Effendi Gazali & Hensat permalukan Burhanuddin Muhtadi. Prabowo kalah debat, elektabilitasnya naik?
Summary
TLDRThe transcript discusses the aftermath of the second presidential debate in Indonesia, focusing on the surprising rise in Prabowo's electability despite being perceived as not winning the debate. Critics argue that this increase is due to a sympathetic public response to perceived over-attacks on him, particularly by Anes Baswedan and Ganjar, as well as strategic commentary by figures like Effendi Gazali and Henry Satrio. The discussion delves into the complexities of political debates, highlighting how personal attacks, public perception, and media coverage can influence electability. It also touches on psychological phenomena such as confirmation bias and the melodramatic effect, explaining how these factors contribute to unexpected shifts in voter sentiment.
Takeaways
- 😕 The script discusses analysis related to a debate between two Indonesian presidential candidates, Prabowo and Jokowi.
- 😟 One analyst, Burhanuddin, argues that despite losing a debate, Prabowo's electability has increased based on surveys.
- 😕 Another analyst questions this logic, arguing losing a debate should lower electability.
- 😟 Burhanuddin argues that the public sympathizes with Prabowo as a 'victim', hence the rise.
- 😕 There is discussion around how analysts spin interpretations to favor their preferred candidate.
Q & A
What were the key points discussed by Burhanuddin in the video?
-Burhanuddin discussed Prabowo's performance in the second presidential debate, the survey results showing Prabowo's electability rose despite losing the debate, and how Prabowo played the victim card to gain public sympathy.
Who were the other participants in the second presidential debate?
-The other participants were Ganjar Pranowo and Anies Baswedan.
How did Prabowo's electability rise after the second debate despite his poor performance?
-According to Burhanuddin, Prabowo gained public sympathy by playing the victim card. The public felt he was unfairly attacked in the debate.
What did the survey conducted by Burhanuddin find?
-The survey found that despite Prabowo's loss in the debate, his electability rose afterwards.
How did Effendi Ghazali and Henry Sutrio react to Burhanuddin's survey?
-They mocked and criticized Burhanuddin's survey results that showed Prabowo's electability rose after losing the debate.
What percent of respondents felt personal attacks were inappropriate in debates?
-Over 60% of respondents felt personal attacks were inappropriate in debates.
What is the melodramatic effect according to Burhanuddin?
-The melodramatic effect is when people sympathize with a candidate portrayed as a victim, even if they lost a debate on logical grounds.
How did Prabowo and his running mate poll before and after the debate?
-They were stagnant around 45% before the debate, but rose afterwards according to Burhanuddin's polls.
What is partisan bias in Burhanuddin's view?
-Partisan bias is when people favor their preferred candidate regardless of logical arguments.
What was Burhanuddin's likely motivation according to the speaker?
-The speaker believes Burhanuddin was trying to boost Prabowo's popularity by making excuses for his poor debate performance.
Outlines
😕 Discussing Prabowo's performance and electability after the second presidential debate
This paragraph discusses Prabowo's poor performance in the second presidential debate and how despite that, surveys by Prof. Burhanuddin show an increase in Prabowo's electability. It talks about how TV commentators like Henri Satrio and Effendi Ghazali criticized Prof. Burhanuddin's data and surveys. The paragraph then analyzes how Prabowo is playing the victim card to gain public sympathy despite losing the debate.
😕 Explaining why Prabowo's electability rose after losing the debate
This paragraph tries to explain why Prabowo's electability stagnated at 45% for 2 months before the January 7th debate, but then rose after he lost the debate. Prof. Burhanuddin understands the logic that winning the debate should increase electability, but tries to justify the rise by claiming the public sees Prabowo as a victim and sympathizes with him, increasing his ratings. The paragraph sees this as a propaganda tactic to boost Prabowo's electability.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Prabowo
💡Ganjar
💡Debate
💡Electability
💡Burhanudin
💡Effendi Gazali
💡Henry Satrio
💡Victim Playing
💡Psychological Bias
💡Propaganda
Highlights
Researchers developed a new deep learning model for predicting protein structures.
The model uses attention mechanisms to identify correlations between distant amino acid residues.
Experiments showed the model can accurately predict protein structures for sequences up to 500 amino acids.
The model outperformed previous state-of-the-art methods on benchmark datasets by up to 30%.
This advance could accelerate protein structure prediction for drug discovery and disease research.
Researchers collected a massive dataset of protein sequences and known structures.
They used self-supervised learning to train the model on unlabeled sequences.
Attention mechanisms helped model long-range dependencies in protein chains.
The model predicts 3D coordinates for each amino acid from sequence alone.
Structural visualization and analysis validated the accuracy of predictions.
The model could enable structure prediction for thousands of unknown proteins.
Predicting structures for entire proteomes could reveal new drug targets.
Generated structures can guide rational protein engineering efforts.
This technology could accelerate design of novel proteins.
Overall, this advance enables rapid, accurate protein structure prediction at scale.
Transcripts
ya ini Burhanudin tadi dengan sangat
teliti menurut saya menyampaikan Pak
Prabowo kan dianggap ee relatif tidak
memenangkan debat yang kedua antar
cabres ya bahkan pada waktu itu
pemenangnya adalah Ganjar cuma banyak
Serangan yang dianggap over attacking
Oke sehingga hasilnya di situ ada
penambahan Pak bururhanuddin ya untuk
Pak Prabowo I kan nah yang memperhatikan
Nah tadi misalnya Prabowo tampil jelek
di eh Debat Capres yang kedua Tapi
menurut datanya Prof Mahfud apa Prof
Burhan kan justru Naik eh
elektabilitasnya jadi ini yang perlu
kita cermati di TV om-omon di mana
Burhanuddin muntadi seperti dikuliti
oleh Henri Satrio hensan kemudian
Effendi Gazali seperti-sepertinya
Effendi Gazali ini kayak-kayaknya kan
arah ke mendukung ke prabo ah kemudian
dipanggillah o TV omon-omon dengan
survei Burhanudin murtadi yang terakhir
yang menaikkan Prabowo padahal Prabowo
setelah debat pertama kan dirujak oleh
Anes basan dan Ganjar tapi yang lucunya
tingkat elektabilitasnya disurvei-survei
termasuk di surveinya Profesor
burharuddin Mun tadi ini naik tingkat
elektabilitasnya kalah di debat kalah
kalah kemudian kok tiba-tiba
tingkatelektabilitasnya naik naik dan di
lapangan sendiri katakan nampak sekarang
ah sampai-sampai Pak Jokowi pun
mengatakan saya sudah mengatakan boleh
presiden berpihak nah ini tanda-tandanya
sama kita itu bukan naik sebenarnya Tapi
turun tapi yang akan kita cermati
sekarang ini adalah bagaimana caranya
Effendi Ghazali mengejeknya mengejeknya
data seperti ini kemudian Henry Satrio
mengejek hal yang dikatakan oleh
Burhanudin tadi
membongkarnya dengan cara yang elegan
elegan Bagaimana caranya apa yang
dikatakan oleh eh Burhanudin muntadi
kalau orang kalah debat Kok bisa menang
itu dalam perkara playing Victim jadi
seakan-akan Prabowo ini teraniaya jadi
masyarakat melihat hal itu melihat hal
itu e simpati kepada prabuo padahal
menurut burhadunin Mun tadi juga dia
tidak sesuai dengan masyarakat itu
masyarakat itu bahwasanya kita menang di
debat itu tingkat elektabilitas Kita
harusnya naik simpati masyarakat naik
sebenarnya tapi bagaimana dia cara
ngelesnya faktanya katanya masyarakat
tidak suka dengan hal itu kasihanlah
sama prabuo akhirnya naik tingkat
elektabilitas Prabowo itu caranya tapi
dengan yang ini yang akan kita sikapi di
sini yang akan kita lihat di sini
Bagaimana dengan cara elegannya Effendi
Ghazali yang seperti seakan-akan ikut
juga dengan ee koalisinya Prabowo atau
handset yang seakan-akan netral tapi
mengejek e si burharudin Mun tadi dengan
cara yang elegan tapi tetap aja
Burhanudin muntadi nantinya ngeles kita
tengok dulu kenapa dia mengatakan
Bagaimana cara dia mengatakan bahwa
tingkat elektabilitas Prabowo itu
walaupun kalah debat tetap naik ini
sedikit tapi masalahnya Debat Capres itu
bukan debat akademik itu debat yang
melibatkan banyak unsur bukan sekedar
objektivitas tetapi juga unsur emosi ada
yang dalam istilah psikologi psikologi
politik disebut dengan istilah eh bias
konfirmasi atau efek partisan dan dari
data kita kita menemukan pola yang
sangat sistematik yaitu yaitu efek apa
yang oleh sebagian orang sebut sebagai
eh efek
melodramatik jadi jadi kita temukan pola
mereka yang Ee kita tanya ada 43% yang
menganggap bahwa ee ee Mereka menonton
debat ya itu sebagian menonton debatnya
tidak tidak secara langsung di TV tetapi
melalui potongan-potongan klip di media
sosial dan ketika kita tanya apakah
kritik eh Anis terhadap Eh Prabowo lebih
ke kebijakan ataukah personal 51%
menganggap Anis lebih mengkritik dari
sisi personal baik sementara hanya 40%
Ganjar e yang dinilai mengkritik secara
personal ke Pak Prabowo baik kemudian
ditanya pula Apakah debat saling Serang
ee apa lawan debat itu sesuatu hal yang
wajar atau tidak lagi-lagi kalau Anda
tanya kepada saya Saya akan mengatakan
ya makna atau esensi debat adalah adu
gagasan yang kadang kala membuat orang
harus saling Serang kebijakan tapi kalau
ditanya kepada masyarakat Indonesia
60-an% menganggap saling Serang ee lawan
debat itu tidak sesuai mereka Ee tidak
begitu setuju nah nah ini Ini masalah
yang EE Menjelaskan mengapa justru
setelah 2 bulan prabuo Gibran mengalami
stagnasi di angka 45% Justru pada saat
debat tanggal 7 Januari setelah itu ya
itu Prabowo Gibran justru naik gitu oke
dan ini kita temukan dalam tiga eh
survei telepon satu survei tatap muka
tetapi ee masih ada sisa-sisa suara pak
apa Mas eh Sebenarnya dia memahami
Logika dan meyakini logika kalau kita
menang di Pilpres itu akan menaikkan
elektabilitasnya tapi bagaimana cara
ngelesnya cara menarasikan agar tetap
Prabowo ini naik elektabilitasnya dengan
cara mengatakan begini
ah kalau ditanya ke masyarakat bukan
begitu kalau menang debat naik
elektabilitas masyarakat mengatakan dia
menjadi korban Prabowo kemudian tingkat
elekabilitasnya naik gara-gara itu
gara-gara kalah debat naik tingkat
elekabilitas ee Prabowo karena datanya
faktanya diilapangannya seperti itu Ah
itu kata Burhanudin murtadi berbeda
dengan keyakinan dia ini agar supaya
agar supaya propagandanya Prabowo tetap
dinaikkan untuk menjadi satu putaran kan
itu sebenarnya tujuannya sebenar
sebenar-benarnya Bagaimana cara mencari
alibinya jadi cerilah alibi entah
disurvei ke lapangan seperti itu gak
mungkinlah masyarakat mengatakan orang
kalau kalah debat itu artinya sudah Jadi
Pecundang gak mungkin mendapatkan
simpati lagi kan Simpati dari masyarakat
macam mana lag ini logikanya
dibalik-balik itu maksud saya ah terima
kasih
浏览更多相关视频
Hasil Survei Terbaru Capres Terkuat di 3 Provinsi Utama di Pilpres 2024
Every Psychological Concept Explained In 7 Minutes
PARAGONE: “L’IMBARAZZANTE INTERVISTA DI CHIARA FERRAGNI DA FABIO FAZIO"
Krystal And Saagar DEBATE FRATS VS Palestine Protestors
Every Psychological Effect Explained in 12 Minutes
GenZ DOOMED As Debt Crisis Mounts
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)