• orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      I imagine it’s from people who just don’t watch the news. They don’t know how evil that CEO was, so they blindly apply common sense.

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

        That was my gut reaction right after it happened, since UHC is my insurance company. But I’m just disappointed people are either lack curiosity, lack empathy, or actively support the true evil here.

      • DerArzt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        2 days ago

        41% of people they asked! Who knows what criteria they used to get their sample set, so the number may even be higher.

        • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 days ago

          Also, do we know the specific wording? The wording of the questions around it? Those can have a significant impact on the answers.

          • Wogi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yes. This was a study by Emerson college. The methodology is linked in the article.

            • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 days ago

              Of course the old people who are “fuck you I got mine” say it’s completely unacceptable LMAO

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Rather than “admitting”, I would think that most of these people are proud of it. If the insurance companies can kill people in large numbers (and they do), and somehow that’s OK (which it shouldn’t be), then that’s the new standard (sadly), and that’s life (or death, as the case may be).

  • Kalysta@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    That sounds extremely low. What young voters are they polling? The Amish?

  • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah that is shocking. My guess is lots of people declined to say for obvious reasons. The number has to be closer to 80%

    • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Neutrals are 19%, so even if we assume half of those are actually ok but didn’t say so, that’s still only 50,5% acceptance

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    They also claim that they want more equality, universal healthcare, less student debt, etc. And then a ton of them proceeded to vote for Donald Trump. I can’t take anything they say seriously.

  • sumguyonline@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Many things people find despicable are common place in the fog of war. I will never agree with gunning down a poor person no matter what they did, justice is served for the poor daily on a cold lead plate. For the 1%??? Who can we call when insurance kills our loved ones? When Dr’s make intentional mistakes and your loved one is dead? Can you call the police and expect them to go snorkeling to find evidence? Or can you maybe expect a call in a few weeks with a maybe update? We have seen how they respond when one of their masters is murdered. Until there is actual justice for all citizens, there will be no peace. Eat the rich.

    • Narauko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      I’m not prepared to say people can’t deserve being gunned down based on socioeconomic status, but I am all for the rich getting their fair share of the gunning down. Preventing active murder or grievous bodily harm, harming children, etc.

      There is too much gunning down, and especially for unreasonable things, but I won’t lose sleep when those in power effecting and enforcing the injustice get theirs. The phrase “just desserts” exists for a reason.

    • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      116
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      People aren’t exactly gonna tell a random stranger and probable Fed that they support murder even if it’s really based

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s not illegal to say you believe Brian Robert Thompson deserved to die. Hell, you could, perfectly legally, file paperwork to hold a parade in Luigi’s honor, right through the heart of DC. It’s illegal to make death threats, but it’s perfectly legal to express support for someone being killed.

          • john89@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Then they’ve already won.

            Also, the executive branch does not make or enforce legislation.

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

              Then they’ve already won.

              Alternatively, keeping your real opinions close in a hostel climate means you have more freedom to act on it. There’s a reason that revolutions are planned out of sight of the authorities.

              Also, the executive branch does not make or enforce legislation.

              If only Trump knew that. Well, his advisors know that and packed the courts.

            • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Not attached to my real name and not in an easily complied format. It’s possible that lemmy is a just a big honeypot, but I doubt it.

              I don’t have a problem with speaking my mind in certain situations, but I’m not outing myself in some survey that counts for nothing.

      • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Why not? Feds support murder, certainly. Heck, the Constitution supports murder: it establishes an Army.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Shit was rigged, you know they made the question something insane to get more people to not agree with the killing.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think of it this way. 41% are willing to say the killing was justified to a perfect stranger.

        • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          2 days ago

          After the shooting, hundreds [if not thousands] of doctors and nurses were posting stories about how insurance companies had literally killed people by withholding treatments.

          If you live your life in a way that makes a lot of people want to kill you, you can’t be surprised when you get shot.

      • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        “I have no strong feelings one way or the other.”
        ―Neutral President

        “If I don’t survive, tell my wife, hello.”
        ―Neutral President

        “All I know is my gut says maybe.”
        ―Neutral President

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

          What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or maybe you were just born with a heart full of neutrality!

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t think I’d be considered “young” anymore, but I don’t know if I’d say I support it.

      Is the world better off without him? Yes.

      Did he deserve to die? Yeah, probably.

      Do I want to support vigilantism? Probably not.

      Would it have been better if he had to deal with some terrible incurable and deadly disease? Yeah, if karma was real.

      • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m almost 40. And I support it.

        All other avenues are closed. All the proper and acceptable forms of redress are either coopted or outright captured. Civil, political, or otherwise. Peaceful Protest is universally ignored because it lacks the implicit threat of violence that makes it effective elsewhere in the world.

        “When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich.” ~ Jean Jacques Rousseau

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

        I feel the same way about Brian as I do about trump. Not sad or angry that they got shot, but I’m upset that someone shot at them. In a better world, we would be empowered enough that the answer to these moneygrubbing grift barons would come before violence, unfortunately, when you only react to violence, violence becomes the only answer.

        For my FBI agent… I do not have plans to harm anyone, and this comment is an observation of the current political, social, and equality situation in the US, and not an advocation of violence.

    • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      There’s a teensy bit of data massaging to make the approval rating appear lower… in my opinion of course.

      The respondents were asked to rank “acceptability of the killers actions” on a scale of 1 to 5.

      Assumin’the average “young voter” views gunning strangers down as:

      [1.very unfavorable]

      (You would, if asked about murder, say it was bad As a rule. right? I would too. Ya know, unless it was justified.)

      Looking at it that way, the same data looks a lot different suddenly.

      33% young voters still think the killer is completely unjustified.

      7% think there was some justification

      19% are undecided if the CEO deserved to die for what he did

      24% think the killer was mostly justified… But have reservations

      17% believe he was 100% in the right

      I got a little free with the interpretations but you get the idea, You could decide to frame the data this way too. there’s a saying: statistics don’t lie but statisticians do. Here’s my 100% true alternate title using the data but presented with the story I want to tell:

      67% of Young Voters at Least Partly Approve of Killers Actions

      • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Selective selection of selected data by billionaire controlled media still can’t get below 41%

        It’s awesome how willfully they exclude or manipulate in attempt to soften the information.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m of two minds about it. Half the time, I want to build a statue of Luigi

        The other half of the time, I’m feeling the Tolkien quote, “many that live deserve death, and many that die deserve life. Will you give it to them?”

        In other words, at no point do I feel that Brian Robert Thompson didn’t objectively deserve to die. He is objectively doing more good for the world as worm food than he did as a living man. My only question is on the ethics of anyone actually killing him. On one hand, no one should have a right to make that call on their own. On the other, it’s not like he was ever going to face justice any other way.

        I wonder if this dilemma is reflected in this poll. You can believe that killing the CEO was unacceptable, while also believing he absolutely deserved it.

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Well said.

          I don’t usually wish cancer on people, but if I had to choose, I’d probably have wanted him to go this way than by vigilante justice.

  • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    3 days ago

    Many of these polls are written in way to ellicit a biased response.

    Others have already covered how this works, but I’ll add to it anyway.

    If you ask a question like “do you condemn violence against healthcare CEOs?” A lot of people are going to say yes, because they view themselves as people against violence and respond mostly to that first part.

    If you ask "did brian thompson deserve to die for his crimes? Many of the same people will say yes to that too, because people have an innate desire for justice.

    Polls do this all the time. It’s part of social engineering and plays on the phenomenon that the Asch Conformity Experiments analyzed. Around 35% of people will change their opinions to fit everyone else’s even if the answer or opinion is very obviously incorrect.

    Don’t let them take the narrative back.

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

      “Do you think your house is too small”, vs “would you like a bigger house” … >> x% of people happy with size of their house

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      did brian thompson deserve to die for his crimes?

      The answer is no. Unless you are counting his drunk driving and insider trading. His business was operating legally, and he was providing legal orders when directing UHC to deny 30% or more of bills. And that’s the problem. Brian didn’t commit crimes, but the industry as a whole is insufficiently regulated, and should not be privatized, but they are so large and powerful that the general citizens cannot oust them. Denying any coverage and passing the bill on to the insured party should be illegal, but it isn’t.

      • john89@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Yeah, rich people get to operate legally with the laws they create. Who’da thunk?

        It’s a shame people like you still take every opportunity to sell yourself out so someone you’ll never know can be just a bit richer.

        I highly recommend you read up on the social contract, it looks like you haven’t reached that lesson in grade school yet.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          Aww, someone didn’t have the attention span to wead da whole comment and now dey are super angwy about it…

          • john89@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yeah, that’s about the response I’d expect from someone like you.

            Blocked.

            • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              2 days ago

              Oh no, he’s threatening to hold his breath! What will I even do!?

              When you’re ready to talk like an adult, I’ll talk with you like an adult.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s not just legal to deny 30% of claims, but he had a fiduciary duty to find ways to make the company profit. He may have “served the wrong master”, but the real crime is the existence of an insurance market where that’s both legal and expected

        For my similar brush with moral ambiguity, I interviewed for a job at a mass-email provider. It’s a perfectly legal company extending a legit job offer to do similar work as what I do now. However I find their existence repugnant, and generally oppose their actions where they affect me. Most importantly I said no. You have to take some responsibility for your actions.

        So no, he didn’t deserve to be killed. We can only hope the anger and outrage from that leads to health insurance reform so the crime of that market no longer exists. I’d be more than happy for someone in that position to lose a job they should not have taken. However, these extenuating circumstances mean that I also would not convict the person who executed him in protest

    • xenomor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Exactly this. I suspect this group is both young enough to not have to supply their own insurance, or at least young enough to not have faced significant health costs yet. Many people have not yet experienced just how trash the US healthcare system is.