What's new
By:

The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

Wes Mantooth said:
The average SAT score at Gettysburg is 1340. That’s far above average. The guy would be the first person to say he didn’t think it was a great school and thought many (most?) that went were morons. But it’s recognized as a strong college. Not sure why tbh.

From one website: “Located adjacent to the famous Civil War battlefield in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania is Gettysburg College, one of the best liberal arts colleges in the Northeast. Students have come from 43 states and 35 countries to pursue Gettysburg's excellent liberal arts curriculum that includes choices of majoring in things like art history, art studio, classical studies, english, French, German Studies, Religious Studies, and a range of other options. It consistently ranks among the top colleges in the country, and in 2015, was ranked by Princeton Review as one of the four top liberal arts college for placing students in strong internship programs.”

Now, your anecdote about a couple of random pension guys who work there not being smart may very well be the case. Or it may not as idiots or not, they somehow sold your firm. Having said that, he says himself how 2/3 of them are idiots.

Carry on, though.
Click to expand...

We're just going to have to disagree about what constitutes a "good college." In my mind, we're talking about the top 15-20% of the programs in the country under that qualification, and there's no chance in hell Gettysburg meets the standard.

Where I went to school could MAYBE qualify and it's 25th percentile SAT score is 100 points higher Gettysburg's average. Perusing the historical World News Rankings indicates it's about the 50th best liberal arts college year to year, which means it's not even competing with the top universities and research institutions. It's in a different, less prestigious, category.

Put another way, would you describe the 50th best Division II NCAA basketball program as a "good basketball program" or is it the kind of place that doesn't get access to the top tiers of recruits and is effectively anonymous?

Ignore me, I just generally hate finance guys and will take every opportunity to dunk on them.
 
Zombie said:
That doesn't have much to do with what I'm saying though. Education =//= intelligence. I'm not arguing at all that less educated people tend to be more attracted to Trump and the GOP in general. I just think that has more to do with class than it does intelligence.
Click to expand...

It has been shown that class isn’t not a strong indicator of one’s support for trump.

However, Race, Sex, and Education Levels have.

"The 2016 campaign witnessed a dramatic polarization in the vote choices of whites based on (their level of) education," writes a research team led by political scientist Brian Schaffner of the University of Massachusetts–Amherst. "Very little of this gap can be explained by the economic difficulties faced by less-educated whites. Rather, most of the divide appears to be associated with sexism, and denialism of racism."
Click to expand...

https://psmag.com/social-justice/more-evidence-that-racism-and-sexism-were-key-to-trump-victory

I also disagree with your take on intelligence and college education. The economic benefits and critical thinking skills are all advanced by furthering one’s education. Imo, two of the biggest problems non-educated whites have is the inability to critically think and lack of experience interacting with others if diverse racial and religious backgrounds. the worst thing imo that one can do is call it good after high school. Just think about the opportunities you would’ve lost, professionally, academically, and socially if you hadn’t gone to college/trade school.

No wonder why those without these experiences are so homogeneous in their political views and thinking. No wonder why they’re Trumpers! There will always be exceptions. I get that. But I also don’t think we should deny the benefits of advancing education beyond high school to placate to people who don’t value education. And again, I get that there are exceptions and people who have financial constraints. But obtaining a college education is one of the best things an individual can do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sirkickyass said:
We're just going to have to disagree about what constitutes a "good college." In my mind, we're talking about the top 15-20% of the programs in the country under that qualification, and there's no chance in hell Gettysburg meets the standard.

Where I went to school could MAYBE qualify and it's 25th percentile SAT score is 100 points higher Gettysburg's average. Perusing the historical World News Rankings indicates it's about the 50th best liberal arts college year to year, which means it's not even competing with the top universities and research institutions. It's in a different, less prestigious, category.

Put another way, would you describe the 50th best Division II NCAA basketball program as a "good basketball program" or is it the kind of place that doesn't get access to the top tiers of recruits and is effectively anonymous?

Ignore me, I just generally hate finance guys and will take every opportunity to dunk on them.
Click to expand...

I get it. I mean, I’d have to look at the 50th best team but yeah, I probably would say the 50th best team is a good team. That’s a team that is typically around 21-12 which I’d say is a good record. Keep in mind, I didn’t say very good or great or elite. Just good. Though without looking back I may have said very good in a subsequent post.

Also, the 25th percentile score you mentioned is in line with Princeton’s. That’s quite obviously a good school. I think you’re being a little humble and perhaps underselling how good the school was/is that you attended.
 
Last edited:
sirkickyass said:
Let's be honest here man - you got cranked because you spoke from a place of assumption and ignorance. Just like when you were all in on Burisma/Biden and hadn't followed the timelines, or when you didn't know what was going on with Shokin/Firtash and all of John Solomon's reporting.

Your news sources are not your friends.

Now let's look at your actual strategy, as described by you. You were presented with the claim "white nationalists always align with conservative politics." You chose not to "waste your time" and instead made a (now demonstrably incorrect) parallel claim about communists. First of all, that is a classic deflection. You did not, in any way shape or form, actually dispute that white nationalism and current American conservative politics are in alignment. You just tried to make the conversation about something else.

So you've actually just kind of let the original point stand. I don't think you've actually examined it, at all. So let's go for this again. And we'll work on it from base blocks as opposed to just parroting things we see other places. 1) do you actually believe that because Robert Byrd was a member of the KKK in the 1940s that this means white nationalism and the Democratic party share a common cause in any real sense; 2) do you believe that there is any correlation between Republican party identification and white nationalism; 3) what would any correlation of those two things mean to you?
Click to expand...
Nice try. My point is that extremists exist in the political spectrum. They typically align with certain majority parties for the same reason that all of the rest of us do - because they see that party as more in alignment with their goals than the alternative party. If this is shocking news to you I don't know what to say.

Regarding your other comments, I disagree. With regard to Burisma/Biden for instance (I'm only selecting this one because it's the most easily provable), I am completely unconvinced by your apparent belief that it has been somehow debunked. In Hunter I still see an extremely unqualified person (and the evidence for this view keeps piling up) who was being massively overpaid. He had one asset to sell that I am aware of, and it was his father's influence. It is frightening and highly concerning that the political left seems entirely unwilling to acknowledge or investigate that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PJF
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/

MASSACHUSETTS DELEGATION CONDEMNS TRUMP’S ORDER TO KILL IRANIAN GENERAL: PRESIDENT DOUBLES DOWN.

U.S. Senator and 2020 presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren tweeted: “Soleimani was a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans. But this reckless move escalates the situation with Iran and increases the likelihood of more deaths and new Middle East conflict. Our priority must be to avoid another costly war.”

U.S. Edward Markey tweeted: “Trump’s apparent assassination of Soleimani is a massive, deliberate, and dangerous escalation of conflict with Iran. The President just put the lives of every person in the region – U.S. service members and civilians – at immediate risk. We need de-escalation now.”

Markey added, “Congress is the only entity that can authorize military force. We cannot and must not get drawn into war with Iran.”

Related: Wielding A Pen And A Phone, Obama Goes It Alone.

—Headline, NPR, January 20, 2014.

Seen on Facebook:

trumptrick-562x600.jpg


Yeah, pretty much.
 
UNEXPECTEDLY: Obama Administration Stopped Israel From Assassinating Soleimani in 2015, Report Says.

MATTHEW CONTINETTI: Trump Calls the Ayatollah’s Bluff: And scores a victory against terrorism.

UPDATE: John Ringo emails:

People keep missing something important about the airstrikes that ‘killed 25 militants’.

The militants were collateral damage. The target was multiple ‘hidden’ missile magazines for rather expensive Iranian SCUDs threatening Israel.

The strike cost the Iranians a **** ton of hard currency. It also pointed out we know where they hide stuff and can take out the “threat” at leisure.

And trying to storm the (fortress) embassy in Iraq was the best they could do.

Yeah, my lefty friends on Facebook seem to think this is Trump wagging the dog because his back is to the wall over impeachment, and that it will provoke Iran to suddenly not like us. In fact this is Trump demonstrating that impeachment is irrelevant, and that Iran, which has always hated us, is weak now.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
Regarding your other comments, I disagree. With regard to Burisma/Biden for instance (I'm only selecting this one because it's the most easily provable), I am completely unconvinced by your apparent belief that it has been somehow debunked. In Hunter I still see an extremely unqualified person (and the evidence for this view keeps piling up) who was being massively overpaid. He had one asset to sell that I am aware of, and it was his father's influence. It is frightening and highly concerning that the political left seems entirely unwilling to acknowledge or investigate that.
Click to expand...

Assuming what you said is true, investigate what, precisely?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top