Political voting is not new but the votes Israel got were weird. Spain is very critical of Israel. They had a massive protest right before or after ESC, and then somehow the popular vote gave Israel 12 points? Spain is the only one I remember from the top of my head but there were something like 4-5 countries in a similar scenario, where the people don’t like Israel but somehow end up giving either 12 or 10 points to Isreal.
This happening with one country could be viewed as just a coincidence but when the same thing happens to multiple countries?
It doesn’t need a majority of people supporting Israel, just enough people who feel strongly about the topic. Even in countries where a majority of people are against Israel, millions do still support them and they may feel even stronger about it if their government is against them.
Supporters of Israel had a way to express their support on the ESC, while supporters of Palestine didn’t, as Palestine didn’t participate in the contest. So you only got political votes from one side of the conflict, while the remaining votes were spread out over any of the other countries. No conspiracy needed, although I will admit it’s possible.
And in your opinion how much of the population percentage-wise would be “enough people who feel strongly about the topic” for Israel to get the most points?
I couldn’t tell you an exact number but I’d say that taking these polls, the 12% who say Israel was justified in everything they did would well be enough.
And with 12% every voter would’ve had to vote at least twice with a portion needing to vote at least thrice for Israel to get first place. Do you think all of them are so devoted they’d all vote multiple times? The Spanish broadcast didn’t think so which is why they asked for a full breakdown and they weren’t given that.
And with 12% every voter would’ve had to vote at least twice with a portion needing to vote at least thrice for Israel to get first place.
Only if there were an even proportion of ESC-voters across Spain’s population, which I see no reason to assume. People with a political motive are more motivated to vote than everyone else who might not have cared for any of the songs and thus not voted at all.
I see no reason to assume the proportions would somehow be different. Or am I supposed to assume that politically motivated people are more likely to vote in Eurovision? I would argue it’s been taken into consideration by the assumption that 100% of that 12% would vote. And just to reiterate, for Israel to get maximum points 100% of the 12% had to vote at least twice or more than 24% (and that’s the low end of what Israel would have to get to be first) of all the votes had to go to Israel.
And finally, Eurovision could’ve easily silenced all skeptics by releasing the full breakdown of votes. I’ll leave it up to you to decide why they didn’t release the full breakdown (and no, it’s not because it’s a secret because Italy reveals their voting percentages).
I see no reason to assume the proportions would somehow be different. Or am I supposed to assume that politically motivated people are more likely to vote in Eurovision?
If that’s what you want to assume, ok. I think we’re past the point of useful discussion here, as neither of us can back up our assumptions.
Political voting is not new but the votes Israel got were weird. Spain is very critical of Israel. They had a massive protest right before or after ESC, and then somehow the popular vote gave Israel 12 points? Spain is the only one I remember from the top of my head but there were something like 4-5 countries in a similar scenario, where the people don’t like Israel but somehow end up giving either 12 or 10 points to Isreal.
This happening with one country could be viewed as just a coincidence but when the same thing happens to multiple countries?
It doesn’t need a majority of people supporting Israel, just enough people who feel strongly about the topic. Even in countries where a majority of people are against Israel, millions do still support them and they may feel even stronger about it if their government is against them.
Supporters of Israel had a way to express their support on the ESC, while supporters of Palestine didn’t, as Palestine didn’t participate in the contest. So you only got political votes from one side of the conflict, while the remaining votes were spread out over any of the other countries. No conspiracy needed, although I will admit it’s possible.
And in your opinion how much of the population percentage-wise would be “enough people who feel strongly about the topic” for Israel to get the most points?
I couldn’t tell you an exact number but I’d say that taking these polls, the 12% who say Israel was justified in everything they did would well be enough.
And with 12% every voter would’ve had to vote at least twice with a portion needing to vote at least thrice for Israel to get first place. Do you think all of them are so devoted they’d all vote multiple times? The Spanish broadcast didn’t think so which is why they asked for a full breakdown and they weren’t given that.
Only if there were an even proportion of ESC-voters across Spain’s population, which I see no reason to assume. People with a political motive are more motivated to vote than everyone else who might not have cared for any of the songs and thus not voted at all.
I see no reason to assume the proportions would somehow be different. Or am I supposed to assume that politically motivated people are more likely to vote in Eurovision? I would argue it’s been taken into consideration by the assumption that 100% of that 12% would vote. And just to reiterate, for Israel to get maximum points 100% of the 12% had to vote at least twice or more than 24% (and that’s the low end of what Israel would have to get to be first) of all the votes had to go to Israel.
And finally, Eurovision could’ve easily silenced all skeptics by releasing the full breakdown of votes. I’ll leave it up to you to decide why they didn’t release the full breakdown (and no, it’s not because it’s a secret because Italy reveals their voting percentages).
If that’s what you want to assume, ok. I think we’re past the point of useful discussion here, as neither of us can back up our assumptions.