fuck

[-] diabetic_porcupine@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

Yeah but you can’t trust anything he says that’s just trump

[-] human@slrpnk.net 72 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

A stunning new poll shows a whopping 71 percent of Americans say President Donald Trump knew about former pal and currently deceased Jeffrey Epstein’s sex crimes against underage girls — and a wide plurality say he was “involved in” those crimes.

So that's 71% that said he broke the law and contributed in some way to the abuse whether by direct action or by not reporting what he knew.

That's actually really high. It would be tough to get 71% of Americans to agree on what day of the week it is.

Edit: Looks like it's a YouGov survey, and the article cites a second YouGov survey as corroboration, so I'm not sure how scientifically rigorous this is.

[-] blimthepixie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 4 weeks ago

I regularly do YouGov serveys and I also believe he's guilty

[+] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -9 points 4 weeks ago

More Americans believe in ghosts than believe trump wasn't aware and complicit in Epstein systematically trafficking and raping children...

Edit: Looks like it’s a YouGov survey, and the article cites a second YouGov survey as corroboration, so I’m not sure how scientifically rigorous this is.

Huh?

It's got more than enough participants and everything seems by the book...

Is this one of those things where people got turned into science deniers because pundits interpretations of other polls didn't turnout true?

That's like saying Doppler radar is untrustworthy because when it was a 50% chance of rain, it didn't rain at your house...

The science wasn't wrong, you just never understood what it said. And rather than take an opportunity to learn what you misunderstood to stop the misunderstanding from happening again...

You're just staying ignorant and now no longer believe any of the science because you don't understand.

Why?

Why does science denial seem like the best path to you?

[-] human@slrpnk.net 9 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Calling looking at the methodology and questioning its voracity "science denial" is wild.

YouGov is self selecting. I'm sure they do true random polling in some capacity too, but both linked studies said they were web surveys of YouGov users selected bases on their profile demographics to be a representative group.

My issue is that by the pool only being YouGov users, just balancing on ideology is not the same as random sampling.

Not claiming to be a data scientist here, just reading the study and applying some healthy skepticism.

If I'm wrong and the methods are sound then great, I would be happy to believe that that many Americans actually believe that.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -3 points 4 weeks ago

Calling looking at the methodology and questioning its voracity “science denial” is wild.

That's not what you did, you based it off two polls being done by the same polling company...

I looked at the methodology, then informed you it was fine...

Not claiming to be a data scientist here, just reading the study and applying some healthy skepticism.

I am fully aware that you:

Don't know about this subject
Are shitting on science because you don't understand it
Are now claiming to be "just asking questions"

The only thing I'm not clear on, is why you believe this is different than any other science denier.

But I think trying to get you to understand enough to answer that question, will go the same as asking any other science denier why they don't believe in a certain field of science.

[-] human@slrpnk.net 4 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

I think the issue here is you are reading

Looks like it's a YouGov survey, and the article cites a second YouGov survey as corroboration, so I'm not sure how scientifically rigorous this is.

Looks like it's a survey, and the article cites a second survey as corroboration, so I'm not sure how scientifically rigorous this is.

My issue is with it being YouGov specifically, not that both were from the same source. Then I looked at the PDFs themselves to confirm they were opt-in web surveys before adding my edit.

Personally I do think he's guilty and would love it if 71% think he was at least complicit.

Not really interested in taking this further though. Enjoy your day.

[-] TheTetrapod@lemmy.world -2 points 4 weeks ago

I would hardly describe online pollsters as scientists. Science, y'know, matters.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago

Science, y’know, matters.

It's not mutually exclusive, but statistical analysis is both science and matters

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago

This is a really weird take.

[-] AlexLost@lemmy.world 28 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Only 49%? I guess they only asked half the class?

[-] Ulvain@sh.itjust.works 12 points 4 weeks ago

The others might be so deep in their echo chamber that the survey question was the first they ever heard of any Trump involvement

[-] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 4 weeks ago

Only 49%?

[-] ScrumpyDumpleskin@lemmy.world 17 points 4 weeks ago

George Carlin - "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that..."

[-] fizzle@quokk.au 16 points 4 weeks ago

LOL.

So basically Democrat voters.

Alternative title: "More than half of Americans are idiots"

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 16 points 4 weeks ago

35%: “I don’t care. I’d still vote for him again.”

[-] xc2215x@lemmy.world 12 points 4 weeks ago

Not a great number to see.

[-] unmagical@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 weeks ago

That reads like party lines.

Also "currently deceased" is a hell of a way to describe someone.

[-] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 weeks ago

Have them listen to Sascha Riley's interview and repoll them, it will be 100%. Epstein was the middle man, it was Trump's crimes.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago

Yup it's more like Epstein is all over the Trump files...

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 9 points 4 weeks ago

New poll: 49% believe in facts

[-] gustofwind@lemmy.world 8 points 4 weeks ago

So 51% say he wasn’t even involved

[-] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world 29 points 4 weeks ago

Trump scored the highest, with 49 percent saying he was involved versus 28 percent who said he wasn’t — a 21-point spread.

I'm guessing 30% are a bunch of NPCs who've never formulated a critical thought in their lives.

[-] SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 10 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Yes, they're the perennial "undecideds" who determine the outcomes of elections & our futures based on nothing more than how tightly their panties are bunched on election day. If it's a good day for them, then maybe their favorite "influencer" at that moment tells them how to vote.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

But we are often told how much we should honor and respect the undecideds because they are not partisan and they are so very principled, etc.

🤮

[-] unmagical@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 weeks ago

28% said he wasn't.

[-] gustofwind@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Are you not gonna include the 22% who somehow didn’t affirmatively say he wasn’t involved?

[-] unmagical@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 weeks ago

I'm gonna read the article:

Trump scored the highest, with 49 percent saying he was involved versus 28 percent who said he wasn’t — a 21-point spread.

The remaining option was "not sure" which isn't a definitive statement of involvement either way. That captures people that haven't been paying attention and those who are trying to reconcile contrary information to their echo chambers, but it's not people who said he wasn't involved.

[-] gustofwind@lemmy.world -1 points 4 weeks ago

Oh I don’t give undecideds that kinda benefit of the doubt lmao

[-] unmagical@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 weeks ago

That doesn't change the reality of the survey and the opinions and understandings of your fellow man.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 8 points 4 weeks ago

LOL, it's only at 49%?

And only 71% think he knew? I wonder if that 29% is the Sarah Palin/Nixon Resigning Floor.

[-] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

I don't exactly understand the final reference, but I wonder if it's the same as "30% of Germans still thought they were the good guys after WW2"

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

I got the Sarah Palin Floor concept from The Professional Left podcast. It's what they call the part of the conservative base that will support Republicans and conservatives no matter what. I think they used this term when Donvict's approval ratings went to 37%.

That number is pretty close to the same polling that Nixon had on the day he resigned - 27%.

[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 weeks ago

27% is the crazy factor and a rather stable data point. Obama-Keyes is an example.

[-] Soulphite@reddthat.com 7 points 4 weeks ago

Based on trump math, the pedophile rapist piece of shit is 400% in those files.

[-] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 7 points 4 weeks ago

Anyone else see the headline and think, "Nah, he was 100% involved, where'd they get this halfsies shit?"

It took me a second, ngl.

[-] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

51% still in denial

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

More like Epstein is in the Trump files.

this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2026

326 points (98.8% liked)

politics

28265 readers

1663 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News