• Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    ·
    2 days ago

    Bloody hell, this is the US version of Brexit… this world would be such a better place if people just did the bare minimum of reading into what they were actually voting for before they fucking voted!

    Also, seeing the other top searches being about the tariffs would have me creasing if it weren’t so disappointingly stupid that these peoole seemingly knew nothing about Trumps most advertised economic policy before (assumably) voting for him

    • vxx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 days ago

      Whenever I see all the trash on the side of the road, I know why the world is that way.

    • aamram@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      Español
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think that most of them do a lot of reading. The problem is that they just read news and info that they like and have no ability to criticise arguments. Critic thinking is the main problem imho.

  • Saleh@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    2 days ago

    The relative numbers are worth little without knowing the underlying numbers. If it went from 100 to 700 people, that is still negligble. Also crazy how people immediately take that as a base to remove voters rights unless they pass some sort of test. Nothing could go wrong with stripping voters rights amirite?

  • CAVOK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 days ago

    Is this the “Find out” stage then?

    Actions have consequences. Sad people had to figure it out this way.

    • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Of course, let’s not let things like knowledge or consequences get in the way of reactionary & spiteful arrogance informed only by propaganda induced fear and hate, emotions know to prevent rational thought /s

      • WolvenSpectre@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        ·
        2 days ago

        That is a percentage score. So you take the highest level of searches and it will always be 100% and all lesser scores are in comparison to that score of 100(%). If you can find out what the actual number of searches are for that one score, you can derive the approximate number of searches in the other places. It shows an informational tool tip on desktop.

        • Cris@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          2 days ago

          Well that’s less than entirely helpful.

          Thank you very much for the explanation!

          • WolvenSpectre@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            2 days ago

            Your welcome… I liked it when it was Google Zeitgeist and they published hard numbers but since they rebranded and named their video series Google Zeitgeist good luck finding out the actual numbers 🤐

        • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Iowa is just where that term was the most popularly searched. However, it was searched in all states.

          I explained Google Trends a bit more here if you’re curious.

      • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        100 means that’s when the searches hit their most popular peak while 0 means nothing was really searched. Google trends does not show actual search volumes.

        Google Trends looks at search terms compared with all searches done (in a specific geographic region and time point). That data is then normalized.

        It’s essentially looking at popularity trends of is this hot or not.

        Source: I am a former SEO

        Edit: here are specifics about what I mentioned above if you’re curious.

      • WolvenSpectre@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 days ago

        It could have been droves… it also could have been 10 people. It also doesn’t say which way they wanted to change their vote. It could all be LIV’s who learned something they didn’t know after voting early or it could have been people torn about their vote panicking and seeing if they could change their mind.

        This doesn’t tell you anything but people searched it and not how many.

        • sbv@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          It doesn’t say if it was a metric drove or an imperial drove. Shoddy journalism, if you ask me.

  • zephorah@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    2 days ago

    Once again, these are the a validation headlines that create and support echo chambers. Honestly, what does it matter now?

    We already know the regret is strong on this nation and will only get worse.

  • Cuberoot@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    Are we all just assuming these searches are from people who regret their votes and hoped to be able to change it?

    I double checked my ballot before submitting it, with full knowledge that irrevocability is the price of anonymity. Nevertheless, I might use similar search terms if I was curious how many other voters, possibly in other states or with different political alignments, had written about regretting their votes. Or, perhaps, … if I was doing research for a post-election article about the topic.

    • smayonak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s a great point. The Trump team tried to get all voter information from all states in 2020. Ostensibly to verify voter fraud. But this data was probably used to create such voter suppression systems as Eagle AI.

      So they know who you voted for.

  • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    What ya’ll upset for now? The economy was so good under Trump! Didn’t you want him to deport all those “poisonous” immigrants. He’s your retribution. And, besides, it’s not like Harris would have been any better, because they’re the same anyway.

    /s