From: pothead <pothead@snakebite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.trump,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics
Subject: Re: Trump Sues Newspaper Over Election Interference
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 01:15:24 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Democrats Are Losers LLC
On 2024-12-20, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On 12/19/2024 2:55 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
>> NoBody wrote:
>>> On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 08:01:01 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/18/2024 4:15 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 11:30:51 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/17/2024 10:48 AM, AlleyCat wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pure election interference, JUST like 2016.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It was election interference, plain and simple. Falsifying polls
>>>>>>> is the same as telling people they don't need to vote, because
>>>>>>> your candidate is too
>>>>>>> far behind to win.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is just plain, fucking stupid. There is no way the poll was
>>>>>> falsified.
>>>>>
>>>>> Did the poll's author ever explain what went wrong with her "poll"
>>>>> that resulted in it being completely out of line with the state's
>>>>> actual results?
>>>>
>>>> It's called an outlier. It's supposed to happen a small portion of the
>>>> time. Pollsters who throw away outliers are engaging in a bad practice
>>>> called herding.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.natesilver.net/p/trust-a-pollster-more-when-it-publishes
>>>
>>> So the answer is "no".
>>>
>>> You should have just said that instead of trying to justify it.
>>>
>>> Â What are the odds of the historically accurate poll being completely
>>> out of whack only several days before the election?
>>>
>>> Her lack of explanation of the flaws is itself an explanation cause a
>>> credible pollster would go back and see what went wrong.
>>>
>>
>> Where is 'election interference' a tort in Illinois law or US Code?
>
> Trump sued under the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act. The claimed damages are
> "he need[ed] to expend extensive time and resources, including direct
> federal campaign expenditures, to mitigate and counteract the harms of
> the Defendants' conduct."
>
> Because the law limits damages to natural persons, even assuming Trump
> can make his case (he can't), he would then have to show what time and
> money he personally spent as a result of the poll (his campaign is not a
> natural person). I'm not sure he can even show any expenditures his
> campaign made in response to the poll.
>
> Yet another reason why this lawsuit is garbage.
That lawsuit will go nowhere.
--
pothead
All about snit read below. Links courtesy of Ron:
Example of Snit trolling in real time:
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.linux.advocacy/c/biFilzgCcVg/m/eUcNGw6lP7UJ>
All about the snit troll:
<https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html>