10 ms·

Opinion.

• rayiner 10d ago
  So what? The article describes the political implications of the Census Bureau errors. I cited the Census Bureau release itself so you can cross-check whether the factual assertions in the article are accurate.
  • estearum 9d ago
    The article describes political implications, and also implies political causes. So it's useful to identify this as not something a journalist or credible outlet would actually put their name to.
    • rayiner 9d ago
      > and also implies political causes. > So it's useful to identify this as not something a journalist or credible outlet would actually put their name to. Why? And is the bottom line point wrong? Gemini, citing a Pew Research study, seems to agree that Republicans lost 3-5 seats due to apportionment errors: https://share.google/aimode/9yPrkEU1U08abPWzF https://share.google/aimode/9yPrkEU1U08abPWzF > An independent analysis by the Pew Research Center and election data experts calculated exactly how those specific errors altered the final map. If the census had perfectly matched the PES estimates, the seats would have shifted as follows: [table showing apportionment errors cost Texas and Florida 1 seat each, and gave Minnesota, Rhode Island, and New York 1 undeserved seat each. Fucking up 5 House seats for a decade seems like a firing-worthy offense.
      • estearum 8d ago
        Is your understanding that they found "the person responsible" for this "error" (of people not self-reporting to Census workers?) and then fired them? That seems to be what you believe happened, but it's not.