|
On October 09 2008 09:49 DrainX wrote:
Evandi, the this site being so pro Obama might have more to do with this site being international than what age group are here. The US is the only place in the world where a campaign like Mccains could be taken seriously.
Well, you may not take Republicans seriously, but you have ever had to take the US seriously. Certainly the things we are doing here work to some extent. So perhaps we should just not take any politicians from little Sweden seriously?
|
On October 09 2008 09:41 evandi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2008 09:08 ahrara_ wrote:On October 09 2008 09:03 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 08:54 Cobalt wrote:On October 09 2008 08:50 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 08:47 aRod wrote:
evandi, th poll isn't looking good for you. The keep evandi bar is still at 0, why haven't you voted yet? Because I would be happy for this thread to be labeled appropriately. I wouldn't want people to think that this is balanced commentary. Of course it's not balanced commentary. This is a discussion forum where the primary age group is late teens to early 20s, the vast majority of which are Obama supporters. You're not going to find balanced discussion in a place where almost everyone is on one side of an opinion. I don't really know why you'd expect anything else. Well, thats why I'm here. This age group is mostly voting based on whats considered cool so they mostly just go for what their friends think. Some might get the impression that this is a normal discussion about the election and that everyone is stupid or racist to bring up anything bad about Obama. EDIT: To clarify, I read this website every day and watch starcraft every day. I don't mean to imply that I registered just to discuss this. I am really curious as to what your exceptional qualifications are that makes you smarter than all of us. Yes, I think that most people in the age group that was mentioned do not pay much attention to politics. I think I'm right about most in the age group. If it doesn't apply to you than you aren't part of most.
You also have to note that people who can have a coherent online discussion and play Starcraft are -probably- among the more intelligent people in their age group. I'm sure that most people here pay MUCH more attention to politics than people in the same age group who don't visit the website.
Yes, I'm making an assumption that intelligent people are more likely to follow politics than non-intelligent people. But I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption.
And as a poster earlier stated, there's always the international factor, considering that most of non-American Western civilization is pro-Obama.
|
On October 09 2008 09:55 Cobalt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2008 09:41 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 09:08 ahrara_ wrote:On October 09 2008 09:03 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 08:54 Cobalt wrote:On October 09 2008 08:50 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 08:47 aRod wrote:
evandi, th poll isn't looking good for you. The keep evandi bar is still at 0, why haven't you voted yet? Because I would be happy for this thread to be labeled appropriately. I wouldn't want people to think that this is balanced commentary. Of course it's not balanced commentary. This is a discussion forum where the primary age group is late teens to early 20s, the vast majority of which are Obama supporters. You're not going to find balanced discussion in a place where almost everyone is on one side of an opinion. I don't really know why you'd expect anything else. Well, thats why I'm here. This age group is mostly voting based on whats considered cool so they mostly just go for what their friends think. Some might get the impression that this is a normal discussion about the election and that everyone is stupid or racist to bring up anything bad about Obama. EDIT: To clarify, I read this website every day and watch starcraft every day. I don't mean to imply that I registered just to discuss this. I am really curious as to what your exceptional qualifications are that makes you smarter than all of us. Yes, I think that most people in the age group that was mentioned do not pay much attention to politics. I think I'm right about most in the age group. If it doesn't apply to you than you aren't part of most. You also have to note that people who can have a coherent online discussion and play Starcraft are -probably- among the more intelligent people in their age group. I'm sure that most people here pay MUCH more attention to politics than people in the same age group who don't visit the website. And as a poster earlier stated, there's always the international factor, considering that most of non-American Western civilization is pro-Obama.
I actually think that it has become so common to post that almost every kid does it.
I don't think there is any sort of simple dumb or smart scale either. It depends on your education and what you spend your time doing. Trying to be good at Starcraft doesn't necessarily mean that you've improved your political knowledge.
In fact, the more time you spend doing one thing means less time for other things, so if you focus on one thing like Starcraft you are probably less likely on average to know as much about other things.
Ya, sure the international thing is big here but we're big enough to count as at least 50 countries 
|
ultimately, i think evandi has a point
there are people in this thread who react wayyy too harshly to conservative opinions. the only thing that irked me about evandi was that he (and people who responded to him) focused so much on character and the who-said-what-when game. i really like savio's posts tho, because he tends to focus on content more.
anyway, i think we can all learn from this and be a little more tolerant of conservatives, and also spend less time on moot shit.
edit
does anyone else feel like every time a conservative starts posting he gets jumped in before being accepted by the thread. it's kind of ridiculous but also really funny.
|
On October 09 2008 10:04 evandi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2008 09:55 Cobalt wrote:On October 09 2008 09:41 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 09:08 ahrara_ wrote:On October 09 2008 09:03 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 08:54 Cobalt wrote:On October 09 2008 08:50 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 08:47 aRod wrote:
evandi, th poll isn't looking good for you. The keep evandi bar is still at 0, why haven't you voted yet? Because I would be happy for this thread to be labeled appropriately. I wouldn't want people to think that this is balanced commentary. Of course it's not balanced commentary. This is a discussion forum where the primary age group is late teens to early 20s, the vast majority of which are Obama supporters. You're not going to find balanced discussion in a place where almost everyone is on one side of an opinion. I don't really know why you'd expect anything else. Well, thats why I'm here. This age group is mostly voting based on whats considered cool so they mostly just go for what their friends think. Some might get the impression that this is a normal discussion about the election and that everyone is stupid or racist to bring up anything bad about Obama. EDIT: To clarify, I read this website every day and watch starcraft every day. I don't mean to imply that I registered just to discuss this. I am really curious as to what your exceptional qualifications are that makes you smarter than all of us. Yes, I think that most people in the age group that was mentioned do not pay much attention to politics. I think I'm right about most in the age group. If it doesn't apply to you than you aren't part of most. You also have to note that people who can have a coherent online discussion and play Starcraft are -probably- among the more intelligent people in their age group. I'm sure that most people here pay MUCH more attention to politics than people in the same age group who don't visit the website. And as a poster earlier stated, there's always the international factor, considering that most of non-American Western civilization is pro-Obama. I actually think that it has become so common to post that almost every kid does it.
Look at the typical MySpace profile, and try to imagine what that person is like. Now try to imagine the typical forum poster, who actually can type coherently and discuss things. Most people you find on forums like this are definitely going to be better-informed about the world than the typical person on MySpace.
I'll use myself as an example. My political knowledge pales in comparison to most people in this thread. I'm not nearly as good as arguing points, or understanding and developing ideas. And yet, I'm first in my class (high school senior), respected as the best debater in my school, and have comprehension ability well exceeding just about everyone else in my school.
When a #1 in class is below average on a forum like this, you can gauge just how much people here know.
For the record, I do agree that you've been unfairly targeted by a few people, but I think it's not nearly as many as your posts seem to suggest. A lot of us, myself included, are simply trying to have a discussion.
|
On October 09 2008 09:54 evandi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2008 09:49 DrainX wrote:
Evandi, the this site being so pro Obama might have more to do with this site being international than what age group are here. The US is the only place in the world where a campaign like Mccains could be taken seriously. Well, you may not take Republicans seriously, but you have ever had to take the US seriously. Certainly the things we are doing here work to some extent. So perhaps we should just not take any politicians from little Sweden seriously?
You might want to look at this link. USA, like much of the world, has a lot to learn from "little Sweden". How about you drop that condescending attitude and start acting like a grown up?
You know, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, but I'm beginning to think you're not here to have a discussion, you're here to massage your own ego. I guess you can still prove me wrong... Now how about comparing how the USA and Sweden did in those rankings and then reading your comment again. Doesn't what you wrote strike you as uninformed and condescending?
|
On October 09 2008 10:11 ahrara_ wrote:
there are people in this thread who react wayyy too harshly to conservative opinions.
Barry Goldwater conservative opinions or Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell conservative opinions?
I imagine that the former would get a lot more respect around here than the latter.
|
On October 09 2008 10:31 Doctorasul wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2008 09:54 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 09:49 DrainX wrote:
Evandi, the this site being so pro Obama might have more to do with this site being international than what age group are here. The US is the only place in the world where a campaign like Mccains could be taken seriously. Well, you may not take Republicans seriously, but you have ever had to take the US seriously. Certainly the things we are doing here work to some extent. So perhaps we should just not take any politicians from little Sweden seriously? You might want to look at this link. USA, like much of the world, has a lot to learn from "little Sweden". How about you drop that condescending attitude and start acting like a grown up?
I was only repaying in kind.
|
On October 09 2008 10:31 Doctorasul wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2008 09:54 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 09:49 DrainX wrote:
Evandi, the this site being so pro Obama might have more to do with this site being international than what age group are here. The US is the only place in the world where a campaign like Mccains could be taken seriously. Well, you may not take Republicans seriously, but you have ever had to take the US seriously. Certainly the things we are doing here work to some extent. So perhaps we should just not take any politicians from little Sweden seriously? You might want to look at this link. USA, like much of the world, has a lot to learn from "little Sweden". How about you drop that condescending attitude and start acting like a grown up?
I'm sure you could take a piece as large as Sweden out of the US and get similar demographics without it looking too funny.
|
On October 09 2008 06:09 Clutch3 wrote:
2. "Raised taxes for people earning as little as $42k" --> extremely misleading, if not an outright lie, and McCain voted for the SAME bill.
3. "He'd sit down with Iran, etc." --> misleading not to mention it's a stupid argument that's been shot down by almost every diplomatic heavyweight in the country
Obama did vote for a bill that included raising taxes for people making as little as $42k. McCain actually voted against it. Obama did say he would sit down with Iran as well. So I don't really consider either of those to be misleading.
|
Ok, find that state that is similar and post the link to the study here please. Until you do that, you do realize it's a baseless assertion.
Edit - And for your point to be sustained, it would have to be a predominantly republican state, since you're trying to argue that most of the world is wrong to reject the characteristically republican campaign of John McCain.
|
On October 09 2008 10:44 Doctorasul wrote:
Ok, find that state that is similar and post the link to the study here please. Until you do that, you do realize it's a baseless assertion.
I don't think any of those reports listed individual states.
But it is far harder to manage a large population than a small one. We manage, as a really large country to get up there to the top of most of those lists so what you said is basically irrelevant in my opinion.
Unsurprisingly, small countries dominate many of those lists and the differences aren't large at the top anyway. The odds favor small countries winning those contests.
|
On October 09 2008 10:27 Cobalt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2008 10:04 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 09:55 Cobalt wrote:On October 09 2008 09:41 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 09:08 ahrara_ wrote:On October 09 2008 09:03 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 08:54 Cobalt wrote:On October 09 2008 08:50 evandi wrote:On October 09 2008 08:47 aRod wrote:
evandi, th poll isn't looking good for you. The keep evandi bar is still at 0, why haven't you voted yet? Because I would be happy for this thread to be labeled appropriately. I wouldn't want people to think that this is balanced commentary. Of course it's not balanced commentary. This is a discussion forum where the primary age group is late teens to early 20s, the vast majority of which are Obama supporters. You're not going to find balanced discussion in a place where almost everyone is on one side of an opinion. I don't really know why you'd expect anything else. Well, thats why I'm here. This age group is mostly voting based on whats considered cool so they mostly just go for what their friends think. Some might get the impression that this is a normal discussion about the election and that everyone is stupid or racist to bring up anything bad about Obama. EDIT: To clarify, I read this website every day and watch starcraft every day. I don't mean to imply that I registered just to discuss this. I am really curious as to what your exceptional qualifications are that makes you smarter than all of us. Yes, I think that most people in the age group that was mentioned do not pay much attention to politics. I think I'm right about most in the age group. If it doesn't apply to you than you aren't part of most. You also have to note that people who can have a coherent online discussion and play Starcraft are -probably- among the more intelligent people in their age group. I'm sure that most people here pay MUCH more attention to politics than people in the same age group who don't visit the website. And as a poster earlier stated, there's always the international factor, considering that most of non-American Western civilization is pro-Obama. I actually think that it has become so common to post that almost every kid does it. Look at the typical MySpace profile, and try to imagine what that person is like. Now try to imagine the typical forum poster, who actually can type coherently and discuss things. Most people you find on forums like this are definitely going to be better-informed about the world than the typical person on MySpace. I'll use myself as an example. My political knowledge pales in comparison to most people in this thread. I'm not nearly as good as arguing points, or understanding and developing ideas. And yet, I'm first in my class (high school senior), respected as the best debater in my school, and have comprehension ability well exceeding just about everyone else in my school. When a #1 in class is below average on a forum like this, you can gauge just how much people here know. For the record, I do agree that you've been unfairly targeted by a few people, but I think it's not nearly as many as your posts seem to suggest. A lot of us, myself included, are simply trying to have a discussion.
nothing to add here,
except debate is a kickass activity and you really ought to extend your repertoire to some politics disads
|
and yeah.. everyone should stfu about evandi cause the last 3 pages of whiny bitching has been 10 times more annoying than anything evandi has said
|
It's your job to look for the appropriate studies to support your assertions, I don't have to do your homework for you.
Dismissing smaller countries as irrelevant is why you don't understand why they would overwhelmingly reject McCain. There's a strong correlation between how liberal and progressive a country is and how well they do in the rankings. Doesn't that give you pause when saying conservative politics are undoubtedly for the good of the country?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
|
On October 09 2008 11:01 Doctorasul wrote:
It's your job to look for the appropriate studies to support your assertions, I don't have to do your homework for you.
Dismissing smaller countries as irrelevant is why you don't understand why they would overwhelmingly reject McCain. There's a strong correlation between how liberal and progressive a country is and how well they do in the rankings. Doesn't that give you pause when saying conservative politics are undoubtedly for the good of the country?
No, it is valid to dismiss small countries because statistically given purely random chance there are more chances to have a good result, and our country is near the top of most of those lists anyway.
Take the Olympics for instance. Small countries like to brag about the amount of medals per person.
Well, divide the US into 50 states and all of them together will be able give more athletes a chance while the same stars that did well in the normal Olympics will of course be there. More chances, more likely to get more golds, except in team sports.
Then add up what the 50 states got and it will probably be a bit higher than what the US got.
|
Comparing Sweden to the United States is kind of useless until Sweden starts spending a third of their budget on the military ;o
|
I dont really know why people argue so much about which candidate would be better prepared to be the president of the united states of america. Its not like either Obama or Mcain is gonna solve the economy, enviromental issues, war issues and so on. I think much more of all americans who intend to vote should focus more on the guys behind the candidates who are really smart and who solve problems.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 09 2008 11:09 evandi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2008 11:01 Doctorasul wrote:
It's your job to look for the appropriate studies to support your assertions, I don't have to do your homework for you.
Dismissing smaller countries as irrelevant is why you don't understand why they would overwhelmingly reject McCain. There's a strong correlation between how liberal and progressive a country is and how well they do in the rankings. Doesn't that give you pause when saying conservative politics are undoubtedly for the good of the country? No, it is valid to dismiss small countries because statistically given purely random chance there are more chances to have a good result, and our country is near the top of most of those lists anyway. Take the Olympics for instance. Small countries like to brag about the amount of medals per person. Well, divide the US into 50 states and all of them together will be able give more athletes a chance while the same stars that did well in the normal Olympics will of course be there. More chances, more likely to get more golds, except in team sports. Then add up what the 50 states got and it will probably be a bit higher than what the US got.
LOL
i wonder if you've made it out of high school. do you even know how this shit works?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
