Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 42541 - 42560 of total 45362 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Jun 5, 2014 - 10:48am PT
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy

Jun 5, 2014 - 10:40am PT
"both sides ran their share of nasty ads in 2012"

Yeah...except that this isn't even close to true.

Not that it matters to Kool-Aid guzzling Republidroids like Sketch, though.

Not even close to true?

Prove it.

I posted two sources on the issue.

Here's a graph from one



Prove me wrong.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jun 5, 2014 - 11:14am PT
Something I've not seen written much about, but which is significant.....57% of registered democratic voters in Ca are WOMEN.

Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jun 5, 2014 - 11:16am PT
Hillary will not whip Ted Cruz.....because they say he is not eligible.
Not only was he BORN in Canada, he CURRENTLY holds Canadian citizenship.
jammer

climber
Jun 5, 2014 - 01:06pm PT
Sketch wrote:

Neither you nor DerF have proven "Republicans Overall Spend Way More Money". I'd really like to see some numbers from 2008, which is where DerF challenged Dingus's statement about McCain.

You can move the goalposts on which kinds of negative ads are okay or not okay. It doesn't invalidate my claim.

Did you notice how I said this didn't matter, and only that you had failed to prove your case?

Case in point: The last graph you show lumps "contrast" and outright "negative" adds to get the "total negative ads" for each campaign. This is in and of itself a perversion. Not only is it not talking about actual total dollars spent on negative advertising, it is saying "contrast" ads and ad hominen attacks are the same kind of vile crap. I don't agree with this at all. So as I said, you have utterly, completely, miserably, failed to make your case whatsoever. At least you provided some "evidence".

Now, even if you could show that the total dollars spent by each party and it's affiliated cronies (such as the Kochtopus) were equivalent, you would still need to show that the nature of all the negative adds was the same, so you would need to show that it's not the case that republicans negative ads largely rely on ad hominen attacks whereas democrats "negative" adds largely rely on exposing republican hypocrisy. You have done absolutely none of this. You don't even appear to recognize that this argument has been made. Is this the same phenomenon which leads people, mostly republicans, to believe the world, or even America, provides equal opportunity to everyone in the face of massive amounts of contradictory evidence?
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Jun 5, 2014 - 01:44pm PT
what liberalism hath wrought:

http://www.adn.com/2014/06/04/3501674/king-cove-groups-sue-over-cold.html


why do libs hate native americans so much?


winston smith is dead
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Jun 5, 2014 - 01:47pm PT
Ken M wrote:Hillary will not whip Ted Cruz.....because they say he is not eligible.
Not only was he BORN in Canada, he CURRENTLY holds Canadian citizenship.



He wants to keep his socialize health care.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Jun 5, 2014 - 02:13pm PT
Ken, I think there must still be some absentee or provisional ballots to be counted in the race, because the Secretary of State's office is still listing it in its "close contest" category. Apparently, it is still possible that the general election will be between two Republicans, even though the three Democrats combined outpolled them, and the only other candidate in the race was a Green Party affiliate. It may even be between Swearingen and Yee. Swearingen (a moderate Republican) seems assured of one of the two spots, but Perez still has a bit of nervous waiting yet.

I think and hope that the greatest moderating factor will be where we have general elections where the two candidates are from the same party. In that circumstance, if the district is not as one-sided as, say, Alameda County, the candidate appealing to his or her party's hard-line fringe may well lose.

I also found it interesting that Chiang did so well. His confrontation with the Legislature over its dubious entitlement to compensation didn't hurt. What I found most interesting, though, was looking at the relative vote totals of Donnelly and Kashkari in overwhelmingly Democratic counties. In general, counties where the Democrats held large majorities did better for Donnelly. I don't know that this means that the Republicans became irrelevant there because they supported extremist candidates, or that lots of Democrats tried to game the system, as dirtbag honorably refused to do.

All in all, it was an interesting election.

John
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Jun 5, 2014 - 05:45pm PT
jammer

climber

Jun 5, 2014 - 01:06pm PT
Sketch wrote:

Neither you nor DerF have proven "Republicans Overall Spend Way More Money". I'd really like to see some numbers from 2008, which is where DerF challenged Dingus's statement about McCain.

You can move the goalposts on which kinds of negative ads are okay or not okay. It doesn't invalidate my claim.

Did you notice how I said this didn't matter, and only that you had failed to prove your case?

Case in point: The last graph you show lumps "contrast" and outright "negative" adds to get the "total negative ads" for each campaign. This is in and of itself a perversion. Not only is it not talking about actual total dollars spent on negative advertising, it is saying "contrast" ads and ad hominen attacks are the same kind of vile crap. I don't agree with this at all. So as I said, you have utterly, completely, miserably, failed to make your case whatsoever. At least you provided some "evidence".

Now, even if you could show that the total dollars spent by each party and it's affiliated cronies (such as the Kochtopus) were equivalent, you would still need to show that the nature of all the negative adds was the same, so you would need to show that it's not the case that republicans negative ads largely rely on ad hominen attacks whereas democrats "negative" adds largely rely on exposing republican hypocrisy. You have done absolutely none of this. You don't even appear to recognize that this argument has been made. Is this the same phenomenon which leads people, mostly republicans, to believe the world, or even America, provides equal opportunity to everyone in the face of massive amounts of contradictory evidence?

Yawn.

I failed to "prove my case"?

What are you referring to?

Earlier you wrote:
Sketch,

A) You are wrong about the Kochtopus. Very wrong. You must be a naive person. Seriously.

"wrong about the Kochtopus"?

I asked what you meant.

What were you talking about? Specifically?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jun 5, 2014 - 09:01pm PT
Sketch...Get checked for early onset..no seriously...rj
jammer

climber
Jun 6, 2014 - 08:59am PT
Sketch, ask and you shall recieve. What greedy, "spiritual", bigoted, stuck-in-1900-and/or-the-middle-ages-f*#ktards hath wrought:

http://kochcash.org/the-kochtopus/

Edited to add: that took literally < 30 sec. of internet searching. Try typing Kochtopus into ANY search engine and see what comes up...
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Jun 6, 2014 - 09:18am PT
jammer

climber

Jun 6, 2014 - 08:59am PT
Sketch, ask and you shall recieve. What greedy, "spiritual", bigoted, stuck-in-1900-and/or-the-middle-ages-f*#ktards hath wrought:

http://kochcash.org/the-kochtopus/

Edited to add: that took literally < 30 sec. of internet searching. Try typing Kochtopus into ANY search engine and see what comes up...

Are you really that stupid?

You said I was "wrong about the Kochtopus. Very wrong. You must be a naive person. Seriously."

Again, what did I say/post that "was wrong about the Kochtopus"?
jammer

climber
Jun 6, 2014 - 09:22am PT
Sketch, I know you are but what am I?





























































You implied that the Kochtopus did not exist. If you had something else to say, just sp-sp-sp-sp-sp-sp-spit it out son.
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Jun 6, 2014 - 09:50am PT
You implied that the Kochtopus did not exist.

I did?

Where?

Let's see the actual post.

Or are you just going to continue making stuff up?

We all play to our strengths.
jammer

climber
Jun 6, 2014 - 10:01am PT
Do you have any actual criticism, Sketch? If so, sp-sp-sp-spit it out. Come on, you have to have something besides schoolyard insults.

You asked what the Kochtopus was, specifically. I inferred from this that you are uninformed. I gave you a link, in fact the first informative looking one after typing "Kochtopus" into google and looking at the page for < 10 sec. Would you like another link? Or two or three, or four? Here you go:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/04/04/207816/kochtopus/

http://crooksandliars.com/2014/03/kochtopus-tentacles-hide-alphabet-soup

http://kochtopus.newsvine.com/

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2012/12/18/video_kochtopus_map_of_the_billionaire_koch_brothers_influence

So do you have something to say now?
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Jun 6, 2014 - 10:06am PT
Ah.

So Jammer is just a stupid troll. Unwilling to back up his words. Preferring cheap distractions.
jammer

climber
Jun 6, 2014 - 10:15am PT
Lol. What words have not been backed up? I'm truly curious...









































































I'm not going to pigeonhole you, so just spit out your argumnent/slant on reality. I'm dying to know...
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Jun 6, 2014 - 10:34am PT
jammer

climber

Jun 4, 2014 - 03:49pm PT
Sketch,

A) You are wrong about the Kochtopus. Very wrong. You must be a naive person. Seriously.

You implied that the Kochtopus did not exist.

You asked what the Kochtopus was, specifically

I asked (repeatedly) what you meant about me being wrong about Koch.

Here's the first time a brought it up. It's obvious I know who they are, dumbass.

You say "You are wrong about the Kochtopus".

What are you talking about? Specifically?

I'm not defending the Koch Brothers. Even if I supported their agenda, I still don't want individuals having so much influence. Citizens United needs to be overturned. Better yet, Congress needs to pass an amendment defining and restricting all campaign finance.


You're full of sh!t. A lying little turd.
jammer

climber
Jun 6, 2014 - 11:12am PT
You are simply wrong about how much financial influence the Kochtopus expends. That was the original issue. While no one can get an exact figure on this, this hardly discounts that we can get an idea that your estimate of 900 million is likely far off the mark. Just look into the Kochtopus. Trust me, if you think they play with only millions politically, your out of your mind.

Now, seriously, do you have anything besides pathetic insults based on a cherry picking of information? Any opinions or anything you would like to express? Seems like you are just here trying to be an internet tough-guy and troll, attempting to wave your inter-dick about as you valiantly slay "liberals" with a lack of discourse and a rambling of misinformation mixed in with strategic bouts of more or less unexplained butt-hurt. It's laughable.
jammer

climber
Jun 6, 2014 - 11:33am PT
Yawn.

I failed to "prove my case"?

What are you referring to?

You point about how much each party spends. I infer from your ramblings that you seem to think they spend about the same, except when Romney outspent Obama in 2012. You waved your inter-dick around to "DerF" aka Dr. F and called him a "pussy" among other things, claiming you won this argument through a lack of discourse and misinformation. Now you are strategically butt-hurt, and I am not really sure why. However, I infer from your ramblings that it is because you claim I have either misread you, misrepresented some unexpressed and unexplained view of yours, or otherwise tried to pigeonhole you.
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Jun 6, 2014 - 11:43am PT
jammer

climber

Jun 6, 2014 - 11:12am PT
You are simply wrong about how much financial influence the Kochtopus expends. That was the original issue. While no one can get an exact figure on this, this hardly discounts that we can get an idea that your estimate of 900 million is likely far off the mark. Just look into the Kochtopus. Trust me, if you think they play with only millions politically, your out of your mind.

Whaddaya know. Jammer finally caught on. I only had to spell it out five times. What a quick study you are.

Turns our you're still full of sh#t. And still making up lies about me. You, like Dr. F., offer nothing to back up your claims. Maybe you just live in a liberal echo chamber, where no one challenges your extreme claims.

And I never estimated they spent 900 billion (Edit: I meant million... 900 million. So embarrassing). That was Dr. F's figure.

Get it right, dumbass.

Now, seriously, do you have anything besides pathetic insults based on a cherry picking of information? Any opinions or anything you would like to express? Seems like you are just here trying to be an internet tough-guy and troll, attempting to wave your inter-dick about as you valiantly slay "liberals" with a lack of discourse and a rambling of misinformation mixed in with strategic bouts of more or less unexplained butt-hurt. It's laughable.

Look at you... after having your lies spelled out for you... standing your ground... looking stupid in the process.... you offer up hollow bluster.

Nice projection.
Messages 42541 - 42560 of total 45362 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews