Wow... BS doesn't get any better than this...

So Biden is bought and paid for by the Chinese, Russians, Ukrainians, Iranians and "probably" more countries, even though there is ZERO evidence... And if I *ask* for evidence are you going to launch ad hominem attacks on me?

Oh, and of course the massive pedophilia crisis, where all Democrats are involved in child sex rings and trafficking and Trump is the white knight champion slaying the dragon of pedophilia. LOL! Nevermind that this was never a concern for Republicans until after the Epstein trial exposed the child sex trafficking that HE was involved in when he and Trump were hanging out together.

Actually, the Q anon BS might have had *some* traction outside the zombie circle if Trump actually did ANYTHING even remotely related to the war on child trafficking. LOL

I'm so glad we're finally getting rid of the clown and all the BS that came with him. Bye-bye Donald you POS!

I think Lonewolf is referring to the challenges that 99% of Americans have in common. The partisan divide that you are apparently referring to is 100% political BS. As for the "torturing" of the president that only 24% of the Americans in 2016 chose in the first place... Trump brought that all on himself through his compulsive recklessness and dishonesty. If Joe does the same, then I am sure he will suffer the same "torture". But I suspect he will suffer a different kind of torture, more similar to what his old boss suffered, where people who just don't like him lie about him, like they already are. But Joe's a better man. He can take it. Trump never could.

Absolutely!

That would give the Democrats an indisputable upper hand. Are you sure that's what you want? Seriously, if you want voter suppression to work for Trump, going back to white males only would be a far better bet but even then, it would be questionable.

Perhaps, if there was a clearer distinction between "watching the polls" and "intimidating the voters". ;)

I'm also a little curious if you can tell me exactly what a "poll watcher" does. Ballots are supposed to be private so any citizen can vote for any option without fear of association and any harassment that might come from it.

I also don't see how anyone, even from six feet away, can actually spot any wrongdoing as counters flip through ballots with tiny check marks at neck-breaking speed.

I think the Republicans are desperately looking for ANYTHING to upset the pro-Biden trend we are seeing at a national scale and not allowing access to the supposed "poll watchers" was one of many reaches. The appellate judge, simply didn't see any law against allowing "poll watchers" and Pennsylvania is perfectly fine with the arrangement. Even better for the Democrats actually who would rather not give the Republicans another excuse to cry foul.


That wouldn't be anything new my friend.

First of all, keep in mind none of those "top five" states have finished counting either. California is only 68% at the time I'm writing this. These states are being "called" by the media because even at 68%, probability can be assessed with some confidence.

For instance, if you have 100 registered voters and only 80 of them have been counted, out of which 78 are blue votes, you can be assured that even if the remaining 20 votes are all red, adding to the 2 votes already counted for a total of 22 red votes, it STILL won't beat the 78 blue votes already counted.

The swing states are states where such predictions really can't be made because the margins are too thin.

The fact is Seth... You say a lot of things that don't make sense and when I ask you to explain them you can't. Describing me as "windy" or "pseudo-intellectual" doesn't hide this. All you are really doing is enforcing a familiar pattern where people who want the world to be seen a certain way can't hold up to the challenges and in their frustration, resort to ad hominem attacks.

I hope that wasn't too "windy" for you.

Can you give me one example of such an indication?

I can give you an example of the opposite... https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/tpr?p=3489284&t=198884
This is a recent post where I was explaining the difference between the pure theory of the Laffer Curve (that conservatives insist is the statical proof that supply-side economics works) fails in the real world of people and human nature. Go ahead - hit the link and search for "Laffer".

...And what about my other question? Did you find that one example of a person with a PhD that caused misery for an entire population?

You seem to do this a lot Seth - you just say things out of the blue because you WANT them to be true and whenever I ask you for any evidence, you act like the conversation never happened.


OK, let's try this again... Name one policy supported by "my side" (whatever you think that is) that ultimately failed.

Go ahead... You talk a lot of smack Seth, but can you back ANY of it up? So far, you haven't.

Well, who doesn't? I earned a living dealing with people and human nature too. I'm pretty sure that's what just about everyone does.


Well yes, educated idealists CAN be very dangerous... Just look at the dangers that idealists like Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson presented to British colonialism. I guess it comes down to whether or not you are personally threatened by a specific line of radical thinking.


I don't think doctors (those who have earned a PhD) mistake their credentials for wisdom, common sense or general street smarts. A PhD simply credits someone with a high level of expertise in a given field of study. Common sense is a minimum level of intelligence, not specific to anything (hence the term, "common") and it's viewed as a lowest common denominator... like how a typical human has the common sense to look both ways before crossing a street. Street smarts is one step up from common sense, where one person uses his human intellect to survive in the streets. It's usually specific to a given environment and is normally limited to short-term projections, like how to find money for food without getting shot.

Why on earth would a doctor want to pass his expertise in a field of study off as some remedial level of intelligence?


Well, since you're insisting that those with doctoral degrees have a long history of causing misery to entire populations, how about you name one?

In the meantime, let me point out that when people like Stalin forced people into starvation, the idealists like Karl Marx really had nothing to do with it. Insisting otherwise is really no different than blaming Jesus for the Spanish Inquisition. The fact is Marx NEVER suggested forced starvation any more than Jesus suggested human torture.

The fact is, idealism is always a threat to those abusing power, which is why your conservative thought leaders are trying to implicate American academics into a potential parallel with Soviet brutality so that you might oppose the ideas that threaten their power. And you can easily see how much more successful this strategy is among the lesser educated than among the more educated.


Well, that's your prerogative. I see it more on a case-by-case basis. For instance, given a question in the space of large-scale information technology, my own experience in the field may encourage me to disagree with a PhD in education systems.


Wasn't she the anthropologist with a PhD that basically said our Western values are inferior to Eastern values?

I'm not sure what you're basing your disappointment on, Tug... Is it the decisions that you can't remember or is it that he is appearing to be nonpartisan?

Well, there's your problem, Seth.

You should NEVER base your education on street-side gossip and freakouts. Get your basic education at school where textbooks and teachers are qualified. THEN once the concepts are clear in your head you can go out amid the blabber and have a better sense of which way is up.

Call it whatever you want, Seth.


No, it doesn't. You just don't know how to read laws. If your talking about section 8 of Article I, all those enumerated powers are simply the responsibilities that the Constitution itself lays on Congress. It is NOT a limit on what Congress can legislate and that is made quite clear in the 10th Amendment that says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution..." (such as anything NOT listed in Article I), " nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

And how do you think "the people" conduct that power reserved for them by the 10th Amendment, Seth? I'll tell you... They petition their representatives in Congress to make the laws they want.

That's how it works big boy.


And to the people... do you have a limit on the number of words you can read per sentence, Seth? Not only that but most of the progressive policies ARE implemented at the state level. Seriously, it's like you recite the words without understanding them.


Yes, it is and I'm helping you find it because you are apparently lost. No need to thank me.

Yes, I have and it resulted in a published paper. Not that it matters.


No, it's a provable fact.


Show me one law sponsored by progressives that prohibit free speech... 'cmon, show me.


I think the only confusion here is how conservatives think it's a violation of free speech every time Twitter or facebook takes down a post that violates their policies. Those are private companies that have a right to determine what is appropriate on their private network. They are not saying the post can't be taken somewhere else.

To truly obstruct free speech the government would have to make it illegal to say or print or show ANYWHERE. And as I said, the only legal prohibition on free speech (usually in the form of printed material) has been advocated by conservatives, especially the religious ones.

BTW, that published paper was actually a study on political movements advocating family values in America versus the same in France. But since so much of the advocacy in America was focused on censorship it led to a great deal of research into that area of our laws.

My home city during lock down...
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/77/7f/b7/777fb7f402c6580f0aa4901728535f36.jpg

This is where I grew up and I can remember in the old days before we had progressive policies on pollution, we couldn't even see the mountains. Despite all the conservative bellyaching about liberal policies in California, the state's environment has improved dramatically since the 60's. Of course now, AGW is taking its toll... the consequence of sharing a planet with ignorant, selfish assholes.

The studies are indeed quite clear about the impact the pandemic has had on the environment. Here's a comparison of the Indian sub-continent before the pandemic and during the pandemic.
https://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/infographics/780xany/2020/jul/Figure-2.jpg

Those who oppose environmental regulations are running out of arguments and their numbers are dwindling. Ignorance just doesn't have much staying power in an educated democracy.

Trump and his supporters are the desperadoes of fading antiquity. The future belongs to progressives!

The very concept of a constitution was considered utopian when our founders (who were liberals in the Age of Enlightenment) fought to replace a monarchy with a republic. So absolutely... utopian ideals were infused into ALL our founding documents and the American Revolution itself became an inspiration for similar utopian quests such as the French Revolution.

American conservatives today have a similar effect on our republic that rust has on a set of gears. They get all over it and settle on the shapes they see, but they inhibit the motions that make it work.