Coreece

Of the remaining 37% of republicans, how many belong to the 29% that's unaffiliated? And you still have to leave room for those in that 63% that are still unaffiliated regardless of their religious views.

But the same thing could be said of of the unaffiliated, from classic liberal racists to conservative white supremacists and everything in between. They're not a homogeneous political group that's likely to rally around a common set of beliefs. On the other hand, the national conservative movement consists of classic liberals, reformist Muslims, Evangelicals, Catholics, mainline protestants, etc., and lead by an Orthodox Jew.

No, just illustrating out how utterly meaningless your post is. And again, if 29% are unaffiliated, how is that larger than the affiliated?

You're ok being recognized in a group that includes atheistic conservative white supremacists? And if 29% are religiously unaffiliated, what is the other 71%? Blue is not synonymous with the religiously unaffiliated.

I was thinking about the Alabama thing when I posted that, but totally forgot about the sharpie.

oxymoron They're scam artists, that's just what they want you to think!

Ya, back in June of last year when the daily average highs are in the 80s, so it's not that much of a stretch to imagine a forest fire in the summer, in Russia. But when I hear the president of the greatest country in the world (next to China now, apparently) talking about the destruction path of a hurricane through 6 states from Arkansas to Kentucky, I take notice!

like a butterfly in Brazil.

20 years maybe. Yes, the map from your link shows the average over a 20 year period, which was zero 0 for TN and KY. The other graph from your link shows that the total for TN and KY over a 60 year period was 30. On Friday alone there were 16. . . Damn you for putting me in this position.

Not like it's never happened before. https://www.ustornadoes.com/2012/12/01/u-s-tornadoes-the-month-of-december-by-the-numbers/ Oooh, I get to play alarmist! (downs a shot with dxm) From your article: In the last 48 hours alone there have been 36 tornadoes reported, 16 of which were in KT and TN. According to the other graph illustrating tornadoes by state, KT and TN had a combined total of about 30 tornadoes over that 60+ years, if I'm ready it correctly. BTW, it was Biden who called it a hurricane on TV last night. ; )

If deadly hurricanes ripping through the Midwest in December isn't a testament for climate change, the I don't know what is.

Well the natcon conference referenced in your link IS talking about that stuff. Even the author in your article said you're living in the 50s if you think America is going to return to christian dominance, and that the natcons are only a piece of a larger illiberal populist revolt that's strong and rising. Here's their menu for the next election. https://nationalconservatism.org/natcon-2-2021/conference-schedule/ You might have to widen your range of cards to play, otherwise you risk getting blinded off. They're banking on people getting hung up on just one of those issues. Hell, I'm sure there's even something in there for you: https://nationalconservatism.org/natcon-2-2021/presenters/ayaan-hirsi-ali/

Who cares, show how he's wrong, if you can. Address the content rather than instinctively attacking the shiny objects.

Wendy and Bill

Ok, so to sum it all up: Winsor is overstating the side effects and scaring the shit out of those whom did have to go to highschool, and nwt + the canadians are overreacting?

Whichever one best suits your narrative. . .

You never wondered what the ever growing "100 Billion Served" means? They might as well just change the sign to a bazillion and be done with it. . .my guess is french fries.

You do realize that it's just a trick to throw people off, then he comes back to kill everyone.

By luck; not by design. I'm afraid you might be right. Looking at the numbers, it's quite possible that Death has been getting cheated over the last 5-10 years. Given the substantial increase in the number of incidents lately, let's hope he doesn't collect on any equity that he may be owed. (apologies if that doesn't make sense, it's another poker concept) ETA: I just wanted to note that I'm referring to the last 5-10 years. I think the significant decline from the 90s is legit given the significant decline of all crime during that period. It appears school shootings seem to correlate with gun crime trends in general, at least from what I remember.

Unfortunately for me, the people that piss me off are also the ones I find most insightful here. I still highly value their input. I suppose I also like being "set off" in the sense of being stimulated, which can be either good or bad. Many here probably don't care, but it helps me to think of this from a poker mindset. I use a TAG style of play (tight aggressive) which in a general sense means I'm going to fold marginal yet playable starting hands and use those chips, along with an aggressive betting strategy to extract more value from premium hands at the top of my range. During play, if my holding has a positive expected value against a known opponents range of hands in any given situation, then it's profitable to continue the hand. If not than I must fold regardless of how bad I want to play, even if I really think I have him beat and want to get him back for check raising or excessive theft of my blinds. It's just not going to be profitable in the long run. So after all that we come to the obvious conclusion to just choose your battles wisely and limit ego/emotion. This is also a time management issue since I have a tendency of being over stimulated which then bleeds over into my personal/professional life either through a loss of time and/or production. So in this sense, those chips that I'm saving by folding marginal yet playable hands represents the time I could save my limiting unnecessary and petty posts, and using that time to create/relply to more substantive posts. So again, the obvious conclusion being quality/quantity - haste/waste.

Good grief, is that text book reactionary or what? If it makes you think it's healthy. If it makes you angry it is not. The decision to take an indefinite break from politics was mainly due to arguments with conservative friends and family. It just wasn't worth tainting those relationships, so no. When it comes to liberals, I agree with the heart of the cause, after all I come from a working class family in the middle of Detroit who was brainwashed with PBS as a child. I just loathe their technique.

Again, the fact that two people decided to have a duel over 200 years ago has ZERO relevance to someone unloading semi-auto weapons into kids who were just trying to go to school. But it is relevant to the post I was replying to about the intentions of the founding fathers. Hamilton's poor decisions regarding firearms in his personal life provide insight into the gun nut mentality of that time. If two men of that stature felt this was a reasonable solution, then who knows wtf they were thinking. While the number of deaths appear to have decreased, I'd agree that the upward trend over the last several years in the total number of incidents might be a better indicator of things to come.

Well I took over a year off so far from politics/news, so that's helped. Not sure if I can ever go back to that again. But whatever, happiness is a choice, right? I mean as long as you're not suffering too much, I suppose. Right, but I can already see that I'm still having trouble walking away. I mean I'm only a couple posts in and already snarkin' off. I see a reply and it's like fire in my bones. I honestly don't know why I care so much - it's not healthy.

How fucking disturbing is that? Especially love the part where it says, "The early 1980s saw only a few multi-victim school shootings." One of the things that immediately stood out to me was how the numbers for the 2000s were significantly lower than those from the 90s. So something's working, right? But again, the point here is that we have a vice president and a founding father, both of whom were supposedly intelligent, insightful leaders of the time, and these guys decide that the best way to solve their differences is by shooting at each other? Add to that the school shootings during the 1800s along with the acquittals, and it's easy to see that appealing to the intentions of the founding fathers and the mindset surrounding gun ownership at the time is a rather weak argument that gun law enthusiasts like to use. Btw, I was prompted to post here because this one hit close to home. My stepdaughter was to start school there Monday before the shooting, but her admission was delayed. Obviously we have some decisions to make. I want to send her elsewhere, but I can't help but to think that's just an overreaction. It might actually be safer now, and I don't think there have been any repeat occurrences at other schools, right?

Yes, the right wing tends to get frustrated and run away because they need to be reassured, not challenged. Or they go over the top, lose their cool and break the rules resulting in a time out. Because you know, civil discussion is for “cucks”. Making shit up and having civil discussions with your own strawmen because there are no conservatives around to bash is not only cucky, it's kooky. And btw, I highly doubt anyone in SC has been banned since the new point system was implemented.