Matt Yglesias offers a primer on confirmation bias – his own
Democrat pundit Matt Yglesias admits to having been wrong about Biden’s mental acuity, and he seems to beat himself up for it so sincerely that I tend to believe he really didn’t see what was in front of his face all the time. Confirmation bias is very real, it can affect anyone and everyone, and it’s important to be on the watch for it in oneself.
However, although he admits to his own confirmation bias (not using the term, however), Yglesias fails to take the opportunity to question his judgment about more than Joe’s fading synapses. Everything else in Yglesias’ belief system seems to remain intact. For example, he makes it clear that – despite everything – if Biden stays in the race, Yglesias will vote for Biden over Trump. And Trump? According to Yglesias, he’s a criminal and an insurrectionist. It’s just so obvious to him.
Yglesias also thinks that Biden has accomplished a lot of good during his administration. Afghanistan, and the colossal error of judgment that represented? Doesn’t seem to have registered with Yglesias – and that occurred towards the beginning of the Biden administration, years ago. Confirmation bias also involves ignoring what doesn’t fit your favored perspective. Yglesias seems to not have noticed that Biden has shown poor judgment during his entire political career. And Biden’s corruption as shown on the Hunter laptop? Not mentioned. Not an issue for Yglesias.
What lulled Yglesias into such a false sense of security about Biden? Something utterly ridiculous – Biden’s ability to read a speech off a teleprompter.
And why do I care what Yglesias says on this? I think he’s typical of a certain sort of earnest liberal Democrat who works in media and sees only what he wants to see. By no means are all Democrats in media like this; many are far more cynical and ruthless.
I find Yglesias one of the most annoying writers around, though not quite David Brooks level, for pontificating while disingenuous.
_______________________________________
Liberal blogger Matt Yglesias likes to call his political opponents “dishonest,” but in a revealing exchange on the website Twitter Friday he advocated lying for political purposes.
“Fighting dishonesty with dishonesty is sometimes the right thing for advocates to do, yes,” said Yglesias.
–“Liberal blogger Matt Yglesias advocates lying on Twitter” (August 13, 2010)
https://news.yahoo.com/news/liberal-blogger-matt-yglesias-advocates-lying-twitter.html
whats that line from thank you for smoking ‘everyones got to pay the mortgage’ voiced by the antihero nick naylor, and well yglesias a cofounder of the journolist
with ezra klein, has made a very good living, since he graduated from harvard in 2002,his atlantic blog, where he was an early hamas supporter, back in 2008-9, was full of hot takes, like these this was before he took soros’s coin at think regress, working under Halperin,
was he lying then, or lying now, can he tell the difference,
huxley:
Very annoying indeed. But in this case I think he’s telling the truth about himself.
Nate Silver currently has a blog post that has me similarly bemused. Essentially he categorizes himself (and other Dem intellectuals) as an empiracist.
Even though objectively there’s observations one can make about the period of Trump’s presidency versus Biden’s presidency* that should make anyone who styles themselves as an “empiracist” question the policy descisions supported by the modern Democrat Party with regards to economics, immigration, and foreign policies. It’s amazing to me how deluded intelligent people can become.
*Covid muddies the waters a bit in both cases, but still…
Slowly, almost unnoticed, the low tide of uncertainty lapped at the Democrat shoreline, then suddenly the tidal wave of chaos slammed ashore with a vengeance.
“None are so blind as they who will not see”
Doesn’t Yglesias mean “weasel” in Spanish?
(Or maybe ecclesiastical weasel… Elastic weasel?)
its a non standard spelling for Church, his father is a somewhat gifted novelist, the one who wrote Fearless, and he wrote for that manson series some time back
And Julio…and his son…
different iglesias, he’s a Spaniard,
…there was a creepy side to Joe Biden—from stories of swimming nude in front of female Secret Service agents and the Tara Reade days to his 2020 apologies for sexual buffoonery and his fixations with pre-teen young girls, expressed by embarrassing crowd call-outs or blowing and touching “inappropriately” their hair, shoulders, and necks. Most Washington women knew in advance to avoid Joe’s too-long hugs and bizarre air blasts on their hair and ears…
— VDH
That said, no amount of Joe’s creepiness can overcome the imaginary qualities of the Orange Man homunculus dancing in the heads of Trump haters.
*sigh*
Yglesias is lying. He is lying now because the alternative is to admit that he was lying before.
I am perplexed by people who can’t look at foreign policy disasters, at energy prices, and at grocery prices, and not see that there are problems. On the cost issues, the only ones with a (somewhat) rational excuse for ignoring these things are the Climate Change True Believers, who think declining standards of living are a good thing because we’re Saving the Planet. Even that’s nuts, but at least it’s not blind confirmation bias.
Guys like Silver and Yglesias need to seem to be objective and empirical in order to be effective advocates, but they don’t actually don’t need to be that, and they aren’t. That’s why they are publicly handwringing right now. It’s not sincere, the performance is to bolster this pose they’ve built careers around and will need to maintain.
Like all journalists, they have their narrative in mind and they select their facts and presentation to support it. It is the polar opposite of empiricism and objectivity. The pose is intended to steal bases, so that instead of arguing for something, you point to a seemingly objective and empirical process that does the arguing for you. But you were the one who chose the model and its assumptions and the data that went in, and you have enough degrees of freedom to get the answer you want to put out there.
When you actually are empirical and objective, you look for reasons for your preferred narrative to NOT be true. There is nothing Yglesias or Silver does or says that fits that. Instead, they spent all their time explaining away anything that contradicted their chosen narratives about Biden.
If he were honest, he’d be upset about the lawfare, the vote fraud, and the decay of news organizations into Regime Media. He’s not.
Factcheck, Factcheck…..I am reminded of a discussion a yellow-dog Democrat relative and I had on the Big Texas Freeze of 2021. He “corrected” one of my statements on wind energy and the loss of electric power. Neither of us had provided any link to back up our statements. I replied using a link from the Energy Information Administration (daily info by region on electric energy sources). Had he wanted to, he could have used the same source to attempt to refute what I stated. But he did not. Instead, he referred to the old Mark Twain saw about “lies, damned lies, and statistics.” When I asked him to prove me wrong, he kept silent.
Democrats are all for “facts,” until the “facts” don’t agree with their stances.
The best that dalton and harvard could provide could have done better with stanford alum christian slater
neo writes, “I think he’s typical of a certain sort of earnest liberal Democrat who works in media…”
This is what’s wrong with media. He is not qualified to be a reporter but media hires people like him.
I saw that Nate Silver substack post analyzing his own failure to see what was obvious to everyone. He starts citing the quote of a Bush staffer (the speculation is that it was Karl Rove) reproving a reporter for belonging to the “reality-based community.” Whoever coined that phrase was an idiot, but the more the media are encouraged to believe that they are a “reality-based community” the more mistakes they make. One has to have a proper skepticism about the things that one believes, the things one’s told, and the things one wants to be true.
ron susskind, pulled out of his rear end, he has done one of these ‘two good to check’ moments in every one of his books, the one percent solution, the way of the world, et al, they created these paradigms, ‘epistemic closure’ was another one, so they don’t have to address reality
one doesn’t have to be close observer, one should be able to observe, otherwise,
what ‘do you do here’ cover with a pillow until it stop moving, ht david burge,
“Confirmation bias also involves ignoring what doesn’t fit your favored perspective.”
When confirmation bias is repeatedly challenged by contrary facts, to continue it requires active willful blindness. The repeated rejection of facts contrary to one’s confirmation bias is demonstrable proof that agenda trumps principle. In such a case, it’s not that they don’t know, it’s that they don’t care. All that matters is the advancement of the agenda. Which is why David Horowitz is correct in his observation that, “Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out.”
“For example, he makes it clear that – despite everything – if Biden stays in the race, Yglesias will vote for Biden over Trump. And Trump? According to Yglesias, he’s a criminal and an insurrectionist. It’s just so obvious to him.”
It is because majority of his info comes from the left. Anything related to the right will be posted or relayed by the left, so it will be taken out of context, “spun” as a bad thing, or simply lied about.
Anybody believing there is no chance the election was stolen or that Trump called for insurrection is ignorant of the reality, or is a liar.
Leftists non-believers of the above are aware that their social standing and their livelihood are at stake if they step out of line. Just happened to the woman DJ who said she was given the questions to ask Biden.
Everything else in Yglesias’ belief system seems to remain intact. For example, he makes it clear that – despite everything – if Biden stays in the race, Yglesias will vote for Biden over Trump. And Trump? According to Yglesias, he’s a criminal and an insurrectionist. It’s just so obvious to him.
I read his whole column, and the stubborn arrogance shined out in every sentence. Good thing we don’t have a President Yglesias. You can’t teach him nothing.
It’s a long story, but I gradually came to the realization many years ago that some people have the capacity to make themselves actually believe anything they want to, if it serves their purposes. So, in their mind, they are not really lying, because at some level they really do believe it. It must be a handy trick.
It’s amazing to me how deluded intelligent people can become.
They can be so certain of their superior understanding, that is never occurs to them that they might be wrong. The result is that they are easily manipulated by unscrupulous, but clever, folks.
‘…“reality-based community”…’
Yep, ‘follow that “reality-based” community’!!
Kinda sounds like “follow the Science”(TM)!!!!!
(“Follow the leader”?…or if one prefers, “the elites”;
“Follow the yellow-brick road”?
“Follow the pied piper”?)
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
“…in this case I think he’s telling the truth about himself.”
Perhaps; insofar as he’s ABLE to tell the truth.
Still have to take his “truth” with a huge grain of salt.
In fact, I wonder whether people such as he are actually ABLE to tell the truth…
File under: Honesty is like a muscle….
Kate
I don’t think people make judgements based on facts. As an Economics minor in college the “rational choice” dictum was pounded into us. Consumers don’t make economic choices on a rational level. It’s a mix of emotion, fantasy, rational, etc. I think this carries over into other areas. Especially in politics. I don’t know why. Just maybe because humans.
Richard F Cook on July 9, 2024 at 8:35 am:
“… It’s a mix of emotion, fantasy, rational, etc. I think this carries over into other areas. Especially in politics. I don’t know why. Just maybe because humans.”
Your view reinforces speculation that we have evolved parallel or conjoint mental capabilities that together helped us survive. This probably took 100K to 800K years to mature, if not 3 or 4 million. I certainly don’t know.
But Michael Tomasello points out (from his team’s studies) that humans are “ultra social” animals, even more so than the large apes. Dunbar suggests we have the mental capacity to maintain useful relationships with up to about 150 people, many more than the usual ape troop, etc. So fanaticizing about things made for good stories around the fire, having emotions provides certain kinds of fight or flight responses, as well as “solidifying” our views concerning something that we rationalized or reasoned. The “ah-ha” feeling. Rational thinking certainly proves useful in solving problems (like learning to use fire), etc. Tomasello also suggests we have evolved an increasingly mature sense of “agency”, linked closely to our multi-level “theory of mind” capability.
I fantasize; therefore, I am….
(Updated for the 21st C.)
It seems to me that the Democrats have always been the party of “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes!”.
My wife believes that I’m on the autism spectrum. To me this explains a lot of my life. I’ve never understood why people make the choices they do. Apparently, I’m also super-rational in how I make decisions. I have certain metrics in how I make choices. In politics, I ask, “Is this person going to reduce my personal liberty?” and vote accordingly. This is not to say I don’t make emotional decisions, but I recognize when I do. The fear and hatred of Trump and the J6 people has really, really baffled me. Years ago I asked a progressive friend what did he think the “insurrection” was going to do? Stop the Elector count and put the election on hold. I asked “How?”. He said something about Trump getting an injunction. Again, “How?” He didn’t have an answer for that. We’re still friends, I don’t have so many to lose one over politics.