Progressive Politics

I'm the one that brought up Hakeem Jeffries, and I'm a socialist. I wasn't doing it to "shield white liberals," as you assume. I was doing it to call out your racism. (Doesn't matter if you're white, internalized racism is still racism).

There are 45.4 million Democrats, 55% of them are white, 36% of voters don't show up to the polls, making about 10 million white liberals don't show up to the polls.

That's really bad statistics and it's astounding that I have to point this out to you. You're assuming that the 36% of voters who don't show up to the polls are evenly distributed and that of the 55% of Democrats who are white, 36% of them didn't vote (and you're assuming all of them are liberals, which ignores DSA and the progressive caucus).

Any statistician will tell you that jump to conclusions is not supported by the data you've presented.

Additionally, are you just going to pretend that there wasn't a concerted left-wing social media campaign leading up to the elections (and continuing ever since) encouraging people to not vote? And you're just going to pretend that this doesn't result in leftists being disproportionally represented among the non-voters?

The white liberal base of the Democratic party is nearly twice the amount of leftists, and ~80% of them show up to the polls.

You're trying to do two things with this statement, and it doesn't work the way you want it to. You're simultaneously citing a gross number (the total "white liberal base" of the democratic party, presumably 2×15.5m = 31 million, although I'm not sure how accurate your reasoning is) and a percentage (80% show up to the polls). You're doing this to claim that 20% (or presumably 6.1 million, which is still less than half the number you cited as total leftist voters) don't show up to the polls, and then comparing that number to the total number of leftist voters (without addressing what percentage of them do/don't show up to the polls).

So you're comparing the number of non-voting "white liberal base of the Democratic party" who don't vote, with the total number of registered leftist voters (whether they voted or not). These are two different categories of static; one adjusted for non-voters and the other not. That's another example of bad statistics, even if the math didn't work out to show that you're wrong anyway because by your own numbers, the number of non-voting "white liberals" is actually far smaller than you were insinuating (it's less than half of the total number of registered leftist voters, when you said they were nearly equal; you're also failing to account for leftist non-voters).

Furthermore:

The amount of white liberals that don't show up to the polls alone nearly matches the entire left wing voting bloc. We show up, white libs don't.

Again, you're ignoring how many leftists boycotted the vote. At no point have you even mentioned the possibility that any of those registered leftist voters might not show up to the polls. And you're wrong because according to your own math, the amount of white liberals that don't show up to the polls is less than half of the left-wing voting bloc (not to mention that was an attempt to ignore per-capita adjustments completely).

Also, your statement that "We show up, white libs don't" is categorically false because you're ignoring 80% of the 31 million (by the numbers you cited) who do show up to vote. While still not addressing how many of those leftists actually did or didn't vote.

Your entire comment was malarkey.