Former President Donald Trump continued his obsession with crowd size on Sunday, claiming photos that showed a large crowd outside Vice President Kamala Harris’ Detroit rally last week were AI-generated. But one photographer who was in attendance confirmed to the Daily Beast that the images his camera captured were very real.

  • @barsquid
    link
    -11 month ago

    Disappeared? You are behaving like a child because someone asked you for data. I hope you can figure out how to control your rage someday.

    • @Organichedgehog
      link
      11 month ago

      I have very little patience for willful ignorance.

      “The sky is orange and you can’t prove otherwise.”

      “You’re dumb.”

      “You can’t find the data because it doesn’t exist. The sky is orange.”

      • @barsquid
        link
        -21 month ago

        Incorrect. You have endless patience for your own willful ignorance and refusal to look at real numbers instead of your feelings.

          • @barsquid
            link
            -21 month ago

            Nah, I think I’ll look at the data, now that I have a minute.

            Here’s Clinton favorability among Dems 2016. 77-78% late in the campaign.

            Dems did prefer Obama. Different poll and different questions but 88% of Dems chose Obama over McCain and 92% of Dems claimed they were excited for Obama. Give him the middle at 90%?

            Here’s Biden '20. Adding enthusiastic to satisfied is 91%. I don’t know if that counts, elsewhere in the poll you can see a huge number of people were primarily voting against Donald.

            And Harris in late July looks like 83% with Dems. Again a different poll. Hopefully she’s more like 90% with Dems in a November instead of near 80% (which we know is reviled by literally everyone from your “people are saying” assertions).

            Difficult to find and compare even measures this similar, and the numbers don’t really support you. That’s why you didn’t want to check.

            • @Organichedgehog
              link
              11 month ago

              That’s why you didn’t want to check.

              I did check, found the sources proved my point, and refused to spoonfeed you.

              https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/poll-clinton-unpopularity-high-par-trump/story?id=41752050

              https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/2016-election-poll-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/index.html

              You cherry-picked data in an attempt to make your point, but just…proved mine? Harris has a likability problem too, and she’s already at a 5 point advantage over Clinton’s peak, what 3 weeks into her campaign?

              Biden and Obama with 13-14% advantages? That qualifies as wildly different.

              • @barsquid
                link
                -11 month ago

                I wanted to see the data with the Dem voters to corroborate your claim that everyone hated her. I don’t really care to see across all adults after months of Donald’s cultists chanting “lock her up.” I also wanted to compare to other campaigns to see what “normal” numbers should be.

                You couldn’t find anything of the sort. You’re still posting data across all demographics. And you were furious about it all for some reason, also.

                Yes, I agree Obama and Biden were wildly different with numbers like that. Obama was a huge win, +8 Senate and +21 House. I guess we’d agree 90% is probably above average popular.

                Is 78% far, far below average? I don’t know. You certainly don’t know either, you haven’t looked for anything because they might run contrary to your biases.

                • @Organichedgehog
                  link
                  11 month ago

                  I guess I must have struck a nerve, for you to keep trying “no you’re the one who won’t research, you’re biased!” Truth hurts, bucko. I like that you’re admitting you’re wrong (like a big boy!) and I was right, but still attempting to say that I didn’t know I was right. Flawless logic. Have a nice life.

                  • @barsquid
                    link
                    -11 month ago

                    You were the one posting, what, three? comments while I was preoccupied today. Now you want to project the feeling of your rage onto me, just like you wish to project about lacking the data you still have not found.

                    You have no data to show ~80% is abnormal because the comparisons are campaigns that were wildly popular. You have zero intellectual curiosity, you could have written that instead of being weirdly and childishly standoffish. “Look at the line, me and my pals agree it is low.” Compared to…?

                    I hope you grow as a human.