Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    06 Mar '17 14:256 edits
    http://www.socialmediatoday.com/technology-data/using-social-media-data-predict-result-2016-us-presidential-election

    I'm told that if one were to try to predict the last election outcome only on the basis of opinions on social media, it would have projected Trump as the winning. Instead, many news sources uses antiquated polls in which people probably did not want to admit they were voting Trump. With the rabid PC sweeping the nation and scarlet "A"s being passed around for not agreeing with the PC crowd, this is understandable. People no longer feel "free" to express their non-PC thoughts with their name associated with them. Instead, many feel "free" to express their thoughts without broadcasting the world who they may be or being selective as to who they tell based on trusting them.

    But predicting election outcomes is just the tip of the ice burg. Using social media to predict other things like what products you may desire or whether you are a terrorist threat are also being explored.

    Back in the day, tyrants felt as though their power depended upon suppressing free speech, so as not to allow a movement to grow through the said free speech that might endanger their power. But perhaps tyrants had it all bass ackwards all these years. Perhaps the key to targeting "dangers" to their power is to allow free speech. Through social media, they can target those that oppose them so that they can simply monitor everything they do and everyone they talk to without actually stopping them, unless their behavior might endanger the lives of others.
  2. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1407
    06 Mar '17 14:452 edits
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://www.socialmediatoday.com/technology-data/using-social-media-data-predict-result-2016-us-presidential-election

    I'm told that if one were to try to predict the last election outcome only on the basis of opinions on social media, it would have projected Trump as the winning. Instead, many news sources uses antiquated polls in which people probably did ...[text shortened]... s" to their power is free speech through social media so they can target those that oppose them.
    You're about 5% correct Whodey (just like Trump is most of the time) The pollsters got this one wrong, no doubt about it, you've conveniently ignored the fact that the pollsters have gotten it right on many other occasions. As far as your silly comments about "suppressing free speech" I'd direct your attention to the fact that there are hundreds of news sources in addition to Facebook and Twitter, none of whom are being suppressed, except of course by our sitting President who seeks to marginalize them by calling them "fake news" whenever they print something he does not want to hear.
  3. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    06 Mar '17 14:481 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    I'm told that if one were to try to predict the last election outcome only on the basis of opinions on social media, it would have projected Trump as the winning. Instead, many news sources uses antiquated polls in which people probably did not want to admit they were voting Trump.
    Its always easy to 'predict' an election that has already happened. Not so easy to do so before it happens.
    Polls are not 'antiquated' nor was there a particularly large problem of people not admitting they were voting for Trump. Most Trump supporters seem quite outspoken about it.
    The polls said the result would be close and it was. You cannot predict the outcome of a close election with polls because polls don't tell you everything about who will actually go and vote.
    Also be sure not to confuse polls, with the people who use polls to make predictions based on statistics and historical patterns. And don't confuse such statisticians with the media who take their predictions and then embellish them till they are unrecognizable.
  4. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    06 Mar '17 14:49
    Originally posted by mchill
    You're about 5% correct Whodey (just like Trump is most of the time) The pollsters got this one wrong, no doubt about it, you've conveniently ignored the fact that the pollsters have gotten it right on many other occasions. As far as your silly comments about "suppressing free speech" I'd direct your attention to the fact that there are hundreds of news sourc ...[text shortened]... inalize them by calling them "fake news" whenever they print something he does not want to hear.
    Are you saying that the only reason to call a news source fake news is to attempt to marginalize it?
  5. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    06 Mar '17 14:492 edits
    Originally posted by mchill
    You're about 5% correct Whodey (just like Trump is most of the time) The pollsters got this one wrong, no doubt about it, you've conveniently ignored the fact that the pollsters have gotten it right on many other occasions. As far as your silly comments about "suppressing free speech" I'd direct your attention to the fact that there are hundreds of news sourc ...[text shortened]... ept of course by our sitting President who seeks to marginalize them by calling them "fake news"
    As I have pointed out, the rabid PC police are out in full force, like nothing before.

    People are afraid of not getting that job because of their political opinion or religious opinion. It's like living in the former USSR. A man even lost his NBA team for just spouting out racist things in a private phone conversation but did not harm anyone. In fact, he was about to be given an award by the NAACP shortly before the incident.

    So, as usual, you are wrong.
  6. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    06 Mar '17 14:50
    Originally posted by mchill
    The pollsters got this one wrong, no doubt about it, .
    Did they? Reference please.
  7. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1407
    06 Mar '17 14:53
    Originally posted by whodey
    As I have pointed out, the rabid PC police are out in full force, like nothing before.

    People are afraid of not getting that job because of their political opinion or religious opinion. A man even lost his NBA team for just spouting out racist things but did not harm anyone. In fact, he was about to be given an award by the NAACP shortly before the incident.

    So, as usual, you are wrong.
    As I have pointed out, the rabid PC police are out in full force.

    Are these the same people that Obama sent to wire tap Trump Tower?? 🙄
  8. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1407
    06 Mar '17 14:55
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Did they? Reference please.
    Reference Please?????

    Well, you might look at the outcome of the 2016 election, then look at the poll numbers just before. That's a pretty good reference, don't you think?
  9. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    06 Mar '17 14:593 edits
    Originally posted by mchill
    As I have pointed out, the rabid PC police are out in full force.

    Are these the same people that Obama sent to wire tap Trump Tower?? 🙄
    Women like Paula Deen were targeted for saying racist things some 20 years ago. Even though she apologized for it, she was demonized for it.

    All of a sudden, you have a situation where no one wants to be associated with that person cuz they don't want to be boycotted or have bad press, especially with the power of social media these days.

    Or let's say you think gay sex is an abomination in the sight of God. You are then in the same boat with the possible addition of getting sued if you fail to bake them a cake.

    I often wonder how the children of Trump will fare in such a world. We shall see.
  10. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    06 Mar '17 16:291 edit
    Originally posted by mchill
    Reference Please?????

    Well, you might look at the outcome of the 2016 election, then look at the poll numbers just before. That's a pretty good reference, don't you think?
    I would like you to point me to those poll numbers given that you claim they disagree with the outcome. I am not aware of any such disagreement hence my request for a reference.
  11. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56305
    06 Mar '17 17:11
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Are you saying that the only reason to call a news source fake news is to attempt to marginalize it?
    No, that's not what he's saying.
    But Trump is.

    But Trump is a moron.
    Don't be like Trump.
  12. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    06 Mar '17 20:55
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    No, that's not what he's saying.
    But Trump is.

    But Trump is a moron.
    Don't be like Trump.
    The mainstream (liberal's true press) was the one that started the fake news claims.
  13. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    The Axe man
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    92189
    06 Mar '17 21:04
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://www.socialmediatoday.com/technology-data/using-social-media-data-predict-result-2016-us-presidential-election

    I'm told that if one were to try to predict the last election outcome only on the basis of opinions on social media, it would have projected Trump as the winning. Instead, many news sources uses antiquated polls in which people probably did ...[text shortened]... alk to without actually stopping them, unless their behavior might endanger the lives of others.
    " ..bass ackwards.."
    nice, I play bass
  14. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    The Axe man
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    92189
    06 Mar '17 21:08
    They think this change is coming to Australia, Little do they (Australia first party, one Nation,etc. ) know that there's compulsory voting here. So unless there is a tidal wave of terrorism it will be business as usual
Back to Top