Has anybody posted this?
tl;dr: Oh no, looks like the Bernie Bro narrative is just garbage and we're all being played, who would have thought?
Longer answer:
Basically, what this shows is:
- 2-3% of supporters of a given candidate - any candidate - on Twitter post negative tweet. This isn't unique to Sanders supporters; even among Trump supporters, the proportions stay the same;
- Because there are way more Bernie supporters on Twitter than any other candidate, and because Warren is second, there is a (false) impression that Bernie supporters are meaner, especially towards Warren's campaign.
My safe speculation as to the disparity in raw numbers is that Bernie has been the sole frontrunner for the longest time AND attracts way more younger voters than the others, so, statistically, there are more of them online, and they're more active on social media. Regardless, this severely undermines the notion that online toxicity is a unique phenomenon of Sanders's base. Everyone has the same number of 'mean' supporters, so the sole conclusion is: Twitter is garbage, and the Bernie Bro narrative is stupid. When you can't shoot the messenger or their message, shoot his supporters, I guess.
Point is: people who buy into that narrative are either being played by those who would benefit from a weakened progressive platform, or are themselves disingenuous actors. And there is no point in asking a candidate to disavow, let alone take responsibility for and control how random supporters behave on Twitter. It's gonna happen whoever you are, whatever you do. Now, can we talk about policy?
Couple notes:
1) The grad student who made this is improving his model, so expect to see a more refined analysis later down the road.
2) He's being interviewed about this, so we should see an article on the subject soon enough; I'll try and post it whenever it comes out if I don't forget
[EDIT] Here's the thread with the table:
www.realclearpolitics.com
www.cnn.com
