42 ms·

This is some excellent cynic bait! Is it bad? I dunno. I'm sure people who are Very Rational Independent Thinkers will interpret it that way. But maybe people

by wilg 6y ago

This is some excellent cynic bait! Is it bad? I dunno. I'm sure people who are Very Rational Independent Thinkers will interpret it that way. But maybe people aren't well informed about the issue, so they go with the group they trust on other issues, because of a shared value system. Maybe there's a public debate which convinces them, or something in the news that provides color on the issue. Or all these things together. Or something else. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

StanislavPetrov 6y ago
>But maybe people aren't well informed about the issue, so they go with the group they trust on other issues, because of a shared value system. There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an advantage and security to all, but especially to democracies as against despots. What is it? Distrust. -Demosthenes
- wilg 6y ago
  I mean yea, sure. But I'm not sure we should expect everyone to have done a ton of research on every issue, and for something not very hot button (like presumably support for reducing unemployment benefits in Denmark), and you have a sensible default of the party you currently like's position.
satyrnein 6y ago
Yeah, especially since the effect is only 15%. It also seems possible that public sentiment was already shifting, which caused the party to shift, which influenced the undecided 15%. For example, if you look back now in the US, you could probably find that some Democrats started supporting gay marriage after the party changed its stance. It's also the case that the party changed its stance in the middle of a large scale shift in public opinion that was occurring.
leetcrew 6y ago
this is a good point. I can't possibly be well-informed on every single important issue. whenever I pick an issue to dive into deeply, I find that my conclusion almost reverses with each layer of the onion that I peel back. eventually I have to stop, still wondering whether the next piece of information would change my stance again.

by wilg 6y ago

StanislavPetrov 6y ago

>But maybe people aren't well informed about the issue, so they go with the group they trust on other issues, because of a shared value system. There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an advantage and security to all, but especially to democracies as against despots. What is it? Distrust. -Demosthenes

wilg 6y ago
I mean yea, sure. But I'm not sure we should expect everyone to have done a ton of research on every issue, and for something not very hot button (like presumably support for reducing unemployment benefits in Denmark), and you have a sensible default of the party you currently like's position.

satyrnein 6y ago

Yeah, especially since the effect is only 15%. It also seems possible that public sentiment was already shifting, which caused the party to shift, which influenced the undecided 15%. For example, if you look back now in the US, you could probably find that some Democrats started supporting gay marriage after the party changed its stance. It's also the case that the party changed its stance in the middle of a large scale shift in public opinion that was occurring.

leetcrew 6y ago

this is a good point. I can't possibly be well-informed on every single important issue. whenever I pick an issue to dive into deeply, I find that my conclusion almost reverses with each layer of the onion that I peel back. eventually I have to stop, still wondering whether the next piece of information would change my stance again.