?
Click to expand...

I'm only giving dowie that number as 98% that donated did donate to the Dems. I completely agree that some will not be lefty or even Democrats, a significant number of Biden's votes came from Republicans who refused to vote for Trump and wanted him gone from their party. This is backed up in how votes down the ticket were cast. People still voted Republican for the Senate and House candidates.

TBH the whole argument was slightly ridiculous but typical of dowie. His original statement that 99% of Twitter employees are leftist is laughable but we had to go round and round rather than him just putting his hand up and admitting it.
 
Fubsy said:
How do you know this? Even with polls, you don't really know.

Could some of them be outwardly this way, but privately not?

I seem to be experiencing more and more people (as we come out of lockdowns) have one set of views online and a tweaked set offline. People say what they need to to fit in.
Click to expand...
IB7ouWD.png
 
mattx2 said:
Democrats were twice as likely as Republicans to say they donated last year. In 2016, 22% of Democrats and Democratic leaners and 10% Republicans and Republican leaners reported making a donation.
Click to expand...
mattx2 said:
So it's more likely to be 97%/98% so you were way off :p
Click to expand...

LOL yup that fair, I'm completely open to the donations being skewed.

mattx2 said:
Actually completely forgot to account for voter turnout which was at 86% for San Fran so that would put the total Democrats at Twitter closer to 84% but we don't know the exact % of Twitter employees that vote we can only really guess at a range of 80% to 90%
Click to expand...
I'd be inclined to ignore non-voters and assume they're split in the same way as voters unless there are compelling reasons to assume they lean a particular way, if anything it is usually argued that increasing the % of people voting tends to increase the democrat/left vote.

Colonel_Klinck said:
My point is dowie that your statement that 99% of Twitter employees are lefty is simply wrong. A small sample, which is all that amount donated can give, can't lead to such a statement. Now can we just move on and not do the usual round and round, I know you won't admit you were wrong, that never happens but lets just move on now we agree that 99% or 98% of Twitter staff can't be said to be lefty. 98% of the staff that donated can be said to be lefty.
Click to expand...

Eh? You're just pointing out something that was never denied in the first place,and has been covered in the post you're literally quoting, it's a rough estimate based on a sample. This is just you repeating an argument along the lines of

"But you the poll only asked 1000 people, it didn't ask everyone in the country"

I pointed that out to you before, but whoosh, over your head it goes... of course, it's technically wrong, "all models are wrong but some are useful" Have you never taken a basic stats course?

Matt has provided an update, perhaps a better estimate is more like 97% or 98% given a higher chance of individual democrat voters donating.

IF you're going to reply saying it is wrong, instead of the mindless replies of pointing out that there is some uncertainty around the figure then explain why, in which direction and what you think a better estimate is... that might require engaging in some thought and constructing an argument though.
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
LOL yup that fair, I'm completely open to the donations being skewed.


I'd be inclined to ignore non-voters and assume they're split in the same way as voters unless there are compelling reasons to assume they lean a particular way, if anything it is usually argued that increasing the % of people voting tends to increase the democrat/left vote.



Eh? You're just pointing out something that was never denied in the first place,and has been covered in the post you're literally quoting, it's a rough estimate based on a sample. This is just you repeating an argument along the lines of

"But you the poll only asked 1000 people, it didn't ask everyone in the country"

I pointed that out to you before, but whoosh, over your head it goes... of course, it's technically wrong, "all models are wrong but some are useful" Have you never taken a basic stats course?

Matt has provided an update, perhaps a better estimate is more like 97% or 98% given a higher chance of individual democrat voters donating.

IF you're going to reply saying it is wrong, instead of the mindless replies of pointing out that there is some uncertainty around the figure then explain why, in which direction and what you think a better estimate is... that might require engaging in some thought and constructing an argument though.
Click to expand...

You just can't help yourself can you :cry: :cry: :cry: Never change dowie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom