Discussion in 'Politics' started by ColoradoHighGrower, Jan 30, 2018.
The pattern I see is the highest concentration of WalMarts and fast food Industries.
Teach me more.
Welcome to Costco. I love you.
Mazel toving and twiddling of fingers on msnbc with a celebratory countdown.......
read whatever you like in that expression.
If I were to put a label to it, I'd say her expression says "I told you these people couldn't run the government anywhere except into the ground."
This shut down is entirely within the power of Republicans to end. They have the majorities in Congress and the presidency. In my opinion, Democrats in the Senate shouldn't have bailed on Dreamers. Even so, Republicans can't agree on a compromise that gave them all the leverage when it came to immigration and funded important military and social arms of government for two years. Nor can they propose an alternative with a hope of passing.
I see a pattern. Areas with more cows and corn than people have fewer people. All your map does is show where people live. Of course some of those people collect food stamps. Duh.
More people are Democrats. You sure take a long time to state the obvious. Let's break it down:
18% of the population have ever accepted food stamps
Most of the people in the population say they are Democrats, 35% D to 25% R
More Democrats have accepted food stamps, 22% D to 10% R.
You mix up simple math with some sort of morality.
Don't use the word correlation. You don't understand what it means.
Normalized per capita fog. And there is no short way of saying these things correctly. The issue is much more nuanced than a simple 4 line party line. And yes, i have an intimate understanding of what correlation is. I'm a physicist, and a data scientist. Yes, we smoke pot too....
i see what you did there, jew hater!
The caption says: "Darker areas have more people on food stamps". New York has a lot more people than Amarillo Texas. New York has more people on food stamps. You were shagged by a manipulative graphic, dude. There is nothing in the graph that says what you claim.
Oh and I totally believe everything you say now that you tell me you are a scientist. I make my investment decisions based upon advice I get here too. lulz
"Regardless, I'd say my correlation of dems versus foodstamps is a pretty telling comparison, especially since my post is broken down by county, and not lumping entire states together."
You use correlation as if it explains anything. A high correlation is useful to help piece out the underlying reasons. High correlation by itself is not useful nor does it prove anything. Did you know that the number of lemons imported from Mexico in a year and highway fatality rates are correlated?
You have a bias and you looked for something to prove it is right. You are not alone, That kind of fake logic is used by propagandists all the time.
Actually, all i did was google "political affiliation versus social benefits," and used nothing beyond the first half page of results. Also precisely why i posted a link to an artical that discusses the dangers of twisted stats regurgitated by biased dumbasses and clans of political whores you're claiming i belong to.. Not trying to convince you of anything by sharing my education on data and stats btw, other than the fact that i know what correlation is. Also, to avoid bias is why i posted like 5 links and data visualizations only from the Pew Trust instead of one biased fake cherry-picked graphic from CN fucking N whores.... sorry for the longer than 4-line reply.... as i said before, this is a rather nuanced issue that you clearly don't get... I'm moderate, and was simply trying to convey that buck is a dumbass that more closely fits your idea of dangerous political bias. Did i even mention causality? Do you know what that is? No? Yes? Did you know rape increases with icecream sales? Must be all those white bigots chomming on vanilla cones and gettin all hopped up on cornsugar, eh? Equally nonsensical correlation... i get it.
So many words for so few actual thoughts.
Its like the SOTU address all over again...
Yes, definitely triggered...
but he's a data scientist!
Not triggered.. although, jew hater is pretty rough, and couldn't be futher from the truth.... ok. sorry I'm not always as concise as possible too. I shouldn't use that as a qualifier - my only point here is buck's original post paints a quite biased view of entitlements payouts versus states productivity through the lens of political affiliations...
It's well known that people are better at recognizing other people's biases and poor at seeing their own.
That's why it's better if the poster would to stick to facts and information they understand. Something they demonstrate poor ability in doing.
Such as their butchery of what correlation means. Also it should read the titles in the graphics they post. They completely misrepresented what they said.
He may go now.
shut the fuck up
You're a republican
Really? Wow. Yeah, im done.
His post was backed by some pretty solid statistics and I'm happily the first to call bullshit when I see it.
If you're wrong about something just concede the point, its not a loss, it means you've learnt something.
Separate names with a comma.