wesw wrote:polls of one thousand people can t even predict one county, much less a country.
Which just proves that you are as dumbfuck ignorant about statistics as you are on every other subject about which you flap your gums.
no one polls trumpanzees
Trumpanzees don't have telephones? Perhaps not those who live in swamps, but otherwise...
I picked up my kid from school the other day, and the pick up trucks had keep America great banners flying......
And remind us again how your state voted in the last election? Democrats won every state wide race, Democratic majorities in state house and senate, might have been a Republican or two elected as dog catcher.
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose
They want to take the vote away from all poorer people as they did during Jim Crow. It is not entirely a partisan thing. It is certain that a large percentage of poor GOP voters will be prevented from voting by the b-s ID requirements and closing polling places and they appear not to care. They want the plutocrats to govern again as they did before the civil rights movement.
In response to Brown v. Board of education Prince Edward County Va. closed all of its public schools for 5 years, 1959-1964, and opened private schools for whites who could pay. All black students and some whites were effected. Some moved in with relatives in other counties &c but many only got some rudimentary education through churches &c.
Poll taxes were cumulative and became rapidly impassible barriers to vote for all poor people. If you had not voted for 10 years you had to pay back taxes, in cash. Share croppers only got paid once a year and so cash was hard to come by. People scraping to buy food could ill afford it.
Partisanship is not the end for the GOP. It is the means to the end. The end is to quash democracy altogether.
rubato wrote:They want to take the vote away from all poorer people as they did during Jim Crow. It is not entirely a partisan thing. It is certain that a large percentage of poor GOP voters will be prevented from voting by the b-s ID requirements and closing polling places and they appear not to care. They want the plutocrats to govern again as they did before the civil rights movement.
yeah, let's make American great again; go back to the way it supposed to be. Senators selected, not elected by the ignorant masses. Voters stand up on their hind legs in public and announce to the whole world who their voting for. This secret ballot stuff is all a conspiracy from furiners from half way around the world any way. Do it the way our God-feerin white Christian founding fathers said to do it--voters were only white males who owned real property.
if you saw the press conference, a couple of days ago, when 85 women, from all parties and of all persuasions, who had worked with and or hung with kavanaugh, throughout all stages of his life, from high schools to high courts, you saw the result of the midterm elections.
the democrats have lost the middle.
trump may have lost the middle too.
maybe, maybe not.
I still see the GOP holding both houses.
I still see the swamp further draining.
glug glug glug....
....and right about Christmas or thanksgiving, I think that the snow globe with be shaken vigorously again.
And I guess you conveniently missed, a couple of days later, when details of the allegations became public, that almost all of those women were backing away from him. Because no one likes the thought of someone trying to rape what might have been their daughter. Except maybe you.
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose
Burning Petard wrote:When CNN tried to contact these 85 women individually, most of them were just hired shills, or the personal information about them was faked.
snailgate.
Colour me completely unsurprised.
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose
Burning Petard wrote:When CNN tried to contact these 85 women individually, most of them were just hired shills, or the personal information about them was faked.
snailgate.
SG, do you have a link for that?
The CNN story I found about the press conference doesn't say anything about it:
Burning Petard wrote:yeah, let's make American great again; go back to the way it supposed to be. Senators selected, not elected by the ignorant masses. Voters stand up on their hind legs in public and announce to the whole world who their voting for. This secret ballot stuff is all a conspiracy from furiners from half way around the world any way. Do it the way our God-feerin white Christian founding fathers said to do it--voters were only white males who owned real property.
snailgate
Honestly...at this point, I would no longer oppose a return to only property owners voting.
That’s BS; an IQ test would be a much better measure of civic ability than property ownership. Any moronic knuckledragger can inherit land, while many highly intelligent people choose the freedom of NOT owning property.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan
BoSoxGal wrote:That’s BS; an IQ test would be a much better measure of civic ability than property ownership. Any moronic knuckledragger can inherit land, while many highly intelligent people choose the freedom of NOT owning property.
Hear, hear!! And while we're at it, how about a mandatory IQ test for anybody running for any public office higher than city alderman or its equivalent? -"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?
The "more than 85" women who appeared at the press conference are not to be confused with the 65 women who co-signed a letter of support. Although there may be overlap, the two "events" are separate. There is, according to this article, a mistaken allegation in circulation that the 65 women have walked-back their letter of support. I don't find anything about the "more than 85" at the press conference. FWIW:
Women are running away from their support of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in droves — at least, that’s what a few misleading tweets that circulated on Monday would have you believe. But in reality, of the 65 women who signed a letter supporting his nomination, none have publicly withdrawn their support. Several, in contrast, have reaffirmed it.
Politico writer Daniel Lippman raised questions when he tweeted that of the 65 women who initially signed a letter in support of Kavanaugh, “only TWO said they still stood by him.” (That number was later updated to five.) According to his article, however, that number only actually reflected the women who had responded positively to requests for comment. He indicated in the tweet that he had contacted “over two dozen,” most of whom did not respond.
.@AndrewRestuccia and I called many of Kavanaugh’s 65 female HS acquittances who signed a letter supporting him. After his accuser came out on Sunday, only TWO said they still stood by him. More than two dozen didn’t respond, and two declined to comment. https://t.co/Q7ux6pmzrf
— Daniel Lippman (@dlippman) September 17, 2018
And the story quickly took off, being framed in a similar manner by others.
A day after Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser came forward, only 2 women are still standing by him https://t.co/yhQgxV3jMV
— Shareblue Media (@Shareblue) September 17, 2018
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
My data point about the 85 came from a public television program viewed the evening of Sept 23. It was a group of tv talking heads from various networks (nobody from Fox) sitting around a table being questioned by a talking head from PBS about 'headline' stories of the week. The person from CNN made the remark about not being able to verify these female supporters of the judicial nominee.
Well, I have CNN on a fair bit and I haven't heard a single report about it, and another search still didn't turn up anything, so I'm going to give this one a Snopes rating of "Unproven"...
