I don't understand why you don't just click on the link I included in the post if you want that info.
Combative? For telling you I already share that info with you? Look at your post #142 - you quoted the link and title that say "30% increase in the number of hate groups"
We already discussed this stupid graph and its randomly weird selection of 1994 or more importantly seven years after the Fairness Doctrine was eliminated by the Reagan administration. Maybe you should have shown up for that discussion instead of trotting it out now. Of course Republicans have been big on the racist front since Nixon's Southern Strategy so there's no surprise they would be consistently racist since 1994. We've also discussed how you somehow believe Donald Trump isn't a racist despite the mountain of evidence. Please cite for me the George HW Bush equivalence to the oral history of Trump's bigotry. An Oral History of Trump’s Bigotry You've traded in alleged Christian values for the power brought to you by the scummiest, lying, racist, piece of garbage ever seen in American politics. Just own it. Your behavior is a disgrace to everything Jesus teaches in your religion. I'm sure the next Democratic President that comes along will suddenly be held to some lofty Christian standard that you will break out of mothballs. You have zero shame, none. Don't even get me started with your Bible prophecy baloney.
Right, I didn't see that post at first, but I remember bobby posting it. The problem here is that the graph is not displayed originally vertically. A conservative blog took those graphs and displayed it vertically like that to make it look like that conservatives haven't moved but liberals moved more left. This, of course, wasn't the intention or conclusion of the study. Here is the graph broken down... I remember then Bobby arguing forever that the graph as it was presented (manipulated on some random conservative blog) was the correct way to look at it although pew never displayed it as such. It was a pretty slick trick though as that version of the graph gets passed around. Also, the graph doesn't really go in depth about how right the country has been so much so that conservatives thought Obama...Obama...was some super liberal progressive socialist.
No, there are only two sexes though and you won't find many people arguing that there are more than two sexes. But that's another discussion for another thread (although it shouldn't be a discussion at all...)
This also just completely ignores the nature of progressivism. Gay marriage for example would have been a hard pass for just about everyone in 1994 but today almost all liberals would support it and even you know like 5% of conservatives might support it (). So conservatives would say we didn't move to that position like you did and we would say you're damn right we did because it was the right thing to do. Hence, liberals have moved more to the left while conservatives stood still. If we were all conservatives we'd probably all still be having sex with our 14 year old cousins and burning witches.
This mischaracterizes liberalism and conservatism. Most conservatives just don't want to change what isn't broken or in essence change slowly and carefully (which would be moderate I suppose). Self-characterized liberals think the term as synonymous with change and ignore that conservatives are also OK with change sometimes. That is why we aren't still marrying 14 year olds and burning witches, though the witch hunts have just taken a new form and the left is OK with letting certain groups marry younglings if it is for certain religious reason... but I digress. Many liberals also want to change pretty much everything as a group, because everyone in the group has their own ideas of what needs to change and how. So the liberals are asking for too much too fast, and this is why they lose elections. I remember I was actively helping democrats in college and met with a group of different student reps from various organizations and they all talked over each other. The trans people wanted to tag along and make it about them, the LGBTQ people needed to be heard, the minorities too and feminists. They all seek to take over the group as a whole. The liberal progressive alliance as it was was a complete failure and couldn't actually target one goal. And when they speak to the public they tend to all want their issue heard and solved. This IMO is one of the biggest challenges facing liberals today actually and the democratic party, which is hijacked by everyone pushing change and it is just too much and not always the right change for many Americans who are wondering what the hell is going on with that party.
There was specific language that made the left wing rabbit hole sound like a savior, and it wasn't the topic of the article, so there you go. They aimed right. Also let's talk about what kids watch... NO I wouldn't want my kids watching him but this article is about an adult man who whether he can be manipulated or not, has the right to watch what he wants. And you, watch whatever the hell you want, despite that you are obviously a manipulated and useful idiot for the far left. As for kids, parents have the responsibilty to police their children. Youtube is not a child friendly place and shouldn't be considered one. Get cable and let kids watch filtered TV. Youtube shouldn't be ruined because of stupid lazy parents who are morally brow beating everyone.
Liberals lead the way in making important changes in society while conservatives prey on hatred, fear, and nostalgia. I agree. The reasons liberals lose elections isn't simple. Fact is Republicans have gerrymandered like hell to win elections. They've also successfully broken up unions as well as recently passed bogus voter ID laws targeting people based on race which brings down voter participation. More importantly though, Republicans have co-opted the traditional blue collar Democratic union voter by preying on fear, hatred, and nostalgia. Liberal leadership has made a mistake by not showing their blue collar base how strong unions and regular guy progressive policies bring more benefits to their lives than tax cuts for millionaires. It's been a mistake for liberal leadership to put a significant focus on fringe issues. Their focus should be on education and health care, not trans rights and supposed Dreamers.
What specific language? LOL at me being manipulated by the far left...says the guy linking Black Pigeon Speaks videos. As for Youtube not being for kids, that's news to me and many corporations. There is certainly kid stuff on youtube, cartoons, Disney videos, etc etc. Always been this way. That's why Youtube should clean up its RECOMMENDATIONS system...you know, what this article is about. It's not about banning anyone from youtube. The article never makes a case for that. It's about how youtube's recommendation system has benefited extreme fringe voices. Don't worry chief, Black Pigeon Speaks is still on youtube, you can get your race war now videos there if you want. Some of us just don't want these videos advertised to people that aren't searching for them...
First... learn to read and stop misrepresenting the article... the right is presented as the problem. The left is framed as a counter balance (thus fixing things). Calling it a left wing rabbit hole despite the way the article treats both sides is not enough to bring true balance and focusing on making the right look extreme is obvious... talking about the gun... calling them trolls who literally are creatures, not even human. And then making it sound as bad as possible. And back to the kids issue... there is no problem. Youtube is not a family friendly place. It is the Internet. Demanding that the Internet be safe for kids is insane. Kids don't need to be let lose on the Internet without supervision and rules, and any parent who trusts youtube to give their child safe videos clearly hasn't been watching closely enough. That is a basic please think of the children argument. I fail to give a damn. Moralists Christians did this crap in the 80s and 90s, and it ruined TV and made it dry as hell. That's why Youtube took off. People want the wild wild west and interesting things. And Black Pigeon Speaks makes great videos and raises wonderful questions usually. Of course I am sure you equate liking some of his views as to agreeing with him on everything he espouses. I am sure you will look for his most questionable view and automatically assume it is my personal belief. Because that is your tactic. Guilt by association. You assume adults agree with all the videos watch and are not critical,which is where you fail. You have no faith in people and assume watching a video or content creator means that person just automatically believes them and agrees on everything. If you had half the brain you pretend to, you would know this is not how most people are. This is why you got taken in by NYT propaganda that frames a 26 year old as not being able to think for himself, but the guy clearly demonstrates critical thinking (whether he agrees with the right or the left, when it comes down to it). A true liberal doesn't get all panicky about this sort of thing. Only authoritarians who want to control what people watch and listen to. That is the opposite of liberal values. You are on the side of fascism actually. I guess I should assume the NYT is a neonazi group because of their antisemitic cartoons in the past and that the people posting NYT articles are neonazis.
I agree with you that conservatives are lacking in the change department and liberals have done great things and I think will be able to do great things in the future. Which is why I'm not a conservative. I'm closer to a minimum government libertarian type. Basically I like govt when it is truly needed, but I disagree with a lot on the right and left about when and where it is needed. That aside, there are actual changes that should be made and can be made (I don't hate unions and I support more education spending for example; but things like... free college... I don't support) I also like the idea of universal healthcare but I want a real plan and not the Obamacare system which I consider too friendy to pharma and insurance companies. Largely the progressives are ruining their chance to make realistic changes by all coopting the Democratic party for their own pet issues. It has become a clown show.
There's nothing randomly weird about it, they picked 1994 because it was the first time the democrats had lost the house in 40 years, as such it was the starting point of the split, as prior to that they basically hadn't moved much in decades and collaboration was the rule rather than the exception. Political power has never really transitioned into value for a group in the USA, the culture has always been too individualistic. It's good for those actual people, but there's really no spill over, the only people who politicize their way into prosperity in the US are the politicians and hangers on, as the irish learned.
So which one is it? That you moved and you're ok with that, or that you didn't move? It can't be both It would actually be rather strange for conservatives, who are by their nature, less inclined to change (which is also why they skew older) to be the ones that are doing the changing, the data supports that, but it doesn't really stop feelings based people from suggesting otherwise.
