Huh? Can This Really Be Happening in the U.S.A.?!

[Deleted]

      This is truly shocking, people...

      A new (Ipsos) poll published in the Daily Beast today showed that 43% of Republicans in the U.S. today believe that Trump should have the authority to shut down the free press-- in direct violation of the First Amendment!!

      YGBFKM... 

      Obviously, Trump's gas-lighting and scape-goating of the media is "working."

      What's next-- Storm Troopers in red hats beating up minorities and sending the "liberals" to Dachau?


www.thedailybeast.com/new-poll-43-of-republicans-want-to-give-trump-the-power-to-shut-down-media?via=twitter_page

[Walter]

Those numbers, though disturbing, can be viewed through another prism.
The Republican Party numbers are shrinking.
They represent something like only 26% of eligible voters and that number shrinks daily.
So, 43% of 26% = 11.1% of Americans, or roughly one in ten.

...and since Trump's biggest constituency is people without a college degree, it stands to reason that a big group of those under-educated voters didn't ace high school civics.

dailycaller.com/2016/01/11/29-percent-of-voters-identify-with-democratic-party/

[Deleted]

Aug 7, 2018 14:25:37 GMT -5 Walter said:

Those numbers, though disturbing, can be viewed through another prism.
The Republican Party numbers are shrinking.
They represent something like only 26% of eligible voters and that number shrinks daily.
So, 43% of 26% = 11.1% of Americans, or roughly one in ten.

...and since Trump's biggest constituency is people without a college degree, it stands to reason that a big group of those under-educated voters didn't ace high school civics.

dailycaller.com/2016/01/11/29-percent-of-voters-identify-with-democratic-party/

So if I didn't go to or finish college, all of sudden I didn't do well in high school CIVICS?

That is an inflammatory, untrue statement without FACTS to back it up, and you have just violated your own rule.

1 strike on Walter.

You're gonna get kicked off your own section!

[Walter]

Aug 7, 2018 16:51:53 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Aug 7, 2018 14:25:37 GMT -5 Walter said:

Those numbers, though disturbing, can be viewed through another prism.
The Republican Party numbers are shrinking.
They represent something like only 26% of eligible voters and that number shrinks daily.
So, 43% of 26% = 11.1% of Americans, or roughly one in ten.

...and since Trump's biggest constituency is people without a college degree, it stands to reason that a big group of those under-educated voters didn't ace high school civics.

dailycaller.com/2016/01/11/29-percent-of-voters-identify-with-democratic-party/

So if I didn't go to or finish college, all of sudden I didn't do well in high school CIVICS?

That is an inflammatory, untrue statement without FACTS to back it up, and you have just violated your own rule.

1 strike on Walter.

You're gonna get kicked off your own section!

Unless you're claiming that those who do not have a college degree somehow made up the top 10% of students in their HS civics classes, I'm going to stand by the comment. Doesn't mean some didn't do well in the subject, but "a big group" didn't, and their ignorance of the First Amendment as displayed in this story stands as testament to that assertion.

[Deleted]

Aug 7, 2018 17:19:04 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 7, 2018 16:51:53 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

So if I didn't go to or finish college, all of sudden I didn't do well in high school CIVICS?

That is an inflammatory, untrue statement without FACTS to back it up, and you have just violated your own rule.

1 strike on Walter.

You're gonna get kicked off your own section!

Unless you're claiming that those who do not have a college degree somehow made up the top 10% of students in their HS civics classes, I'm going to stand by the comment. Doesn't mean some didn't do well in the subject, but "a big group" didn't, and their ignorance of the First Amendment as displayed in this story stands as testament to that assertion.

Nope.  That dog don't hunt.  You posted an inflammatory statement with NO PROOF.  NO LINK, in violation of your own rule.  Now you refuse to admit you are wrong.

2 strikes on Walt.

Speaking of ignorance of the First amendment, tell that to all the lieberals how are attacking conservatives simply for being conservative.  Who protested against Milo speaking?  And I can post a link if I need to.

[Walter]

Aug 7, 2018 17:23:50 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Aug 7, 2018 17:19:04 GMT -5 Walter said:

Unless you're claiming that those who do not have a college degree somehow made up the top 10% of students in their HS civics classes, I'm going to stand by the comment. Doesn't mean some didn't do well in the subject, but "a big group" didn't, and their ignorance of the First Amendment as displayed in this story stands as testament to that assertion.

Nope.  That dog don't hunt.  You posted an inflammatory statement with NO PROOF.  NO LINK, in violation of your own rule.  Now you refuse to admit you are wrong.

2 strikes on Walt.

Speaking of ignorance of the First amendment, tell that to all the lieberals how are attacking conservatives simply for being conservative.  Who protested against Milo speaking?  And I can post a link if I need to.

Also, let me clear up a misunderstanding about the rules here.
You are free to make up anything you want here. If you want to claim that Santa Claus is your brother in law or that liberals kidnapped the Easter Bunny, go for it.
The rule is this about links.

If you claim Joe or BillyBob or anyone else said something, then you need to provide a link to verify that Joe or BB actually said it.
Hence, had I written that "a study by the Port Allen Public Library confirmed that conservatives do poorly in HS civics classes, THEN I'd need to provide a link.
But if I want to assert that conservatives do poorly in civics, that's my opinion and is acceptable. Your response to that should then be, "From where did you get that idea?", to which I would respond, "I didn't get it anywhere. It's what I think to be true, and to paraphrase the Eagles, 'I could be wrong but I'm not...no I'm not.'"

[Deleted]

Aug 7, 2018 18:03:24 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 7, 2018 17:23:50 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Nope.  That dog don't hunt.  You posted an inflammatory statement with NO PROOF.  NO LINK, in violation of your own rule.  Now you refuse to admit you are wrong.

2 strikes on Walt.

Speaking of ignorance of the First amendment, tell that to all the lieberals how are attacking conservatives simply for being conservative.  Who protested against Milo speaking?  And I can post a link if I need to.

Also, let me clear up a misunderstanding about the rules here.
You are free to make up anything you want here. If you want to claim that Santa Claus is your brother in law or that liberals kidnapped the Easter Bunny, go for it.
The rule is this about links.

If you claim Joe or BillyBob or anyone else said something, then you need to provide a link to verify that Joe or BB actually said it.
Hence, had I written that "a study by the Port Allen Public Library confirmed that conservatives do poorly in HS civics classes, THEN I'd need to provide a link.
But if just I want to assert that conservatives do poorly in civics, that's my opinion and is acceptable. Your response to that should then be, "From where did you get that idea?", to which I would respond, "I didn't get it anywhere. It's what I think to be true, and to paraphrase the Eagles, 'I could be wrong but I'm not...no I'm not.'"

So your rule is that inflammatory bullshit that is totally fabricated is allowed here.

That means this place is no different from the "normal" politics section.   Truth does not matter here, either.

Gotcha.

Thanks for clearing up that the new boss is nothing but the old boss.

[AlaCowboy]

Aug 7, 2018 14:25:37 GMT -5 Walter said:

Those numbers, though disturbing, can be viewed through another prism.
The Republican Party numbers are shrinking.
They represent something like only 26% of eligible voters and that number shrinks daily.
So, 43% of 26% = 11.1% of Americans, or roughly one in ten.

...and since Trump's biggest constituency is people without a college degree, it stands to reason that a big group of those under-educated voters didn't ace high school civics.

dailycaller.com/2016/01/11/29-percent-of-voters-identify-with-democratic-party/

So those Left Wing Liberal Socialist Democrats that protest that Conservatives should not be allowed to speak their opinions are in that under-educated group as well, even with their college educations. Right?

[Walter]

Aug 7, 2018 18:09:00 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Aug 7, 2018 18:03:24 GMT -5 Walter said:

Also, let me clear up a misunderstanding about the rules here.
You are free to make up anything you want here. If you want to claim that Santa Claus is your brother in law or that liberals kidnapped the Easter Bunny, go for it.
The rule is this about links.

If you claim Joe or BillyBob or anyone else said something, then you need to provide a link to verify that Joe or BB actually said it.
Hence, had I written that "a study by the Port Allen Public Library confirmed that conservatives do poorly in HS civics classes, THEN I'd need to provide a link.
But if just I want to assert that conservatives do poorly in civics, that's my opinion and is acceptable. Your response to that should then be, "From where did you get that idea?", to which I would respond, "I didn't get it anywhere. It's what I think to be true, and to paraphrase the Eagles, 'I could be wrong but I'm not...no I'm not.'"

So your rule is that inflammatory bullshit that is totally fabricated is allowed here.

That means this place is no different from the "normal" politics section.   Truth does not matter here, either.

Gotcha.

Thanks for clearing up that the new boss is nothing but the old boss.

This board wasn't set up to be different about ideas, thoughts or beliefs.
It was set up to be different in reference, tone and demeanor.

[Walter]

Aug 7, 2018 18:29:41 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Aug 7, 2018 14:25:37 GMT -5 Walter said:

Those numbers, though disturbing, can be viewed through another prism.
The Republican Party numbers are shrinking.
They represent something like only 26% of eligible voters and that number shrinks daily.
So, 43% of 26% = 11.1% of Americans, or roughly one in ten.

...and since Trump's biggest constituency is people without a college degree, it stands to reason that a big group of those under-educated voters didn't ace high school civics.

dailycaller.com/2016/01/11/29-percent-of-voters-identify-with-democratic-party/

So those Left Wing Liberal Socialist Democrats that protest that Conservatives should not be allowed to speak their opinions are in that under-educated group as well, even with their college educations. Right?

To an extent, yes.

[Deleted]

Aug 7, 2018 18:33:19 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 7, 2018 18:09:00 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

So your rule is that inflammatory bullshit that is totally fabricated is allowed here.

That means this place is no different from the "normal" politics section.   Truth does not matter here, either.

Gotcha.

Thanks for clearing up that the new boss is nothing but the old boss.

This board wasn't set up to be different about ideas, thoughts or beliefs.
It was set up to be different in reference, tone and demeanor.

So how is your inflammatory tone with unsubstantiated BULLSHIT "different?"

You personally attacked Trump supporters and you know it.

Strike 3 for Walt.

How many more strikes do you get?

[Walter]

Aug 7, 2018 18:39:16 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Aug 7, 2018 18:33:19 GMT -5 Walter said:

This board wasn't set up to be different about ideas, thoughts or beliefs.
It was set up to be different in reference, tone and demeanor.

So how is your inflammatory tone with unsubstantiated BULLSHIT "different?"

You personally attacked Trump supporters and you know it.

Strike 3 for Walt.

How many more strikes do you get?

If you are unclear on the rules, go back and read them again.

[Deleted]

Aug 7, 2018 19:23:13 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 7, 2018 18:39:16 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

So how is your inflammatory tone with unsubstantiated BULLSHIT "different?"

You personally attacked Trump supporters and you know it.

Strike 3 for Walt.

How many more strikes do you get?

If you are unclear on the rules, go back and read them again.

I can't.  They move faster than a Sandy Koufax curve ball.

Not to mention you have already proved "do as I SAY, not as I DO."

So are you telling me it's OK for me to say "Lieberals are blind, socialist fools" here?

[Walter]

Aug 7, 2018 19:29:28 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Aug 7, 2018 19:23:13 GMT -5 Walter said:

If you are unclear on the rules, go back and read them again.

I can't.  They move faster than a Sandy Koufax curve ball.

Not to mention you have already proved "do as I SAY, not as I DO."

So are you telling me it's OK for me to say "Lieberals are blind, socialist fools" here?

Yes. You can say anything you want about them, or anyone else, so long as you are not gratuitously vulgar about it.
And it is hoped that, while others will disagree with you here, they will respect that opinion without making any derogatory comments about you personally in response.

I'm trying to keep this place out of the 6th grade schoolyard area of a bad PeeWee Herman movie.

[Deleted]

Aug 7, 2018 19:48:46 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 7, 2018 19:29:28 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

I can't.  They move faster than a Sandy Koufax curve ball.

Not to mention you have already proved "do as I SAY, not as I DO."

So are you telling me it's OK for me to say "Lieberals are blind, socialist fools" here?

Yes. You can say anything you want about them, or anyone else, so long as you are not gratuitously vulgar about it.
And it is hoped that, while others will disagree with you here, they will respect that opinion without making any derogatory comments about you personally in response.

I'm trying to keep this place out of the 6th grade schoolyard area of a bad PeeWee Herman movie.

If you say so ...........