Tara Reade is a person who exists

[Metaphor]

It seem to me that you are woefully ignorant of the USA.

For example,
1)Mr. Trump did not get the majority of actual votes cast in the election,
2) Roughly 39% of the voting age population did not vote in 2016,
3) the Republican and Democratic Party since 1869 have radically changed, so it is rather stupid to use such a time frame, and
4) among elected Republicans, there is sufficient diversity - Rhinos and never Trumpers are just 2 examples with the GOP, and
5) among elected Democrats, there is sufficient diversity - blue dog Democrats and "progressives" are just 2 examples.

All of which indicate that the proportion of the voting population who are Trumpers is significantly less that 40% of the population.

To rational adults, the world is a complex place that does not fit nicely into a comic-book view of black and white.

Metaphor ‘thinks’ he’s getting some dig at me.

Toni, you claimed Republicans are without conscience. That must be very frightening for you, since Republicans have, in the past, held the presidency and the House, and more or less about as often as Democrats have.

 

[Metaphor]

Minor detail: So far in 2020, on average only 30% identify as Repugs:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

Nevertheless, the president has been either a Republican or Democrat since 1869, no? And sometimes Republicans have a majority in the House and sometimes Democrats do.

It does seem to me that, since up to half and sometimes more of the population has voted Republican, Toni should be in daily torment for how large a percentage of the population is wretchedly wicked and shameless.

It seems to me that Metaphor really should learn a lot more about US history and US political history before he attempts to speculate on what my emotional state must be. Even though it’s long been obvious that imagining my torment seems to comprise far too large a portion of his raison d’etre. Quel dommage!

It seems to me you should point out a single error I made before dismissing me.

EDIT: I perhaps was projecting onto Toni. You see, even though Toni was not able to refute any of my facts, what I was imagining was my own state. I was imagining what the world must feel like if I believed that 45-50% of the people in it were without a moral centre. That world would be deeply frightening to me, and I imagined the same would be for anybody who believed such a thing.

 

[ZiprHead]

It seems to me that Metaphor really should learn a lot more about US history and US political history before he attempts to speculate on what my emotional state must be. Even though it’s long been obvious that imagining my torment seems to comprise far too large a portion of his raison d’etre. Quel dommage!

It seems to me you should point out a single error I made before dismissing me.

EDIT: I perhaps was projecting onto Toni. You see, even though Toni was not able to refute any of my facts, what I was imagining was my own state. I was imagining what the world must feel like if I believed that 45-50% of the people in it were without a moral centre. That world would be deeply frightening to me, and I imagined the same would be for anybody who believed such a thing.

Well, you did say this which is just plain bullshit.

I'm trying to imagine what it must be like to live in a country where this were actually true of 45-50% of the population as you imagine.

Trump was elected by a little more than a quarter of eligible voters

 

[Metaphor]

Well, you did say this which is just plain bullshit.

I'm trying to imagine what it must be like to live in a country where this were actually true of 45-50% of the population as you imagine.

Trump was elected by a little more than a quarter of eligible voters

EDIT: I was going to say something very nasty, and I didn't.

For those who appear confused about what Toni said, I will quote it again, this time with more context and in bold:

The Democrats like to think of ourselves as morally better than the Republicans who like to pretend the same because they sit in church pews. The thing is, if we call out the Republicans, they don't care. They don't have a sufficient sense of decency or any moral compass or sense of shame.

Toni did not say 'Trump supporters' or 'Trump voters'. Of course, this hasn't stopped you and laughing dog pretending she did say it, which she didn't. I know she didn't say it, because I quoted what she said, and it's up there in the quote.

According to Gallup, the latest Trump approval rating is 49%.

Now, perhaps, if Toni had spoken only of Trump supporters the way ZiprHead and laughing dog wrongly imagined she had, this approval rating would be evidence that in fact half the country is as bereft of moral centre as Toni imagines. And my estimate of the percentage of the country who are morally anchorless would be exactly in line.


But, I sincerely doubt Toni or laughing dog or ZiprHead will apologise for their misconstrual. It's what I've come to expect from them.

 

[Toni]

It seems to me that Metaphor really should learn a lot more about US history and US political history before he attempts to speculate on what my emotional state must be. Even though it’s long been obvious that imagining my torment seems to comprise far too large a portion of his raison d’etre. Quel dommage!

It seems to me you should point out a single error I made before dismissing me.

EDIT: I perhaps was projecting onto Toni. You see, even though Toni was not able to refute any of my facts, what I was imagining was my own state. I was imagining what the world must feel like if I believed that 45-50% of the people in it were without a moral centre. That world would be deeply frightening to me, and I imagined the same would be for anybody who believed such a thing.

Metaphor, I am not interested in providing you with an education on the US political system or a history of the various political parties even if I had the time. There are numerous online resources. If you wish to make thoughtful, informed comments about the Democratic or Republican parties or even the basic way the US government works, how US elections are run, etc. you should infirm yourself. It differs significantly from Australia’s.

Or ask specific questions. Don’t expect others to source and digest broad concepts for you.

You may not be aware but this is a holiday weekend in the US and personally I have more to do than to monitor this thread to see what you want me to respond to so you can insult me again. It’s boring and pointless.

I’m not sure why you want so much attention from me since you have so little respect for me.

And knock off the personal attacks.

My apologies to the rest of the participants for this sidebar.

 

[Metaphor]

It seems to me that Metaphor really should learn a lot more about US history and US political history before he attempts to speculate on what my emotional state must be. Even though it’s long been obvious that imagining my torment seems to comprise far too large a portion of his raison d’etre. Quel dommage!

It seems to me you should point out a single error I made before dismissing me.

EDIT: I perhaps was projecting onto Toni. You see, even though Toni was not able to refute any of my facts, what I was imagining was my own state. I was imagining what the world must feel like if I believed that 45-50% of the people in it were without a moral centre. That world would be deeply frightening to me, and I imagined the same would be for anybody who believed such a thing.

Metaphor, I am not interested in providing you with an education on the US political system or a history of the various political parties even if I had the time. There are numerous online resources. If you wish to make thoughtful, informed comments about the Democratic or Republican parties or even the basic way the US government works, how US elections are run, etc. you should infirm yourself. It differs significantly from Australia’s.

Or ask specific questions. Don’t expect others to source and digest broad concepts for you.

You may not be aware but this is a holiday weekend in the US and personally I have more to do than to monitor this thread to see what you want me to respond to so you can insult me again. It’s boring and pointless.

I’m not sure why you want so much attention from me since you have so little respect for me.

And knock off the personal attacks.

My apologies to the rest of the participants for this sidebar.

Point out an error of fact that I've made and I'll accept the correction.

But your vague nonsense telling me to 'educate myself' is self-serving bullshit.

You said Republicans were without shame or a moral centre. Instead of owning this comment - frankly a fucking shocking claim that shows your absolute moral certainty and utter callousness for an outgroup that constitutes a huge swathe of the population - you pretend that I made errors of fact.

But, of course, I didn't make any errors of fact. I simply pointed out Republicans had held the popular vote and a majority in the House at various times throughout history, and the people who enabled that majority must have been the people who voted Republican.

No doubt you and your coterie of cheerleaders will continue to deny the facts. I hope your safe space serves you well, but I doubt it will.

 

[Toni]

Metaphor, I am not interested in providing you with an education on the US political system or a history of the various political parties even if I had the time. There are numerous online resources. If you wish to make thoughtful, informed comments about the Democratic or Republican parties or even the basic way the US government works, how US elections are run, etc. you should infirm yourself. It differs significantly from Australia’s.

Or ask specific questions. Don’t expect others to source and digest broad concepts for you.

You may not be aware but this is a holiday weekend in the US and personally I have more to do than to monitor this thread to see what you want me to respond to so you can insult me again. It’s boring and pointless.

I’m not sure why you want so much attention from me since you have so little respect for me.

And knock off the personal attacks.

My apologies to the rest of the participants for this sidebar.

Point out an error of fact that I've made and I'll accept the correction.

But your vague nonsense telling me to 'educate myself' is self-serving bullshit.

You said Republicans were without shame or a moral centre. Instead of owning this comment - frankly a fucking shocking claim that shows your absolute moral certainty and utter callousness for an outgroup that constitutes a huge swathe of the population - you pretend that I made errors of fact.

But, of course, I didn't make any errors of fact. I simply pointed out Republicans had held the popular vote and a majority in the House at various times throughout history, and the people who enabled that majority must have been the people who voted Republican.

No doubt you and your coterie of cheerleaders will continue to deny the facts. I hope your safe space serves you well, but I doubt it will.

I cannot begin to point out errors as you seem to believe that the Republican party and the Democratic party have been stagnant since their beginnings which isn't at all true even for the last 30 years, much less the last 150 years.

You seem to believe that the US is evenly divided in numbers between Republicans and Democrats but that's not accurate either.

You seem to believe that a general statement that I make about my personal take on the current GOP and Democratic parties must be false if it is not accurate across time from the inception of these two parties--which was not simultaneous, btw.

Please get over your personal obsession with me.

 

[laughing dog]

I did not claim he did, nor did anything I say imply he did.

Nor did I say you did. Please read more carefully.

Nevertheless, Trump did obtan 46% of the popular vote, and that is certainly in line with my 45-50% range.

Sigh, which is not 45% to 50% of the voting public. Which means that significantly less than 45% to 50% of the voting public are Republicans or people you think Toni might fear. Duh.

But, go on with your list. I want to see what else you will claim I misunderstand when all you've demonstrated is that you are desperate to show me up.

No desperation is needed - your own words show yourself up. Your claim about the portion of the electorate Toni should be afraid of was and is based on illogical reasoning and ignorance of US politics.

And if those people were forced to vote, they would probably vote for one of the major parties.

They did not vote for a variety of reasons: don't care, don't like any of the candidates, cannot get to the polls, etc.... The "if they were forced to vote, they would probably.." is stupid handwaved wishful thinking.

The time frame is largely irrelevant. The point is that both parties have held majorities.

Which is really irrelevant.

You are greatly confused. Toni spoke about Republicans, not "Trumpers". I talked about both presidential election and the House.

I believe if one reads in context, she meant Trumpers. Of course, unlike you, I admit I may be wrong about that.

You might try to remember that before you post ridiculous garbage like your list which rebuts arguments I never made or implied.

It is either the height of narcissism or blatant stupidity to claim I was rebutting arguments you never made or implied. I simply pointed out that your claim she should be afraid of a large portion of the electorate is wrong for the reasons I gave.

 

[Toni]

I believe if one reads in context, she meant Trumpers. Of course, unlike you, I admit I may be wrong about that.

At this point in time, I think that that is a distinction without a a difference: There is no meaningful difference between a Trumper and a Republican, with precious few exceptions. The GOP has whole heartedly stood behind Trump no matter what his excesses, no matter what laws he breaks or is teetering on breaking. Even those Republicans who disavowed Trump and his agenda during the 2016 elections are kissing his boots now and have been, although I do believe that McConnell thinks he is the puppetmaster.

Is that the historic Republican Party? Of course not. But it's what we've been sliding towards since Reagan, helped along by the concerted efforts to underfund and undermine public education in the US since that era.

 

[Metaphor]

I cannot begin to point out errors as you seem to believe that the Republican party and the Democratic party have been stagnant since their beginnings

Did not say it and I don't believe it.

which isn't at all true even for the last 30 years, much less the last 150 years.

You seem to believe that the US is evenly divided in numbers between Republicans and Democrats but that's not accurate either.

I didn't say it and I don't believe it, but I did consult a Gallup poll, showing roughly 30% for Republicans, 30% Democrats, 40% independents. But of course independent voters often vote for Democrats or Republicans.

For example, in the last election, Trump won 46.1% of the popular vote, Clinton won 48.2% of the popular vote, which means over 94% of the country voted for either a Democrat or a Republican.

You seem to believe that a general statement that I make about my personal take on the current GOP and Democratic parties must be false if it is not accurate across time from the inception of these two parties--which was not simultaneous, btw.

No: you said Republicans were without shame and a moral centre.

Let's forget everything before 2016.

30% of the country is party-affiliated Republican. I assume every single one of these 30% must be the shameless, morality-free Republicans you spoke of.

46.1% of the voting public voted for Trump. Now, these people are not necessarily 'Republicans', but it seems to me that from ZiprHead's, laughing dog's, and your own reaction, it is the Trump voting public that are the actual shameless, morality-free people you were talking about. So is it this 46.1%?

Trump currently has a 49% approval rating. Of course, not everybody who approves of Trump voted for him, and not everybody who voted for him approves of him now. Is it this 49% who is shameless and morality-free?

I'll admit I'm not sure I see much substantive difference in whether 30% of the country is shameless and morality free, and roughly 15-20% of the country can be reliably and repeatedly persuaded to join them, or 45-50% is taken as the number of shameless and morality free public.

But, let's take the most generous possible interpretation for your position. 30% of the American public is shameless and morality-free. If I believed that, I'd be pretty upset. But I understand you to be more resilient than I.

 

[laughing dog]

I did not claim he did, nor did anything I say imply he did.

I did not claim you did.

Nevertheless, Trump did obtan 46% of the popular vote, and that is certainly in line with my 45-50% range.

Non. You wrote "

"I'm trying to imagine what it must be like to live in a country where this were actually true of 45-50% of the population as you imagine. "

46% of the popular vote does not translate into either 46% of the population or even 46% of the electorate. Because the population includes people who are not eligible to vote. And roughly 61% of those eligible to vote did not. Which means Trump did not get even close to "45% to 50%" of the population.

But, go on with your list. I want to see what else you will claim I misunderstand when all you've demonstrated is that you are desperate to show me up.

There is no desperation - your own words do the job so well.

And if those people were forced to vote, they would probably vote for one of the major parties.

People do not vote for a variety of reasons including that they do not like any of the candidates. Handwaving "if they were forced to vote, they would probably____" is pure wishful thinking which has not basis in fact.

The time frame is largely irrelevant. The point is that both parties have held majorities.

Only someone who is ignorant of US politics would make that claim. The Republican and Democratic party have switched positions on many issues since 1869. I strongly suspect that Toni would say the Republican party had a conscience in 1860s+ until 1930s or so.

More importantly, since the discussion is about the current state of affairs, bringing the GOP from over 150 years ago was pretty pointless of you.

You are greatly confused. Toni spoke about Republicans, not "Trumpers". I talked about both presidential election and the House.

I think in context, it was obvious Toni meant "Trumpers" have no conscience. But, I could be wrong.

You might try to remember that before you post ridiculous garbage like your list which rebuts arguments I never made or implied.

To those who practice minimal reading comprehension, it was obvious I was not rebutting any argument you made. I pointed out that your claim of fact of "45-50% of the population" is mind boggling false. And I gave reasons why and why your snipe about your "imagining" was not based on the realities of current US politics.

Or to put in terms you seem to understand - your snipe was ridiculous garbage.

 

[Metaphor]

Nor did I say you did. Please read more carefully.

Responding to my post with a list of things implies you are correcting something that I posted that was wrong.

Sigh, which is not 45% to 50% of the voting public.

Well, yes it is. 45 < 46.1 < 50

Unless by 'the voting public' you mean to include people who didn't vote. I was taught in primary school that words ending in 'ing' were 'doing' words. Verbs, I think. Yes.

Which means that significantly less than 45% to 50% of the voting public are Republicans or people you think Toni might fear. Duh.

Yes, I've since made a post revising my estimates to the most generous possible interpretation of Toni's sweeping generalisation to 30% of the 'voting' public.

(I'm a proud member of the 'vigorously exercising' public).

They did not vote for a variety of reasons: don't care, don't like any of the candidates, cannot get to the polls, etc.... The "if they were forced to vote, they would probably.." is stupid handwaved wishful thinking.

Of course it is not. In fact, every American election cycle is dominated by one or both sides wondering how they can 'activate' the vote of their side. That is, there are real people - real Democrats and real Republicans - who would vote Democrat or Republican if they had the opportunity or could be motivated succesfully.

I believe if one reads in context, she meant Trumpers. Of course, unlike you, I admit I may be wrong about that.

Well, she ought be more careful about what she writes. Certainly, I am not afforded any grace whatsoever if I write something that could have an 'alternative reading'.

But, if she meant 'Trumpers', perhaps she could have used the word and defined the term. In any case, I think that makes the situation rather worse for Toni, as depending on how you define it, there are more 'Trumpers' than Republicans.

I simply pointed out that your claim she should be afraid of a large portion of the electorate is wrong for the reasons I gave.

I'd be afraid if I thought 30% of the population were shameless and without a moral centre.

 

[Metaphor]

I did not claim you did.
Non. You wrote "

"I'm trying to imagine what it must be like to live in a country where this were actually true of 45-50% of the population as you imagine. "

46% of the popular vote does not translate into either 46% of the population or even 46% of the electorate. Because the population includes people who are not eligible to vote. And roughly 61% of those eligible to vote did not. Which means Trump did not get even close to "45% to 50%" of the population.

Ah, I see. So when I say 'the population' in regards to a political discussion about Republicans, you think I mean to include children.

 

[angelo]

The thing is, if we call out the Republicans, they don't care. They don't have a sufficient sense of decency or any moral compass or sense of shame.

I'm trying to imagine what it must be like to live in a country where this were actually true of 45-50% of the population as you imagine.

It must be a frightening frightening world out there for you.

Minor detail: So far in 2020, on average only 30% identify as Repugs:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

WTF does that prove? 1% is going to cause a landslide? Is that your point. All I see is a roughly 50/50 split between the Cons and Dems. Unless the majority of independents are secret Dem supporters, that poll proves nothing.

 

[laughing dog]

Responding to my post with a list of things implies you are correcting something that I posted that was wrong.

Yes, it was list of reasons why your claim of fact was wrong. A fact is not an argument.

Well, yes it is. 45 < 46.1 < 50

Unless by 'the voting public' you mean to include people who didn't vote. I was taught in primary school that words ending in 'ing' were 'doing' words. Verbs, I think. Yes.

Your clam of face was about the population not the voting public.

Yes, I've since made a post revising my estimates to the most generous possible interpretation of Toni's sweeping generalisation to 30% of the 'voting' public.

Your estimates are crapola. The US census estimates that 64% of the eligible population is registered to vote. So the proportion of the voting population who voted for Trump in the last election is 18% ( = proportion of registered eligible voters x proportion of registered eligible voters who voted x proportion of votes Trump received = 0.64 x 0.61 = 0.46).

(I'm a proud member of the 'vigorously exercising' public).

Of course it is not. In fact, every American election cycle is dominated by one or both sides wondering how they can 'activate' the vote of their side. That is, there are real people - real Democrats and real Republicans - who would vote Democrat or Republican if they had the opportunity or could be motivated succesfully.

Nice story bro and totally beside the point for two reasons. First "ifs" don't count. Second, you incorectly assume that someone who votes for a Republican is a Republican

I believe if one reads in context, she meant Trumpers. Of course, unlike you, I admit I may be wrong about that.

Well, she ought be more careful about what she writes. Certainly, I am not afforded any grace whatsoever if I write something that could have an 'alternative reading'.

You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

But, if she meant 'Trumpers', perhaps she could have used the word and defined the term. In any case, I think that makes the situation rather worse for Toni, as depending on how you define it, there are more 'Trumpers' than Republicans.

I'd be afraid if I thought 30% of the population were shameless and without a moral centre.

Ignoring your number is off by almost a factor of 1.5 to 2 and that there are Republicans who oppose Trump (i.e. have a conscience), projection is form of narcissism, not analysis. I wonder what Ms.Thunberg thinks of that cowardly standard,

Ah, I see. So when I say 'the population' in regards to a political discussion about Republicans, you think I mean to include children.

Population includes those who are eligible to vote and those who are not eligible to vote (children and non-citizens). I think words have meaning. I think pedants who routinely crucify people (mostly women) for allegedly insufficiently worded statements should hold themselves up to the same standards. I think pedants should be consistent with the use of context in interpretation of posts instead of refusing to use context when savaging and sniping the observations of others while clinging to context when called out on their bonehead claims of fact.

 

[Toni]

Ignoring your number is off by almost a factor of 1.5 to 2 and that there are Republicans who oppose Trump (i.e. have a conscience), projection is form of narcissism, not analysis.

In the face of the pandemic, yes, there are some scant few Republicans who are actually speaking out against Trump--on that issue alone. They tend to be silent when it comes to border walls, children in cages, raping the environment, screwing over students, etc. except to give full throated support for Trump's policies.

Certainly there are those who affiliate themselves with the GOP who oppose Trump on this issue or that or perhaps, a small handful who oppose him in broader range. Some have publicly announced that they have left the GOP over Trump. But these are such a small minority that it seems to me that the GOP is now the Party of Trump--and I am not alone in this assessment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...trumps-republican-party-is-not-party-lincoln/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...ave-gop-future-editorials-debates/3979356002/

https://freebeacon.com/columns/the-party-of-trump/

https://spectator.org/welcome-to-the-party-of-trump/

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-party-not-republican-party-1468758


Sure, there are Never Trumpers but may I remind you that Lindsay Grahams has been happy to lick Trump's boots--and he is not at all alone in the ranks of GOP who vehemently opposed Trump.......right up to the swearing in ceremony.

 

[Metaphor]

Yes, it was list of reasons why your claim of fact was wrong.

No. It was a list of facts you claim contradicted my own. They did not, for reasons I've already explained.

Your clam of face was about the population not the voting public.

It might surprise you to learn that the voting public is a population.

Your estimates are crapola. The US census estimates that 64% of the eligible population is registered to vote. So the proportion of the voting population who voted for Trump in the last election is 18% ( = proportion of registered eligible voters x proportion of registered eligible voters who voted x proportion of votes Trump received = 0.64 x 0.61 = 0.46).

Once again you are wrongly equating 'Republicans' with 'the percentage of the adult population who voted for Trump in 2016'.

But even if I entertain your delusion that when Toni wrote 'Republicans' contrasted to Democrats, she actually meant "Trumpers", who is a Trumper? Is it the roughly 49% of the adult population right now that approves of Trump? That seems to me a good a population as any to call "Trumpers".

Nice story bro and totally beside the point for two reasons. First "ifs" don't count. Second, you incorectly assume that someone who votes for a Republican is a Republican

I see. So, some people who voted for Trump are not Republicans and they're not the Republicans Toni was talking about.

I wonder how she tells the difference.

Ignoring your number is off by almost a factor of 1.5 to 2 and that there are Republicans who oppose Trump (i.e. have a conscience), projection is form of narcissism, not analysis.

Projection is a kind of empathy. Sometimes human beings imagine what it's like for somebody else by imagining what it would be like as their own experience, since our own experience is ultimately all we ever have access to.

I wonder what Ms.Thunberg thinks of that cowardly standard,

???

Population includes those who are eligible to vote and those who are not eligible to vote (children and non-citizens).

That's one kind of population. sure. But so is the population of the world, or the universe, or the population of the local library knitting club.

Hell, why didn't you simply say 7 billion people didn't vote for Trump and therefore Toni does not need to worry.

I think words have meaning. I think pedants who routinely crucify people (mostly women) for allegedly insufficiently worded statements should hold themselves up to the same standards. I think pedants should be consistent with the use of context in interpretation of posts instead of refusing to use context when savaging and sniping the observations of others while clinging to context when called out on their bonehead claims of fact.

Sure Jan.

 

[laughing dog]

No. It was a list of facts you claim contradicted my own. They did not, for reasons I've already explained.

Non, you are mistaken on all counts. Your fact was wrong.

It might surprise you to learn that the voting public is a population.

Your desperation is pathetic. You used the term "population" not "voting public". Words have meaning.

Once again you are wrongly equating 'Republicans' with 'the percentage of the adult population who voted for Trump in 2016'.

I was following your lead by adjusting your "fact" to reflect your own words. Dude, you are the one who used pulled out the proportion of voters who voted for Trump as Republicans in the first place. I simply made the proper adjustments.

Projection is a kind of empathy. Sometimes human beings imagine what it's like for somebody else by imagining what it would be like as their own experience, since our own experience is ultimately all we ever have access to.

Wondering what it is like and projecting it are different activities. In this case, narcissism is the appropriate description IMO.

That's one kind of population. sure. But so is the population of the world, or the universe, or the population of the local library knitting club.

Hell, why didn't you simply say 7 billion people didn't vote for Trump and therefore Toni does not need to worry.

Babbling nonsense is your MO, not mine.

Your "fact" was wrong. It was wrong with the normal definition of population. It was more off if one uses the eligible voting public as the "population." Face it. Life goes on and your stupid attempts at justification will probably continue as well. Ta Ta, bro.

 

[Metaphor]

Non, you are mistaken on all counts. Your fact was wrong.

Sure Jan.

Your desperation is pathetic. You used the term "population" not "voting public". Words have meaning.

You bet they do. Ask any person with a passing understanding of statistics what "population" means.

I was following your lead by adjusting your "fact" to reflect your own words. Dude, you are the one who used pulled out the proportion of voters who voted for Trump as Republicans in the first place. I simply made the proper adjustments.

No. You brought up the number of people who voted for Trump in the first place, not me. I did not equate 'Republican' with 'voted for Trump in 2016'. That's one of the mistakes you made.

Wondering what it is like and projecting it are different activities. In this case, narcissism is the appropriate description IMO.

Sure hun, I'm a narcissist.

Babbling nonsense is your MO, not mine.

For a university professor to not even understand what a population is, is worrying.

Your "fact" was wrong. It was wrong with the normal definition of population.

Yes, it's true that 7 billion people did not vote for Trump.

It was more off if one uses the eligible voting public as the "population." Face it. Life goes on and your stupid attempts at justification will probably continue as well. Ta Ta, bro.

Oh, I see. Now it's the 'eligible' voting public, not 'the voting public'. Why not include children? I mean, the context of the discussion is obviously meaningless to you, where you imagine 'Republicans' means 'Trumpers', and you imagine the 45-50% estimate, which was discussed specifically in terms of election of presidents and members of the House, was actually something about the entire population of the US and/or possibly earth, and maybe including people who are now dead and people yet to be born.

My goodness I feel almost sorry for you if Trump is re-elected. Since his approval rating is actually higher at the moment than Obama's was at the same time during his presidency, it's a distinct possibility. Perhaps the sheer number of Republicans Trumpers might send you into a paroxysm of rage and despair at the immorality of half the electorate.

 

[fromderinside]

Since about 50-55% of eligible voters actually vote in US general elections, they are suggestive of general apathy among those enfranchised. If you have a better club to wield, do so Metaphor

​Another thing. It's been established that not only doe Tara exist it's been shown she has documented sketchy history.

I think 720 posts should be enough.

Swing away factless ones.