***Official H&F LC Thread***
A valid strategy for getting ripped imo.
(From http://extrafabulouscomics.com/, kyleb's (RIP) favorite web comic)
Hey guys. What's up?
How does that even make sense? So if he had just not done anything it would have been just as good? It's just not an internally consistent point. Obviously him doing something, even late, has to be better than doing nothing at all.
No, it didn't. Maybe it did to you, but to the people who care about the border, Biden opening the floodgates by rescinding Trump's EOs and then closing them years later merited him zero credit. Ask around and see how many conservatives credit Biden with anything on the border. And, no, I don't owe you a research paper to tell you that we didn't like the bloated border bill. It's not my fault you take everything you see on MSNBC as gospel.
Similarly, I don't care if you believe California is tougher on shoplifting than Texas. If that's what you want to believe, go for it. I won't stop you. Just know that plenty of us voted for law and order on Nov. 5th.
Lack of education/intelligence correlates with lots of other things and it's possible that dumb people may have reason to vote for Trump because of those other things. In that case, it's not really a problem. On the other hand, it may be a problem because if you're dumb, you might unintentionally be voting against your self-interest (as judged by a reasonable observer, obviously the stupid person would not realize it himself).
I find this interesting because as an outsider, if you claim that more intelligent people vote for Kamala, then why did the college educated men split 50/50? This is an important fact to think about.
It implies that there is no correlation between education/intelligence and who you vote for. If you claim that dumb people vote for Trump, and you only look at college educated voters, then this implies that college educated men are dumber than college educated women.
What could account for the 50/50 split in college educated men when the split in college educated women was 62/38?
If the claim was true for more intelligent people vote for Kamala then the men should have also split 62/38.
It is possible that the more educated women voted for Kamala, not because they were more intelligent but because Kamala's policies on abortion and student loan forgiveness were more important to those women?
In all complicated problems there is never one cause (intelligence) creating all of the effect. There are always many, many forces/causes affecting people's ultimate decision.
Just me trying to figure out how and why you guys vote the way you do.
No, it didn't. Maybe it did to you, but to the people who care about the border, Biden opening the floodgates by rescinding Trump's EOs and then closing them years later merited him zero credit. Ask around and see how many conservatives credit Biden with anything on the border.
LOL. You can't possibly saying these two things are the same.
1. Biden rescinds Trump's EOs and does nothing.
2. Biden rescinds Trump's EOs and then puts it back in place or otherwise undoes it.
Remember, we're looking at this from your perspective. I dislike Biden's border policy for difference reasons. I'm just accepting your version of of how it went down. But if you think these things are exactly the same, based on everything else you've written, that completely tracks.
And, no, I don't owe you a research paper to tell you that we didn't like the bloated border bill. It's not my fault you take everything you see on MSNBC as gospel.
I don't watch MSNBC. Maybe a clip someone posts now and then. But don't let that stop your imagination from running wild. What else would you base your beliefs on? Facts?
No one is asking for a research paper. How about a couple of sources to substantiate a single thing you're saying? It's not hard. It takes seconds. For someone who "deals in facts" this seems awfully hard for you.
Similarly, I don't care if you believe California is tougher on shoplifting than Texas. If that's what you want to believe, go for it. I won't stop you. Just know that plenty of us voted for law and order on Nov. 5th.
More excuses. Zero actual facts posted. A+ Excellent work.
I'm beginning to wonder if "deals in facts" means what you thinks it means. Not a lot of dealing going on here.
I don't know much on this topic or how much of an effect sexism plays in that split so I looked up a recent UN Study.
The research checked biases around seven indicators by asking whether or not men make better political leaders; women and men have the same rights; university is more important for men than women; men should have more rights to a job than women; men make better business executives; physical violence by a partner is ever justified; and, finally, whether or not women should be granted full reproductive rights.
According to the findings, published today as part of the Gender Social Norms Index (pdf, p. 8), only 14% of women and 10% of men are free of bias against women.
Astonishing but there is not much difference between men and women. 86% of women are biased against women and 90% of men are also biased against women.
I guess that means 86% and 90% of us are dumb. =(
I don't know much on this topic or how much of an effect sexism plays in that split so I looked up a recent UN Study.
Yes, there sure is a lot of sexism out there!
However, I'm not sure how much that stuff applies to Presidential candidates. It's very easy for people to think you shouldn't beat a woman or a woman should be able to go to university just like men, but trusting a woman with the highest position in the land is just too much.
Also it probably depends on the populations you ask. Lots of other developed countries have had women presidents or equivalents. That reflects different attitudes and arguably shapes attitudes.
Do you have the link to the full study handy? I think if we separated out the "business executive" part that might be the most relevant. But even that isn't quite the same. I've been in orgs who have an endless supply of worthless VPs of various things. I'm sure they would describe themselves as executives. They have very little power and do very little of value.
I guess that means 86% and 90% of us are dumb.
Well, it's not binary. There are degrees there is smarter and less smart, dumber and less dumb. A person who is sexist and can't add is dumber than a person who is sexist and can do arithmetic.
I just picked the study at the top of my search.
There was probably a less blunt way to put that, but I'm trying to be brief. Also, blunt is often better and less confusing. There was a very specific part of the discussion that each bit was referring to. Maybe I went overboard with that last bit, but if you've been following along, it seems that some are having trouble understanding fairly obvious things.
Also, Emoken, who I was responding to, is someone who I think like to get right to the point (as do I). So that seemed like the best way
Melk,
I think one of us (and it could be me!) is misunderstanding what feels was saying there.
I like Trump, simple as.
You're going to get so tired of winning Melk. You're going to be rich. Your neighborhood will be safe. CHYna will implode. It's going to be wonderful.
Someone please explain to me why Americans believe that trump presidency=higher probability of world war iii. Given his track record of avoiding armed conflict and the democratic establishment being incredibly war hungry, I don't get it. Is there something deeper happening or is it as simple as TDS?
I think the latter, "trump bad. war bad. therefore trump like war. he dumb man, therefore he start ww3. my party good guys, we no do war". His foreign policy was relatively isolationist and he followe
Turns out it's not a Trump presidency that increases the chances, it was just him getting elected and current lame duck period getting wild. Biden just OK'd long distance missile attacks. So WWIII might be starting before Trump even assumes office.
Ok couldn't really make it through everything but Norwegians and their infinite wealth fund should stop pretending to know anything about America and melk very quickly entered the "it's not happening but it's a good think that it is" with respect to inflation, crime, etc. Lol. "show me the data" like we don't go shopping or live in the world.
Anyway, it's gonna be fine bros. Life is gonna be great. Set some PRs. Give more than you get.
Kamala said people should vote for her because she's a woman. (She didn't lean on it at hard as Hillary, but she still pushed for that.) Trump never said anyone should vote for him because he's a man. Which one is the sexist?
Kamala clearly focused on appealing to women. Trump's positions appealed more to the needs and concerns of men. People voted their interests. LOL at saying the divide proves sexism.
Wow. Hegseth. Gaetz. Kennedy. And now Dr Oz.
He is definitely a genius, no way he cheated to get into Upenn. His niece is lying fosho.
Popcorn.gif
Wow, former CEO of WWE nominated for secretary of education.
So unreal yet so awesome. MOAR popcorn.
I find this interesting because as an outsider, if you claim that more intelligent people vote for Kamala, then why did the college educated men split 50/50? This is an important fact to think about.
It implies that there is no correlation between education/intelligence and who you vote for. If you claim that dumb people vote for Trump, and you only look at college educated voters, then this implies that college educated men are dumber than college educated women.
What could account for the
Didn't trump win or come close to winning the married women vote? Or maybe just married white women?
Short term economic self interest, not perceived deficits in intelligence/information, motivate most (not all) voting decisions. There are exceptions certainly, but working class whites voting Trump is not among these exceptions. People are considerably less able to vote in their best self interest over a longer time horizon, however.
tangentially related
This is the type of reform the US needs. Trump is not nearly radical enough.
In the intro, lex says he wants to do similar interviews with Xi Jinping and Putin. I'm gonna lol my ass off when old boomer white people call him a traitor for giving these people a platform.
Look dude, those things aren't the same. If you want to reduce immigration one of those should be better than another.
Kamala said people should vote for her because she's a woman. (She didn't lean on it at hard as Hillary, but she still pushed for that.) Trump never said anyone should vote for him because he's a man. Which one is the sexist?
Kamala clearly focused on appealing to women. Trump's positions appealed more to the needs and concerns of men. People voted their interests.
Oh, now Kamala is the sexist and Trump is the feminist (or at least not sexist)? Soulman, how can you not be entertained!
LOL at saying the divide proves sexism.
Of course, I didn't say that. But you can't read, can you?
Ok couldn't really make it through everything but Norwegians and their infinite wealth fund should stop pretending to know anything about America and melk very quickly entered the "it's not happening but it's a good think that it is" with respect to inflation, crime, etc.
Ah, lord of the squat, you disappoint me greatly. Where did you get the "good thing that it is" part from? Quote function is pretty easy to use.
I don't think crime is good. I don't think excessive inflation is good. I do have different thoughts on immigration policy, tho. I'll give you that.
To be clear, there is inflation. It is lower than it used to be. There hasn't been deflation. That is very difficult to achieve without other bad things happening economically.
Crime is bad. Crime is going down. I provided some data on this. Sorry for the great news!
Lol. "show me the data" like we don't go shopping or live in the world.
Man, kc, this gives me a sad. Aren't you like an engineer also? It's crazy that the ultimate kryptonite for you Trump slappies is "Do you have any evidence for that?" No one is asking for a facking research paper or whatever Rich Muny is rambling on about. You're on a computer connected to the facking internet. Finding like a couple of links to support whatever you're saying should be trivially easy. And if it isn't, you might want to wonder why.
Anyway, it's gonna be fine bros. Life is gonna be great. Set some PRs. Give more than you get.
Life is gonna be fine for all of us posting here. No argument there.
Since you popped by, I'm curious: Modi? Awesome or WOAT? I assume you have thoughts.
Look dude, those things aren't the same. If you want to reduce immigration one of those should be better than another.
No, a bad bill is not an improvement. It would just saddle us with all the negative provisions of the bill. Besides, notice how Biden was fully capable of taking effective action but chose not to until he had to do something with the election coming? We didn't need the crappy bill. We needed action. We didn't get it until the last minute. People who mind aren't misinformed.
Oh, now Kamala is the sexist and Trump is the feminist (or at least not sexist)? Soulman, how can you not be entertained!
Now you're getting it.
Of course, I didn't say that. But you can't read, can you?
Actually, that is what you said.
But, back to the point of your initial graphic. The recent reduction in border crossings is not the salient data point, really. It's just a political talking point. And, as I said, it shows that Biden could have done something years ago and didn't, which works against him and Kamala. The actual point? The total number of illegals who crossed. People who voted on that basis are not misinformed. They've paid plenty of attention to how we've been impacted by the flood of illegals. Too bad you lack the critical thinking skills to see that.
Same for inflation in that Biden wants credit because prices are going up less rapidly than they were before. LOL at thinking people are misinformed on how much they spend.
And, same for crime. You keep crying about cherry-picked data sets, as if legacy media don't parrot the Democrat talking points Biden sends them in the form of White House press releases. But, there are also plenty of
showing some crime going up. We also see blue cities and states clearly not stopping shoplifting and other crimes. Telling people not to believe what they see is such a leftist thing to say. You also sound foolish saying California is tougher on shoplifting than Texas and other red states. The voters sure didn't buy it.
The people who don't believe the stock market is close to an all-time high? They clearly aren't investors, so it's not an important issue to them. It's not misinformation...they could easily check the market if they cared to. Besides, it's only +9 Trump, when the general population was almost +2 Trump. That may not even be a statistically significant difference.
But, keep living in fantasy land, where you believe everyone was just misinformed.
