Jump to content

RockwallJim

crowd sourced
  • Posts

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RockwallJim

  1. I didn't say that, but your generalization that republican voters are exclusively reaping the benefits of federal funding while subsequently voting against those just hasn't been proven... But let's play in your universe a minute, let's say that's true..that they ARE getting all this money, yet voting to push it away, shouldn't that be respected? That they desire to be self sufficient? So worst case scenario, in your universe is that republicans are currently getting handouts that they no longer want (so are voting against)? Sure I have, as much if not more than anybody else here.
  2. Thank you. it only took me 5-6 times to explain it to the class. I think many here are making assumptions based on a biases..not facts
  3. or maybe, just maybe the republican voters in that state DON'T want the Federal government involved in their state's activities, budgets, priorities, etc... is that possible?
  4. I think you're missing the point of my questions, so I'll ask again. 1. when we talk about federal funding to states as we are discussing here, is this money into the state government or individuals pockets. 2. if it's into individuals pockets how do you know it's republican voters pockets? (when they apply for assistance, do they have to claim a political party?)
  5. Are we sure that government funding is going into the pockets of the Republican voters themselves?
  6. Oh. A troll. So anybody who doesn’t agree with your world view 100% is a troll? Must be an interesting life you lead, blocking out anybody who doesn’t echo your world view
  7. Are you sure about that. If that was the case, why does he have such voter loyalty? Don't we keep hearing about his rock solid 'base' on tv?
  8. Interesting stats. Still searching for your point...I'm sure you're trying to make one.
  9. I'm pretty sure that map proved nothing. Right off the top I was able to discount 20% of the sample size as directly opposing the theory. clever.
  10. I sure do. Would you care to expand on which states you claim are proving your point and which states aren't?
  11. As opposed to the Democrat playbook of solving income inequality evidenced by what exactly?
  12. Question: is voter regret unique to Trump 2024 or has that happened with other elections in the past?
  13. I'm happy to meet / engage anybody on a spirited debate / exchange of ideas....I'm also fully prepared to take responsibility for having a comma in the wrong place or using a : when a ; should've been used. I'll also give extra effort to the affect vs effect usage, their vs there, your vs you're...I know these are all important things
  14. I'll consider myself warned. I've learned you can always tell when a person has nothing of consequence to add to the discussion if they do 1 of 3 things.. 1. grammar police, 2. swear, 3. ad hominem attacks. Pardon the pun, but the 2025 trump card is when they label somebody a Nazi. When they use that, it's because they have nothing more convincing to add.
  15. I contention, if you will, is that there is no correlation between the electoral votes of a state and whether or not that state is a net contributor to, or recipient of federal funds. That map was a sophomoric attempt to paint a group of people as being hypocrites so you can then discount their political beliefs. Nothing more. You win the spell check wars. Congratulations.
  16. Not what I asked. What I asked was if Christianity was a tenant of Nazism? i.e. was it endorsed by the political ideology? I've been called worse.
  17. Well, we can agree to disagree then. I think that map, at best, was an attempt to push a narrative that doesn't match reality...especially when taking into account (as you've stated) the razor thin margins of voting within each state. I think if you weighted each state's population (texas and florida being #2 & #3) you'd find that map doesn't really prove any theory at all...you know the whole correlation vs causation thing.
  18. First off, I haven't blathered once. I also don't think I ever brought up anybody voting for or against their interests. What I brought up was the reductive nature of that map and the fact it doesn't nearly present the 'gotcha moment' they thought it did. Which is why I asked what exactly the point of it was?
  19. Got it. So the idea is now we lump voters into a monolith on a state by state basis and project how, from behind our computers the 'why' of the way each person votes? Seems like a great idea.
  20. Ok, great. So now we are subdividing states by truly red, kinda red, kinda blue and truly blue? Are we also going to create a purple state group? It appears you are trying to now shift from a statistical conversation to a nuanced conversation.
  21. Interesting chart, although written with a very marginal grasp on facts or reality. Allow me to pick this apart point by point. Let's begin with "throngs of racist fascist christians". Are you under the impression that Nazism had christianity as a core tenant of that political movement?
  22. Even though on this map the 2 largest "electoral points to Trump States" are in the column with net dollars towards DC as were 3 others....for a total of 5 states.. while there was the exact same number, 5, of "electoral points to Harris States" that were net dollars from DC. Seems this map (to an intelligent person) displays nearly zero correlation. BUT NEVER LET FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A GOOD STORY, RIGHT?
  23. What is an intelligent person supposed to take from this map? I'm sure you're trying to make some point here, but I'm not sure exactly what it is?
  24. I'm here for it
Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...