From: Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.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: Wed, 1 Jan 2025 10:11:48 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 1/1/2025 8:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:43:16 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
{snip}
>> So, she should have not published in 2024 after examination and
>> published in 2016 and 2020 after examination because of this clear party
>> motivation thing? Laughter, indeed.
>
> Good lord, you're dense. You've had your question answered no fewer
> than three times and you ask it again. Oh and you snipped the
> following:
>
> "It was very clear to anyone paying attention that 2024 was very
> different for party motivation. Seltzer's failure to check her
> methodology problem resulted in her career ending. At this point, you
> are asking hypotheticals of hypotheticals since you are presuming that
> she checked her methodology when she saw the poll this year was out of
> bed. My position is she did not and the easiest explanation is
> usually the correct one. "
>
> I never said jack about not publishing the polls yet you keep implying
> that I'm saying that.
That means you have not answered my questions on whether she should have
published in 2016, 2020 or 2024 after checking her methodology.
There are two possible assumptions: she did not check her methodology in
any of 2016, 2020 and 2024. In that case, you think she was wrong in all
those years not to check. OK, I understand that argument and it is
reasonable.
But, it doesn't end the discussion. Let's assume she did the right thing
and checked. What then? Publish or not publish? You refuse to answer.