A Florida area known for being a "hotbed of Trump support" is reportedly seeing a bump in enthusiasm for Vice President Kamala Harris on Saturday. As Trump and Harris gear up to face one another in November's election, each candidate has made an effort to make inroads on the territories typicall...
  • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.socialBanned
    1·
    2 years ago

    They were afraid of a thing that would significantly improve their electoral chances because they were too wrapped up in their support for a presumed nominee to put their biases aside and consider the benefits of switching to another candidate.

      • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.socialBanned
        1·
        2 years ago

        Anchoring Bias, Salience Bias, Normalcy Bias, Confirmation Bias, Semmelweis Reflex, Egocentric Bias Blind Spot, False Consensus Effect, Illusion of Control, Illusion of Validity, Naive Realism, the Overconfidence Effect, Zero-Risk Bias, Neglect of Probability, Sunk Cost Fallacy, Plan Continuation Bias, Ambiguity Effect, Loss Aversion, Status Quo Bias, System Justification Bias, and the Dunning-Kruger Effect, among others.

          • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.socialBanned
            1·
            2 years ago

            I don’t know how to be any less ambiguous here… I’m literally, deliberately, and intentionally referring to any and all mental hangups which made people think that sticking with Biden would have been better than switching. That switching improved the Democrats chances should have been extremely obvious even without the benefit of hindsight, and the folks who thought otherwise were wrong and should reckon with this so that they can be less wrong in the future.

            What part of this is unclear to you?

              • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.socialBanned
                2·
                2 years ago

                This is the part that is confusing:

                “Biden supporters had biases that prevented them see the big picture.”

                Ok, what biases?

                I already tried listing all possible biases that might be involved in the misconception and you complained about a lack of specificity.

                That’s like saying “there are many reasons why that engine doesn’t fit for that car” and then when someone asks you “what reason?” you reply “a technical reason, a mechanical stress reason, an electrical failure reason,” ok, but GIVE ME SOMETHING.

                Oh, I think I understand now. You don’t want to think about Biden supporters as a generalized class who might take any number of different routes to reach the same wrong conclusion, you just want me to explain how psychological bias works.

                Ok, name ONE example bias that you can say it is “anchoring bias” in this case.

                That’s all I want, man.

                Fine. Anchoring bias occurs when an individuals’ judgements or decisions are influenced by a reference point that may be entirely unrelated to the question at hand.

                For example, people who took “Biden is the most progressive president ever” as a reference for their judgement that he shouldn’t step down from the race. Regardless of the truth-value of the statement, the reference point was entirely immaterial to the actual question, whether or not another candidate would have improved the partys’ chances in the election, because it tells us nothing about how Biden compared with his electoral competition.

                Thus, persons who relied on this anchor to justify their opposition to Biden dropping out did so for fallacious reasons, and an honest reckoning with this might have led them to an opinion which more accurately reflected reality.

                  • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.socialBanned
                    2·
                    2 years ago

                    Indeed, it’s always nice when folks stick around long enough to really understand the weirdness that is an ADHD/Autistic person’s idea of a realistic perspective on politics.

                    It doesn’t seem to matter how accurate my models are, most folks (regardless of their politics) just want to hear their own opinions reflected back at them. And I get it, it’s frustrating when reality contradicts the assumptions one has held as the truth, but I’ve never been able to understand how folks can get so emotionally invested in an idea of how the world works that they take personal offense to the existence of contradictory evidence. XD