Reply With Quote
Did you win or lose this one?
How are you marking it?
You didn't answer the question.
So how would you stop any other information from being released from any source?
Did you win or lose this one?
How are you marking it?
"Day by day" -John Rambo
I also like free rent in mental cavities.
Why would it ever be in bent on me to stop it?
"I write for Time Magazine and am interested in quantum entanglement, Alex. I also have no Fkn clue what X as a function of y even means."
Just airdrop into an algebra discussion anytime you want to feel as if you have corrected something.
If it were up to you, how would you stop any other information from being released from any source?
Right. Suddenly every mass shooter will be a Muslim Antifa member who owned a pizza restaurant where the Clintons ate.yeah, I’m sure the false flag nutjobs will act responsibly and reasonably if the shooter’s iden y is hidden.
Hah! Joke's on you.
They already are all those things!
The N.R.A. Lobbyist Behind Florida’s Pro-Gun Policies
Marion Hammer’s unique influence over legislators has produced laws that dramatically alter long-held American norms.
“I was talking to one of the Douglas students,” Daley said.
“His only words to me were ‘Do something.’
I had to tell him that I legally can’t do anything, because the governor could take away my job if I tried.”
Moskowitz turned to me. “That’s the legacy of Marion Hammer,” he said.
Hammer is the National Rifle Association’s Florida lobbyist.
At seventy-eight years old, she is nearing four decades as the most influential gun lobbyist in the United States.
Her policies have elevated Florida’s gun owners to a uniquely privileged status, and made the public carrying of firearms a fact of daily life in the state.
Daley was referring to a law that Hammer worked to enact in 2011, during Governor Rick Scott’s first year in office.
The statute punishes local officials who attempt to establish gun regulations stricter than those imposed at the state level.
Officials can be fined thousands of dollars and removed from office.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...M0MjEyMzM0OQS2
I suppose Hammer's laws and regs are responsible for a FL murderer like George Zimmerman walking free.
That's why research in this area needs to be done by agencies that track data over long periods of time. If it's not scientifically sound, then it carries very little value, IMO.
I already stated my opinion about the results of the last election, that doesn't mean there was no Russian interference, but I would also be curious to know what's the real impact of the alleged interference, and basically these alleged social manipulation tools.
Studies have shown they have ZERO impact.
Which studies, Chris?
Well, you've posted tweets from guys who retweeted Russian bot tweets, so they certainly got to you.
Explain your theory, and name the guys who retweeted Russian bot tweets and point me to those tweets. Also explain how they "got to me" when I already decided to vote for Trump a year before the election.
Cernovich and Posobiec to name two.
No one said they changed your vote, white Chris.
And if the agencies get data that correlates to behavior conservatives don't like, that agency is branded politically motivated. Just like climatologists are undermining their credibility because they gave us bad news. Scientists are all flaming Liberals, can't be trusted.
So easy and so tired... Some on this board just wear it to the bone. They can't handle the truth.
As as to your last paragraph, there is no doubt there was interference. I personally think it will be very difficult to assess the impact. Also, IMO, the impact did not significantly change the results. It was close. That's the take home fact, close. There was a very angry block that voted Trump. The significant part of his votes, (not the looney tunes 1/3 that stick by him) were people who responded to the have and have not theme and wealth discrepancy. This is also why Bernie gave Hillary fits. So in my mind, when the country is so evenly split, flip a coin. We have a real division and someone has to lead.
Most important is the absolute paranoid, unwillingness to investigate the extent of the interference so the public knows and the government responds with sanctions and isolating individuals who took part in taking money from Putin. This is very disturbing. Trump and the 1/3 think investigating interference delegitimizes their victory. The election is over. Trump IS president. Can Trump (&the1/3) possibly act like a president and understand the importance of free and fair elections?
( now the response is but,but, but... the US has played games in elections also... So the what; shame on us, stop it and let the public know what we have done, which we do know) Now, let Mueller et al investigate. And if it leads to further investigation of only Russians please continue. We need to know. Let the intelligence community give us the goods.
Last edited by pgardn; 02-24-2018 at 09:10 PM.
I wasn't even reading all that wall of text, just the "never saw it before I witnessed it" comment. That was priceless. I can see you're worked up though.
You mean like if I had omniscient control over all of the world?
I would have control over said sources. Problem solved.
The problem is "what would you do" is usually tied to "if you were..."
If I was in charge of all media (like in the land of Oz), I would avoid giving the shooter more airtime than the victims. I wouldn't give him any other than name and age.
In the absence of solid, scientific study, you have to take what you can get. You'll never know how the Russians affected the election but you can probably safely say they swayed some votes. You could pool a group of 200K people and ask everyone if the video games made them want to shoot other people IRL, they'd likely say no. How do you ever get that real data? Maybe it didn't, but if it swayed one in 10 million just enough to think "what would it take for me to ever do that?" then you put those people together and when said condition exists, you get what you got.
So you did not read the wall of text meant and directed towards rmt. We were discussing algebra, she suggested books I had heard about, and you responded. Yet you found my Yogism. But you did not read it. Sure thing.
How about:
I would have never foreseen these math difficulties until I witnessed it for myself and asked questions.
So I'm glad you got a laugh. Anyways, you should have just stopped there instead of carrying on.
x(y) = 5(y)+ y^2
When the parenthesis used mean two different things in the same equation I was enlightened as to why the student was having difficulty. I never detected this misuse on my own. And you, you showed bravado leading to a good humbling moment. So I enjoyed this and my own Yogy.
Last edited by pgardn; 02-24-2018 at 11:05 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions