Crime Rates In Liberal Cities Shockingly Higher Than In Conservative Cities

beenthere said:

Sorry NoDrama, I'm not sure I buying that.

The overwhelming majority of violent crimes are committed in larger cities (100,000+)
And it just so happens that the overwhelming majority of larger cities are left leaning democrat.
This is not my opinion, it's a fact.

Click to expand...

So let's say you are correct in your assumption. Based on your pattern of political discourse, you are in favor of making these "larger democrat cities" worse, by not providing healthcare to those who need it, buy defunding welfare to those who need it, take away minimum wage to those who need it, the list goes on.

What you propose is to make these larger cities worse.

Seems like in the end, you are trying to destroy the country while the liberals and Democrats are trying to improve it.

That's very unpatriotic of you. And a tad racist.

#justsayin

see4 said:

But that is not what the numbers are showing, when considering ALL factors, including population density [number of people per square mile]. And when researching this, we should consider looking at pre/post redistricting in many of these states. Specifically midwest states.

Click to expand...

When considering ALL factors (which is what they did, instead of ONLY relying on GUN crimes like someone might) the most liberal cities also have the most crime, they might also have the most trees or the most dogs too, but that's not the point.

althor said:

Memphis is a Democratic city in a Republican state.
Of course, the rest of the state is pretty nice, Memphis is Memphis.

Click to expand...

I lived in Memphis for a time, wonderful city, had some of the greatest years of my life there.

see4 said:

So let's say you are correct in your assumption. Based on your pattern of political discourse, you are in favor of making these "larger democrat cities" worse, by not providing healthcare to those who need it, buy defunding welfare to those who need it, take away minimum wage to those who need it, the list goes on.

What you propose is to make these larger cities worse.

Seems like in the end, you are trying to destroy the country while the liberals and Democrats are trying to improve it.

That's very unpatriotic of you. And a tad racist.

#justsayin

Click to expand...

Why do you think it would make things worse for them? Why wouldn't it better them by making them take charge of their own lives instead of relying on daddy gubbermint to dictate them their livelihood?

see4 said:

I'm looking at several places in Gilbert. A great town.

Let's look at numbers as a whole, shall we?

States with the lowest gun voilence & crimes as follows:
Hawaii, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Iowa, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Maine, Nebraska.
Oddly enough, 9 of the 10 listed are liberal states.

State with the highest gun violence & crimes as follows:
Georgia, Arkansas, Missouri, New Mexico, South Carolina, Mississippi, Arizona, Alabama, Alaska, Lousiana
Oddly enough, 10 of the 10 listed are conservative states.

And interestingly enough, the OP did not cite population density as a factor, which would correct the skewed poll he is representing. Yet another lie from the OP and the right.

#justsayin

Click to expand...

gilbert is a quiet little part of town, kinda boring and a little stuffy. ahwatukee or south scottsdale or north tempe is a little more lively.

and population density is a huge factor, i figured a picture of gilbert vesus san francisco might drive home that point to some of the retards like OP.

let's try again:

lubbock, texas



baltimore, md

see4 said:

So let's say you are correct in your assumption. Based on your pattern of political discourse, you are in favor of making these "larger democrat cities" worse, by not providing healthcare to those who need it, buy defunding welfare to those who need it, take away minimum wage to those who need it, the list goes on.

What you propose is to make these larger cities worse.

Seems like in the end, you are trying to destroy the country while the liberals and Democrats are trying to improve it.

That's very unpatriotic of you. And a tad racist.

#justsayin

Click to expand...

Wow, a tad racist, really.
I've only mentioned higher crime rates are statistically in large cities, never said a word about who was committing them.
Ya might want to look in the mirror, you are suggesting only non whites are the culprits.

And instead of finding out why democrat leaning large cities are so prone to violent crimes and trying to prevent it, you want to put a band-aid on it and give them some more free stuff, have you ever considered that there could be a correlation between the two?

see4 said:

So let's say you are correct in your assumption. Based on your pattern of political discourse, you are in favor of making these "larger democrat cities" worse, by not providing healthcare to those who need it, buy defunding welfare to those who need it, take away minimum wage to those who need it, the list goes on.

What you propose is to make these larger cities worse.

Seems like in the end, you are trying to destroy the country while the liberals and Democrats are trying to improve it.

That's very unpatriotic of you. And a tad racist.

#justsayin

Click to expand...

We've learned from rehab and observation that the more we do for someone the less they do for themselves.* We're told to not feed animals at wildlife reserves because they'll become dependent on people for food. These truths are generally accepted universally.

Could you at least entertain the possibility that your methods have had the opposite effect you guys thought it would? Doing more of what you are doing will only make it worse.

The people who disagree with you think your policies are damaging our country. We think your ideas are shown over and over to not work but we keep hearing you say MOAR!! We think you are misguided and also unpatriotic. In our view you are changing what works and doubling down on what doesn't. We also think you know this deep down and that's why you have to resort to name calling and the race card.

I think what would be most productive would be to have a discussion with some data and studies and try to convince each other where we are wrong. Economics and sociology are very gray and I think that's what makes it fun to argue those topics.

I think what's least productive is to call you guys racist, so I won't until you pull that shit. You seem very close minded and almost OCD about pub hatred, it's not healthy man.

Here's a fact: correlation does not imply causation.

When the revolution begins, it will be in the cities with the most underemployed.

abandonconflict said:

Here's a fact: correlation does not imply causation.

When the revolution begins, it will be in the cities with the most underemployed.

Click to expand...

Do you think it will be the most underemployed or the most unemployed? Before the revolution I believe we'll see small scale riots in the heavily unionized cities that have to lay off and down size. Especially if the private sector unions join in the protest in a highly unemployed region. Scab work will get you killed in Detroit, but it may come a time where it's so bad, the scab gets sympathy, then it's on.

UncleBuck said:

gilbert is a quiet little part of town, kinda boring and a little stuffy. ahwatukee or south scottsdale or north tempe is a little more lively.

and population density is a huge factor, i figured a picture of gilbert vesus san francisco might drive home that point to some of the retards like OP.

let's try again:

lubbock, texas

Click to expand...

Conservative Colorado Springs: Population: 430,000, 5 violent crimes/100,000 residents



Liberal Flint Michigan: Population 100,000, 24 violent crimes/100,000 residents


Colorado Spring has four times the population than the liberal POS Flint Michigan yet Flint has four times the violent crime rate.

Not holding up to well for ya, is it?

I would say the unemployed are underemployed.

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.

beenthere said:

Wow, a tad racist, really.
I've only mentioned higher crime rates are statistically in large cities, never said a word about who was committing them.
Ya might want to look in the mirror, you are suggesting only non whites are the culprits.

And instead of finding out why democrat leaning large cities are so prone to violent crimes and trying to prevent it, you want to put a band-aid on it and give them some more free stuff, have you ever considered that there could be a correlation between the two?

Click to expand...

There you go assuming again. No, personally I believe we should reform welfare, increase minimum wage, create infrastructure jobs and provide aid to urban neighborhoods that need it in the form of sustainable farming, cost efficient housing and better transportation as well as more police and stricter laws on crime.

You have yet to show us any constructive ideas that will help our society progress. You and your kind have only wanted to stifle it. You are unpatriotic.

UB is not racist.

abandonconflict said:

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.

Click to expand...

[video=youtube;ugH-mxFzr9U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugH-mxFzr9U[/video]

beenthere said:

Conservative Colorado Springs: Population: 430,000, 5 violent crimes/100,000 residents

Liberal Flint Michigan: Population 100,000, 24 violent crimes/100,000 residents

Colorado Spring has four times the population than the liberal POS Flint Michigan yet Flint has four times the violent crime rate.

Not holding up to well for ya, is it?

Click to expand...

You are either blind, ignorant or just playing dumb, in an effort that we may not notice. Flint, Michigan is a FAR cry from Colorado Springs, CO, a FAR FAR cry. Among many things, lets look at population density. One is 197 square miles in size, the other, just 34 square miles, which means people are closely packed together. Now let's look at history, Flint is the birthplace of GM, a town that as literally seem economic booms and total collapse, right now Flint is in total collapse, nothing to do with a liberal or conservative local government. And you know this. Stop playing the fool.

ginwilly said:

um, no, not that at all. What gave you the idea I was even talking about food stamps?

Click to expand...

right here.

you're comparing people on food stamps (or any type of assistance) to wild animals.

you don't need to play dumb, you are a teabagger who lives in the south (some might say that because you live in the south, you come from the south).*

*We're told to not feed animals at wildlife reserves because they'll become dependent on people for food....Could you at least entertain the possibility that your methods have had the opposite effect you guys thought it would?

see4 said:

You are either blind, ignorant or just playing dumb, in an effort that we may not notice. Flint, Michigan is a FAR cry from Colorado Springs, CO, a FAR FAR cry. Among many things, lets look at population density. One is 197 square miles in size, the other, just 34 square miles, which means people are closely packed together. Now let's look at history, Flint is the birthplace of GM, a town that as literally seem economic booms and total collapse, right now Flint is in total collapse, nothing to do with a liberal or conservative local government. And you know this. Stop playing the fool.

Click to expand...

colorado springs: 2,242.5 people per square mile

flint: 3,715 people per square mile



WOOOOOOOOOPS!

UncleBuck said:

colorado springs: 2,242.5 people per square mile

flint: 3,715 people per square mile



WOOOOOOOOOPS!

Click to expand...

I guess you think the giant font woooops means something, how fucking stupid.

There is no evidence that population density has anything to do with the high violent crime rates that plague democrat cities, if you believe I'm wrong, then cite it.

UncleBuck said:

right here.

you're comparing people on food stamps (or any type of assistance) to wild animals.

you don't need to play dumb, you are a teabagger who lives in the south (some might say that because you live in the south, you come from the south).*

*We're told to not feed animals at wildlife reserves because they'll become dependent on people for food....Could you at least entertain the possibility that your methods have had the opposite effect you guys thought it would?

Click to expand...

The signs posted at wildlife reserves would not say please don't clothe or shelter the animals, that would just be stupid.

Before you go off the depend and OMG HE STHAID HE WONT HELP PEOPLES!! THATS RACIST!! I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying our help has not been working and we need to focus on ways to help people become self-sufficient. I also realize there a shit ton of people that need the motivation of starvation and freezing before they will even attempt it. For those that want to, I want to help, for those that can't I want to help, for those that won't, I want to vote them off the island. You are on your own loser, we gave you several chances.

Without that threat, many in this country will simply continue to ride the system. I have 4th generation cradle to grave welfare to let me know our methods aren't working and doing more of the same will not fix it. What do you have to back up the claim that if we only did more for people they would be less dependent.

Definitely a bunch of proggy butthurt in this thread.