---

Or are you using the fact that "I'm" making the observation an excuse to dismiss it out of hand because you really don't want to consider the observation itself because it just might make you acknowledge your own poor behavior?

---

---

Maureen, that's SO like a Republican. I happen to ENJOY tacos.


Of course you do, everyone knows that Tacos are part of the Liberal agenda.

---

---

I shouldn't post, but I will. I'm seeing it from both sides. Gloating and sore losers both. Don't complain about one and give the other a pass.

---

---

It seems that only when one finds themselves 'sleeping with the enemy', like MergeLeft, that it becomes not such a funny game anymore.

---

---

ITA How many posts have there been regarding tax hikes, budget issues, stock market reports, etc. since the election? Those are merely thinly-veiled "this is all Obama's fault and never would have happened if Romney won" posts.

---

---

I could be misremembering, but I don't believe I enganged in "taunting" even before it became an issue at home. Argument, yes. Taunting, I don't think so. (I'm sure someone has a spreadsheet somewhere that will prove me wrong, but I hope not.)

---

---

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts.

---