POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
You probably shouldn't waste your time trying to make sense to him. He holds liberal views and he is not worthy of the discussion
Intellectualism doesn't make a great leader either. Nobody, is accusing Trump of being a great leader, nor a genius. Not me anyway.
You and many others are getting caught up with the messenger his affairs, college transcripts, and irs records.
Pay more attention to the message.
Trump was elected not for his genius. He sure wasn't elected because of his political affiliation, dude is an Ivy League Manhattan Dem.
He was elected because the message rang true with many. A message that doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to know, see or understand.
The democratic party has gone too far left and the ideas, policies, etc that come with that are not good and the people don't want them.
It's really simple. California, NY, Illinois, Baltimore...things have gone tits up and no one would accuse those places as being middle of the road on the political spectrum let alone conservative.
Taxes and college transcripts aren't the issues.
Last edited:
Media consumption does have a significant impact on a person's level of knowledge. Fox News viewers are the least knowledgeable of all news viewers, less informed than even people who watch no news at all. I'd say that qualifies as misinformation, wouldn't you?
Questions about current events foreign and domestic answered correctly:
Opinion shows are not news.
Also, what were the questions asked? Current events is rather wide open.
I plan to read this book that's about Obama having gay sex and smoking crack with Larry Sinclair and then having him murdered
Ok, well first of all...
You are dealing with different samples, a random selection of conservatives is not the same as a random selection of liberals.
Their interests are not the same.
That is of most primacy.
Second of all, there is testing methodology and this is probably most important. What does it mean to be informed or misinformed on current events and which events? Are we asking liberals if they are aware of weekend anti-Globalist French protests to the same degree we are asking conservatives where the EU is headquarted? If we ask were is the EU headquarted, why not ask where NATO is headquarted? Who is likely to know the answer to which question?
Third of all is viewership. What does it mean to watch Fox News, some shows do very little current events at all and focus solely on an issue or two which they go in to detail. The average fox viewer watches for far longer than those other platforms. Does an NPR listener count as news or they listening to car talk only? The test likely doesn't account for these disparities, they never do (ideologically bent studies) they never take all variables into account sufficiently.
From one variable you necessarily conclude one conclusion, the one that you want to from the data. You don't sufficiently isolate that variable from the many, many other variables... doing so would one, likely not produce the same result you are looking for and two, be way more difficult than you realise. Any scientist worth his salt knows that it is much, much harder to know what you think you know.
You are dealing with different samples, a random selection of conservatives is not the same as a random selection of liberals.
Their interests are not the same.
That is of most primacy.
Second of all, there is testing methodology and this is probably most important. What does it mean to be informed or misinformed on current events and which events? Are we asking liberals if they are aware of weekend anti-Globalist French protests to the same degree we are asking conservatives where the EU is headquarted? If we ask were is the EU headquarted, why not ask where NATO is headquarted? Who is likely to know the answer to which question?
Third of all is viewership. What does it mean to watch Fox News, some shows do very little current events at all and focus solely on an issue or two which they go in to detail. The average fox viewer watches for far longer than those other platforms. Does an NPR listener count as news or they listening to car talk only? The test likely doesn't account for these disparities, they never do (ideologically bent studies) they never take all variables into account sufficiently.
From one variable you necessarily conclude one conclusion, the one that you want to from the data. You don't sufficiently isolate that variable from the many, many other variables... doing so would one, likely not produce the same result you are looking for and two, be way more difficult than you realise. Any scientist worth his salt knows that it is much, much harder to know what you think you know.
She would have to come to my house to do it, I only wear skimpy close at home.
This is a blanket critique of all surveys, saying they can never live up to your personal standards, no matter the methodology. "The test likely doesn't account for these disparities, they never do"..."they never take all variables into account sufficiently." Go do the research on the questions asked yourself. Or just keep sticking your fingers in your ears and throwing out vague accusations about sampling so you can ignore the entire data set that conflicts with your previously held worldview.
It is not a blanket critique.
To follow up on this test, to reach the conclusion that you do, what you would need to do is isolate conservatives by themselves. See if there is a difference between conservatives who do and do not watch fox news. Then further examine any correlation that remains, continue drilling down.
What is done here is known as handwaving science.
This has to do with data and science, not worldviews. In order to understand these things, you have to divorce yourself from such simplistic thinking.
To follow up on this test, to reach the conclusion that you do, what you would need to do is isolate conservatives by themselves. See if there is a difference between conservatives who do and do not watch fox news. Then further examine any correlation that remains, continue drilling down.
What is done here is known as handwaving science.
This has to do with data and science, not worldviews. In order to understand these things, you have to divorce yourself from such simplistic thinking.
With all of the crap that comes out of that mouth this has to be true.
This is something you people think to be true because you are not scientifically minded... you have outsourced your thinking, claim to be backed by data because someone told you so.
You are intellectually lazy, then have the audacity to complain about your president not being intellectual enough for you.
This is a recurring problem with you leftists... You are worse than that which you deride, way dumber than the rednecks you like to mock to feel superior.. Here, I'm not talking about you specifically, I am carrying over the common thread idiocy you leftists show here on the catpaw.
I'm not even a conservative, just strongly against your un-Amerrican leftism... it is way more dangerous than you realize.
And those personal standards are precisely what is taught in any junior level advanced statistics course.
Last edited:
Good post. Decision making based purely on emotion , (which liberals tend to do), is such a dangerous thing. What's worse is their leadership exploits this through the msm and social media.
Nowhere was anyone even talking about conservatives, whether or not they watch Fox News. @Levibooty stated that Fox news viewers are misinformed, @truebluewildcat took issue with that. I posted a study where Fox News viewers knew less about current events than people who watch no news at all, let alone the other networks. What does isolating conservatives have to do with anything?
It has to do with isolating viewer demographics.
You can't just say something stupid like, well we looked at income levels and they were the same and then go from there. You have to isolate interests and you have to isolate location and immediacy biases and a myriad of other ones I could come up with were I inclined to waste more of my time thinking about this than I already have.
You can't just say something stupid like, well we looked at income levels and they were the same and then go from there. You have to isolate interests and you have to isolate location and immediacy biases and a myriad of other ones I could come up with were I inclined to waste more of my time thinking about this than I already have.
Dion is a big fan of the intellectual Iran Deal written by a guy that majored in creative writing (Rhodes) and bragged about how easy it was to fool the media into selling it for him.
This is a great example of the "recurring problem with you" conspiracy theory types, not leftists or rightists. Outsourced our thinking? That's anti-intellectual poppycock. Of course we as humans have outsourced our thinking, they're called books, or how about the entirety of human knowledge, history, and accomplishment. Do you know how to manufacture a microchip? Or repair satellites in orbit? Or survey, identify, extract, and process rare earth metals? But you use your smartphone right. That's because we've specialized our knowledge and endeavors, "outsourcing" all the things we don't have the time to know about to others who do. But I'm sure you as a random internet bro with your "junior level advanced statistics course" know much more about any topic than the professionals doing the work.
No, no conspiracy theory or problem with honest professionalism or certainly not anti-intellectual poppycock.. Sorry, that is not what is at work here.
I am not surprised you are not capable of understanding the point I made. Incidentally, that's not the point.
I am not surprised you are not capable of understanding the point I made. Incidentally, that's not the point.
Viewer demographics, so you're arguing Fox News viewers know less because of who they are, what type of person watches Fox News, not BECAUSE they watch Fox News and are misinformed by it. Gotcha. Could be, people who gravitate towards Fox News might just know less in general. I wonder why that would be?
In other words, if I truly isolate all demographics, is the "same person" who gets their news solely from NPR demonstrably different than one who gets solely from fox. And how is that affected by type of questions. And for your information, I would fall in the former sooner than the latter.
What I am telling you is that you are not thinking thoroughly enough, not nearly thoroughly enough and this has absolutely zero zilch to do with worldview, or triggers or white privilege or whatever other nonsense your leftist flu mental errors may arise. But I'll leave this here, this is work you need to do on your own.
What I am telling you is that you are not thinking thoroughly enough, not nearly thoroughly enough and this has absolutely zero zilch to do with worldview, or triggers or white privilege or whatever other nonsense your leftist flu mental errors may arise. But I'll leave this here, this is work you need to do on your own.
A bar full of people plus another attack a block away and no video? Sounds like a Jussie Smullett job. She also looks good considering they were "viciously" attacked.
Last edited:
So I'm supposed to be surprised that Fox News viewers don't know the fake news leftist propaganda version of events constantly fed to viewers of the leftist media? GTFOH.Media consumption does have a significant impact on a person's level of knowledge. Fox News viewers are the least knowledgeable of all news viewers, less informed than even people who watch no news at all. I'd say that qualifies as misinformation, wouldn't you?
Questions about current events foreign and domestic answered correctly:
You brainwashed dipshits come on here daily spouting the bullshit you've heard in the leftist media. It's an endless debunking exercise.
Italy doesn't need a wall, just pay off the countries of northern Africa to not allow passage.
(It also helps to be bordered by the Adriatic, Tyrrhenian, Ionian, and the Mediterranean Seas)
Migration from Libya to Italy, Once Europe’s Gateway, Dwindles After Clampdown
In the first two months of this year, only 262 seaborne migrants reached Italy, compared with more than 13,000 during the same period in 2017
https://www.wsj.com/articles/migrat...UF9Gf/Pq8Ai0Q==&reflink=article_copyURL_share
Migration to Italy via the Mediterranean, once the biggest gateway to Europe for those fleeing war or poverty in Africa and Asia, has nearly ground to a halt, showing the effectiveness of controversial efforts by European authorities to stem the inflow.
Rome and the European Union have tried hard to shut down the Libya-to-Italy route, clamping down on nongovernmental organization ships that rescue migrants at sea, training and supplying Libya’s coast guard, and funding authorities in Libya, Niger and Sudan to help block the migration trail.
Since 2016—when seaborne arrivals in Italy peaked at some 180,000—the EU has granted some €230 million to Niger, the main southern gateway to Libya. By last year, the northbound flow through Niger had dropped by at least 75% from an estimated 330,000 people in 2016, according to the International Organization for Migration. Sudan has also received some €100 million since 2016 from Brussels to curb the migration trail.
In 2017, Italy struck an agreement with tribes that controlled swaths of Libya’s southern borders, under which tribal elders agreed to join forces to stop migrants and people smugglers. Italy said it offered development aid to help turn local communities away from the smuggling trade, though how much couldn’t be determined. “Good money pushes out bad money, as people used to say,” said Marco Minniti, Mr. Salvini’s predecessor as interior minister.
Messages from migrants are also appearing on social media, discouraging others from trying to enter Libya.
“I urge all Egyptians not to cross illegally,” says an Egyptian man who appears in a video posted on Facebook in September, sitting in the sand with others detained by Libyan border guards. “Otherwise you’ll go through what we went through. Three days in the desert without food or drink.”
(It also helps to be bordered by the Adriatic, Tyrrhenian, Ionian, and the Mediterranean Seas)
Migration from Libya to Italy, Once Europe’s Gateway, Dwindles After Clampdown
In the first two months of this year, only 262 seaborne migrants reached Italy, compared with more than 13,000 during the same period in 2017
https://www.wsj.com/articles/migrat...UF9Gf/Pq8Ai0Q==&reflink=article_copyURL_share
Migration to Italy via the Mediterranean, once the biggest gateway to Europe for those fleeing war or poverty in Africa and Asia, has nearly ground to a halt, showing the effectiveness of controversial efforts by European authorities to stem the inflow.
Rome and the European Union have tried hard to shut down the Libya-to-Italy route, clamping down on nongovernmental organization ships that rescue migrants at sea, training and supplying Libya’s coast guard, and funding authorities in Libya, Niger and Sudan to help block the migration trail.
Since 2016—when seaborne arrivals in Italy peaked at some 180,000—the EU has granted some €230 million to Niger, the main southern gateway to Libya. By last year, the northbound flow through Niger had dropped by at least 75% from an estimated 330,000 people in 2016, according to the International Organization for Migration. Sudan has also received some €100 million since 2016 from Brussels to curb the migration trail.
In 2017, Italy struck an agreement with tribes that controlled swaths of Libya’s southern borders, under which tribal elders agreed to join forces to stop migrants and people smugglers. Italy said it offered development aid to help turn local communities away from the smuggling trade, though how much couldn’t be determined. “Good money pushes out bad money, as people used to say,” said Marco Minniti, Mr. Salvini’s predecessor as interior minister.
Messages from migrants are also appearing on social media, discouraging others from trying to enter Libya.
“I urge all Egyptians not to cross illegally,” says an Egyptian man who appears in a video posted on Facebook in September, sitting in the sand with others detained by Libyan border guards. “Otherwise you’ll go through what we went through. Three days in the desert without food or drink.”
I'd argue that nobody gets "news" from Fox News, or CNN, or MSNBC, etc. People who consume cable news are watching it for entertainment, and they watch whatever network will feed them what they want to hear.
I'd be willing to bet the kids at Fairleigh Dickinson who wrote the questions are not Fox News watchers.
If one gets their news from fake news CNN or MSNBC, and they write questions to determine if someone is "informed", they're likely going to think "informed" means the version of events and topics predominantly discussed on the media outlets they're consuming. That being the case, the questions likely skewed towards topics discussed on outlets other than Fox News.
If I deemed "informed" meant someone knows the facts of the muh Russia scandal, fast and furious, the facts of James Comey and the Clinton fraud investigation, etc. not a single person who consumes CNN or MSNBC would get the questions correct, aside from guessing.
If one gets their news from fake news CNN or MSNBC, and they write questions to determine if someone is "informed", they're likely going to think "informed" means the version of events and topics predominantly discussed on the media outlets they're consuming. That being the case, the questions likely skewed towards topics discussed on outlets other than Fox News.
If I deemed "informed" meant someone knows the facts of the muh Russia scandal, fast and furious, the facts of James Comey and the Clinton fraud investigation, etc. not a single person who consumes CNN or MSNBC would get the questions correct, aside from guessing.
If it's the "fake news leftist propaganda version of events" they're being quizzed on, how do MSNBC viewers know less about the international questions than people who watch no news? Your premise is that they're being questioned on their knowledge of the narratives they're being fed by leftist outlets. MSNBC viewers being forcefed agenda every day would definitely score higher on a test of knowledge of it than people who watch no news and have the least exposure to the propaganda hose. With Fox and MSNBC being the lowest in both charts, looks like both sides' most partisan outlets are the least informative. Or at least have the least informed viewers.
So what's the baseline? I'm expected to believe it's the truth. LMAO, you may be that gullible, but I'm not that GD naive.
No one gives a f**k about his tax returns besides you deranged lunatics.
There isn’t one. There is no truth in opinions, which is all you get from CNN, Fox, etc. An opinion can’t be right nor wrong.
au·thor·i·tar·i·an·ism
noun
the enforcement or advocacy of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.
to·tal·i·tar·i·an·ism
noun
a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.
com·mu·nism
noun
a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.
Social Democracy
There are many successful Social Democratic countries, and their existence undermines the views of Conservatives who oppose social democracy. Sweden is a Social Democratic country which has universal health care, free college, and various other social programs. However, these social programs and benefits are funded by high taxes generated by wealth in a market economy. [2]
Democratic socialism can mean Social democracy as in Sweden, Denmark and other Scandinavian countries and that works, Denmark is the happiest country in the world while Sweden, Norway and Finland are among the happiest. Democratic socialism can also mean Command economies which don’t work.---http://liberapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Social_Democracy_as_in_Scandinavia#cite_note-1
noun
the enforcement or advocacy of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.
to·tal·i·tar·i·an·ism
noun
a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.
com·mu·nism
noun
a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.
Social Democracy
There are many successful Social Democratic countries, and their existence undermines the views of Conservatives who oppose social democracy. Sweden is a Social Democratic country which has universal health care, free college, and various other social programs. However, these social programs and benefits are funded by high taxes generated by wealth in a market economy. [2]
Democratic socialism can mean Social democracy as in Sweden, Denmark and other Scandinavian countries and that works, Denmark is the happiest country in the world while Sweden, Norway and Finland are among the happiest. Democratic socialism can also mean Command economies which don’t work.---http://liberapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Social_Democracy_as_in_Scandinavia#cite_note-1
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Refs don’t think we’re missing enough players- Latest: BigBlueManSouthCentralKY
-
