User talk:Toa Nidhiki05

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. Please click here to leave me a new message.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2004 United States election conspiracy theories, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ABC News.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:00, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just wanted to apologise for the pseudo-edit war we had on the GOP page. For some reason I rushed to conclusions and automatically assumed you had completely misinterpreted my comments and had only provided a source that the ECR and GOP were both part of the IDU — thus technically making them 'global partners'. As I said in a previous edit, I had previously searched for a source showing that they were affiliates, but I came up short (guess I missed the most obvious place one could look 😅)

Either way, I just wanted to say sorry for being so rash and for making such a mess of the page's edit summary. I was definitely in the wrong! Loytra (talk) 16:34, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All good Loytra! I’ll admit I was a bit bewildered but the fact we were misunderstanding and reading past each other makes a lot of sense. Glad this is resolved! Toa Nidhiki05 16:47, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad too!

Btw, just wanted to say that I love your signature! It takes skill to make one so unique and visually interesting yet not distracting or overbearing. Looks great! Loytra (talk) 13:38, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I don't know how long ago I made it - probably decades at this point - but I've always loved how it looks. Probably one I'll stick with for decades to come. Toa Nidhiki05 17:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot to post a message on the talk page of the admin who initially sanctioned you. The appeal can't continue unless you do that. I'm not a clerk or anything. I just see how wordy the templates can be and understand how that could be missed. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 09:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the New York Times article about republican house members voting for same sex marriage that I put as a link for cultural liberalism, there’s a list of representatives. The vast majority of them, or all, are from this caucus. Maybe 1 or 2 representatives are from the republican study committee but I don’t think so. I can find links about cannabis, I consider them proves or reasons of what can be called “cultural liberalism”. I’m sorry if my English isn’t the best, my mother tongue is Spanish. Bye. Johnymin (talk) 02:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the New York Times article about republican house members voting for same sex marriage that I put as a link for cultural liberalism, there’s a list of representatives. The vast majority of them, or all, are from this caucus. Maybe 1 or 2 representatives are from the republican study committee but I don’t think so. I can find links about cannabis, I consider them proves or reasons of what can be called “cultural liberalism”. I’m sorry if my English isn’t the best, my mother tongue is Spanish. Bye. Johnymin (talk) 03:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I accidentally write the same message with the subject above. I can’t delete it. Sorry. Johnymin (talk) 03:17, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Going issue-by-issue is not sufficient. You need to actually find a source that describes the caucus as culturally liberal. Toa Nidhiki05 03:46, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your appeal at WP:AE ([1]) was granted. Accordingly, the editing restriction from editing biographies of living persons in the area of post-1992 American politics is lifted. I hope that you will take appropriate care in returning to the topic area, and that you will be successful in doing so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! I'll be sure to do that. Toa Nidhiki05 15:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm planning on adding my own statistical plots in the next few weeks over the complete realignment of those with less education shifting from the Republicans to the Democrats, and those with more education shifting from the Democrats to the Republicans. Some good examples include the close 1948, 1960, 1976, 1992, 2008, and the Trump elections (2016, 2020, and 2024).

Lots of research, including by Thomas Piketty, Matt Grossmann and David Hopkins, and exit polls has shown the biggest realignment, particularly among White voters, is educational polarization. The realignment of the Northeast and Southern United States is another example of this, with the Northeast always being more educated than the South, with the two parties changing their geographic bases. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 03:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update I'm waiting until after the 2024 United States presidential election to publish plots of educational polarization. Polling appears to indicate that educational polarization will further increases, but to what extent is unknown.

Looking back at the 2020 results, Biden was largely unable to significantly erase Trump's gains among White voters without college degrees, who predominate in rural areas. Biden mainly won by increasing support in educated suburban areas outside core metropolitan areas, where he often outperformed Obama in 2008. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 23:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably the best idea. Toa Nidhiki05 13:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added an entire section to the demographics section of the Democratic Party on educational realignment--I bought and read the entire book Polarized by Degrees by Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins. Some statistics, some of which I'll add soon:

• Barry Goldwater nearly won a majority of voters with college degrees in 1964, despite losing in a landslide.
• Before the 1980s, whites without college degrees were a Democratic-leaning group. This ended with the victories of Ronald Reagan.
• Until the 2000s, whites without college degrees were no more likely than whites with college degrees to vote for Democrats.
• Voters with college degrees as a whole were Republican-leaning until the 1990s. Since then, Democrats have consistently won a majority of voters with graduate degrees.
• Whites with college degrees were a Republican-leaning group until Trump's election in 2016, and in 2020 Joe Biden won a majority of whites with college degrees for the first time since 1964.

JohnAdams1800 (talk) 23:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This all seems good to me! Toa Nidhiki05 12:46, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Green Party of the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ABC News.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; could you please restore the paragraph on 2004 United States election voting controversies that you removed? [2][3]

I initially didn't realize this myself, but the page is under WP:1RR, and you reverted the content twice in 24 hours (added by two different editors). JSwift49 14:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not realize this either, but I’m not sure what the solution is? Does it need to be added or removed? Toa Nidhiki05 15:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The solution to avoid violating the rule is to self-revert (ie. re-add it). Since a third editor agreed it should be added, we can discuss more in Talk. JSwift49 19:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They also need to self-revert, as the page clearly states reverted content needs consensus to be re-added. Toa Nidhiki05 19:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page notice was wrong, which I fixed (as a non-privileged uninvolved editor). Per WP:CTOP#Enforcement of restrictions an editor may not be blocked for violating a page restriction unless an uninvolved administrator has placed editnotice in the article. I.e. when you click the edit button, the editnotice should enumerate the restrictions. That being said, please avoid edit-warring, folks. Thank you. Politrukki (talk) 19:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]