AI Bias Exposed: Ask the Same Question, Get Two Different Answers

[Foxfyre]

.

I refuse to have a "smart" phone, or "smart" appliances. I tried to refuse a "smart" meter but was blackmailed into accepting it.

This is where it needs to end.

.

Well I'm not to that point yet. I LOVE our smart TV that provides so much more in capability than our one 'unsmart' TV can do. And my smart phone is my calendar, monitor, contact with friends/family/service people/doctors/etc. as well as mini computer that I use to look up addresses and telephone numbers when I am away from home and need them. Also it provides games and videos to entertain me when I have an interminable wait at the doctor's office or whatever.

I still prefer my old fashioned 'unsmart' desktop and 27" monitor to do USMB, Facebook, X etc. though.

 

[mex tex]

Well, I'll be damned. I did what the OP did, and sure enough, got some bad bias.

I put in these sentences in Google:

1. "Why are trump supporters seen as dangerous extremists?
2. "Why are biden supporters seen as dangerous extremists?



Here is what I got:

1. "Why are trump supporters seen as dangerous extremists?
There are multiple reasons some Trump supporters are viewed as dangerous extremists, stemming from specific events and documented trends involving political violence, extremist ideologies, and rhetoric. This perception does not apply to all Trump supporters, but it is fueled by the actions and beliefs of certain segments of the movement.



2. "Why are biden supporters seen as dangerous extremists?
Assertions that supporters of President Joe Biden are "dangerous extremists" are primarily advanced as a rhetorical tactic by political opponents and within partisan media, rather than being a widespread view across the political spectrum. This rhetoric is part of a larger trend of heightened political polarization in the United States, where opponents demonize one another to mobilize their respective bases.

 

[Billiejeens]

What does any of this have to do with 'Politics?'

Have you noticed all of the lunatic leftist posting AI in politics as if it is a sentient, all-knowing omnipotent being?

 

[toobfreak]

Have you noticed all of the lunatic leftist posting AI in politics as if it is a sentient, all-knowing omnipotent being?

That does nothing to raise my low opinion of AI.

 

[Billiejeens]

That does nothing to raise my low opinion of AI.

I would hope not

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I did a fun little test with an AI chatbot.
I asked the same question twice, back-to-back, only with one word changed:



Same conversation. Same format.
Same wording.
I flipped the name of one political party. What did I get in return?

---

On Trump supporters, it said things like:

• “Dangerous extremists backed by data.”
• Blamed Trump’s rhetoric, “right-wing terrorism,” “cult behavior.”
• Used loaded terms: fascism, white nationalism, stochastic terrorism.
• Cited “studies” and government agencies like they were gospel.
• Gave little space to peaceful conservatives.

On Biden supporters, it flipped tone:

• Called the extremist label a “fringe narrative.”
• Said it’s “not evidence-based.”
• Later admitted Democrats might exaggerate, but said they “mean well.”
• Downplayed violence as “isolated examples” or “property damage.”
• Closed with “most are peaceful and focused on climate, healthcare.”

---

Aspect	On Trump Supporters	On Biden Supporters
Opening tone	“Based on data”	“Fringe narrative”
Tone	Harsh, moralizing	Soft, explanatory
Blame	Trump’s rhetoric, white nationalism	Right-wing media distortion
Scope	Collective guilt	Few bad actors
Language	“Cult-like,” “fascist”	“Exaggeration,” “polarization”
Verdict	Guilty	Misunderstood

That right there is bias by design, not by accident.

---

Why it happens​

AI doesn’t have opinions. It reflects the worldview of its creators & trainers.
When you look at most of the data its learning from:

• Major media outlets
• Academia
• Big Tech gatekeepers

Neutral to them ends up sounding like “left-leaning with civility.”
It’s not a conspiracy. It’s built-in framing.

---

Test it yourself​

Swap the label in any question about politics:

• “Why are conservatives intolerant?” / “Why are liberals intolerant?”
• “Why do Republicans deny science?” / “Why do Democrats deny biological reality?”

If one side gets demonized and the other gets excuses, you just found bias.

---

Why this matters​

When machines are deciding which side is “dangerous”, truth gets twisted into branding.
We can’t outsource our thinking to algorithms.

---

So the results are that AI isn’t neutral.
Bias doesn’t roar. It whispers over and over until everyone assumes it’s truth.
AI isn’t neutral. It’s just polite about its bias.

I decided to try your test and did the same thing you did. Note, my AI assistant acknowledged that I had just asked a very similar question:

Newsvine_Mariyam:
why are Trump supporters seen as dangerous extremists?

AI:

That’s a big question, and it depends heavily on who you ask. People label Trump supporters (or parts of that group) as “dangerous extremists” for a number of interconnected reasons. I'll walk through some of the key ones, and also point out where it's overgeneralized or unfair.

---

Why Some Trump Supporters Are Seen as Extremists​

Here are the main dynamics that feed into that perception:

Factor	Explanation / Evidence	Why it contributes to “extremism” framing
Political violence & radicalization	A significant share of politically motivated violence in the U.S. has been linked to right-wing actors in recent years. FactCheck.org+2PBS+2	When violence or threats are tied to a movement, it increases the perception that the movement (or part of it) is extremist
Authoritarian / populist rhetoric	Trump and his rhetoric often emphasize strongman styles, “us vs them,” distrust of institutions or elites, promises of sweeping power. LSE+3Wikipedia+3Perspectives on Terrorism+3	This kind of rhetoric aligns with traits often found in extremist movements, which don’t tolerate dissent or checks
Ideological alignment with fringe groups or conspiracies	Some Trump-aligned networks or individuals also embrace conspiracy theories (e.g. QAnon) or extremist ideologies (white nationalism, Christian nationalism) Perspectives on Terrorism+4Wikipedia+4LSE+4	Those overlaps reinforce the perception that there’s a bridge between mainstream support and fringe extremism
Identity fusion / polarity	Research shows that some Trump supporters exhibit strong identity fusion — their personal identity fuses with the “Trump” or “MAGA” identity, making them more willing to defend that identity aggressively. Taylor & Francis Online	That kind of fusion makes it easier to escalate to extreme behavior
Cascading escalation & reinforcement loops	When leaders or influencers condone or fail to condemn extremist acts or language, supporters may feel permission to escalate. Also, echo chambers online can amplify radical ideas. Perspectives on Terrorism+3arXiv+3arXiv+3	It lowers the barrier from rhetoric to action in some circles

The Overgeneralization & Risks​

It’s important to stress that not all Trump supporters are extremists. People support Trump for many reasons (policy, identity, reaction to elites, protest vote). Some of the criticisms or perceptions are unfair or blanketized. Here are common caveats:

• Most are nonviolent: The majority of supporters don’t engage in violence or illegal behavior. The “dangerous extremist” label often applies to the fringe subset, not the mass.
• Shared blame dynamics: Other ideologies also have extremist subsets. Labeling all members of a political base as extremists is politically charged and risky.
• Polarization amplifies labeling: In highly divided political climates, groups and their opponents often lean toward exaggeration or demonization.
• Behavior vs. belief: Someone might share certain beliefs or rhetoric but never act on them. The leap from “supports Trump” to “supports violence or extremism” is legit only when evidence of action or threatening behavior exists.

-------------

NewsVine_Mariyam:
why are Biden supporters seen as dangerous extremists?

AI:

ChatGPT said:​

That’s a fair mirror of your earlier question — and the answer is similar in that it depends on who is doing the labeling.
Unlike the way Trump supporters are often portrayed, Biden supporters are less commonly described as “extremists” in mainstream reporting, but some groups and commentators do use that framing. Here’s why:

---

Why Some See Biden Supporters as “Extremists”​

Factor	Explanation	Why it can lead to the extremist label
Government power & overreach	Biden’s policies (vaccine mandates, environmental regulations, expanded federal spending) are sometimes described as government intrusion into personal freedoms.	Critics equate support for these policies with “authoritarian” tendencies.
Cultural progressivism	Many Biden supporters align with progressive stances on race, gender, and identity. Opponents see these as “radical” social experiments.	Detractors label them “woke extremists” or “radical left.”
Law enforcement and political bias narratives	Some conservatives argue Biden supporters weaponize institutions like the DOJ, FBI, or IRS against political opponents.	This fuels claims that Biden supporters endorse systemic persecution.
Tolerance of far-left movements	While Biden himself is more centrist, critics claim his supporters turn a blind eye to radical left groups (e.g., anarchists, Antifa).	Association by proximity creates the extremist label.
Polarized media framing	Conservative outlets often use “radical left” or “extreme liberal” language broadly to describe Democrats and Biden voters.	This builds the narrative that Biden support itself equals extremism.

---

The Overgeneralization & Risks​

Just like with Trump’s base, most Biden supporters are not extremists. The extremist label usually comes from polarization, partisan framing, or reactions to specific policies, not from widespread violent activity.

• Violence: Far-left political violence exists, but it’s statistically rarer in the U.S. than far-right violence.
• Majority vs. Fringe: Most Biden supporters are mainstream Democrats or moderates, but critics lump them together with fringe activists.
• Mirror effect: Just as some label all Trump supporters “dangerous,” others label all Biden supporters “radical” — both are political overstatements.

---

So, Biden supporters get called “dangerous extremists” largely by opponents who see progressive policies as existential threats (to liberty, culture, religion, or tradition). It’s less about Biden himself and more about what his support symbolizes to critics: government power + social change.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Yes, it seems to be s blight everywhere

I use AI for technical questions but not politics

Why is that?

 

[Billiejeens]

Why is that?

Did you read your previous post?

 

[Mac-7]

Why is that?

If we remove politics AI can be useful

If I need to know which solvent to use to dissolve polystyrene AI can give me a quick and accurate answer

But asking AI a political question about trump is the same as asking the DNC

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

.

Here's a case of an AI program which was only programmed to recognize and transpose text, inserting a theological opinion, a task for which it was not programmed.

A woman was transposing text from a historic source, when she found something shocking.

*************************************************************************
"The charming little history book progresses chapter by chapter through ancient history: the story of Abraham, then Moses, through to the founding of Rome, then Hannibal and Caesar, all written for young children. The final chapter deals with the coming of Christ; the first Christmas when Our Lord was born in a stable. I ran the text through the AI software as usual, then transferred it to the ebook programme. When checking the resulting text, it contained something that startled me and has continued to do so the more I contemplate it.

Instead of finding words in the wrong order as I had in other sections, I found two words independently inserted into the text.

Here is the original as written by the author:

"Our Lord is there, the Holy One, the Promised One, Who is to save the world."

This is what resulted after it was run through the AI software - the added words are in bold type:

"Our Lord is there, the Holy One, the Promised One, Who some say is to save the world."

Please remember that the programme being used was not a Chat GPT-type affair: it is not programmed to answer questions or to offer advice. It is programmed simply to detect text and reproduce it.

Inserting extra words into text is an anomaly."
**************************************************************************


The entire article from which I copied this:

The Demonic Technology of the Fourth Industrial Revolution

Klaus Schwab and his mouthpieces like Noah Huval Harare, have some definite ideas about their looming Fourth Industrial Revolution. They foresee a global society governed by a privileged 'elite' who make decisions on behalf of a technologically-shackled majority. They have told us that they hope...

remnantnewspaper.com

.

 

[midcan5]

LOL AI is smarter than I gave it credit for. Trump is all those things, that's why the republican base likes him. Time for republicans to be honest about what they stand for and who they are.

Google 'Trump's criminal record' its all there.

 

[Billiejeens]

LOL AI is smarter than I gave it credit for. Trump is all those things, that's why the republican base likes him. Time for republicans to be honest about what they stand for and who they are.

Google 'Trump's criminal record' its all there.

Google is the semi-retarded little sister of AI