2 ms·

This stuff deals with aggregates not the person in front of you. No one claims to be able to tell what a particular person is voting based on whether they are

by chvid 10y ago

This stuff deals with aggregates not the person in front of you. No one claims to be able to tell what a particular person is voting based on whether they are in job or not.

ZenoArrow 10y ago
> "No one claims to be able to tell what a particular person is voting based on whether they are in job or not." No one claims to be able to be completely certain who someone will vote for, but people do claim to be able to predict who someone will vote for. What I'm saying is that making this prediction is not without consequence. In other words, the prediction and the action taken as a result of this prediction can influence the result of an election. By characterising the 'type' of people that are likely to vote a certain way, you build up social norms. These social norms then have a limiting effect on reasonable debate. In a more robust democracy there shouldn't be such a thing as 'safe' states (in the sense of states that always vote Democrat or Republican), yet those states exist. I'm saying that a large part of that is because people have become conditioned to voting a certain way by the society that surrounds them, and the way that voting along with peers is normalised. As a light-hearted example, take a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3VLqLLWxbQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3VLqLLWxbQ It's fairly tame from a political standpoint, and it's clearly done in a light-hearted way, but one of the main reasons it's safe because people vote with their peers, the artist can be fairly certain he's not singing to people who (for the most part) would vote Democrat because that not part of their identity. Statistical analysis of voters can feed into identity politics, both from the perspective of how parties advertise themselves to would-be voters, and in the case of statistical analysis that is frequently repeated in the mass media, of normalising divisions and guiding people into where they 'fit in'. I don't think these divisions help people engage in politics in a reasoned, respectful way as the moment you bring identity into politics reason and logic can go out of the window. Therefore, whilst statistical grouping may seem innocuous on the surface, it can lead to a fairly sizeable impact over time.

by chvid 10y ago

This stuff deals with aggregates not the person in front of you. No one claims to be able to tell what a particular person is voting based on whether they are in job or not.

ZenoArrow 10y ago

> "No one claims to be able to tell what a particular person is voting based on whether they are in job or not." No one claims to be able to be completely certain who someone will vote for, but people do claim to be able to predict who someone will vote for. What I'm saying is that making this prediction is not without consequence. In other words, the prediction and the action taken as a result of this prediction can influence the result of an election. By characterising the 'type' of people that are likely to vote a certain way, you build up social norms. These social norms then have a limiting effect on reasonable debate. In a more robust democracy there shouldn't be such a thing as 'safe' states (in the sense of states that always vote Democrat or Republican), yet those states exist. I'm saying that a large part of that is because people have become conditioned to voting a certain way by the society that surrounds them, and the way that voting along with peers is normalised. As a light-hearted example, take a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3VLqLLWxbQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3VLqLLWxbQ It's fairly tame from a political standpoint, and it's clearly done in a light-hearted way, but one of the main reasons it's safe because people vote with their peers, the artist can be fairly certain he's not singing to people who (for the most part) would vote Democrat because that not part of their identity. Statistical analysis of voters can feed into identity politics, both from the perspective of how parties advertise themselves to would-be voters, and in the case of statistical analysis that is frequently repeated in the mass media, of normalising divisions and guiding people into where they 'fit in'. I don't think these divisions help people engage in politics in a reasoned, respectful way as the moment you bring identity into politics reason and logic can go out of the window. Therefore, whilst statistical grouping may seem innocuous on the surface, it can lead to a fairly sizeable impact over time.