Liberal Forum

Zeets2 » 22 Oct 2022, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Oct 2022, 12:20 pm

OK, let's assume that ALL your **** is accurate.  It's not, but assuming that, explain how those 141 "invitees" were chosen and by what criteria.  Were they half Republican registered voters and half Democrat voters?  Or were they skewed with an oversampling of Democrats or blacks, or women, or other minorities as they usually are?  And what was the political affiliation of those students who actually did the vote counting and were they supervised by BOTH Republican and Democrat representatives?  You don't know because that all important criteria IS NOT REVEALED, is it?  And THAT is what makes your biased poll of a mere 141 handpicked respondents as useless as you are!

And how is it that you believe that even though Marist College is one of the most liberal colleges in the country, you still think their polls are also unbiased any less than Siena?  Are you aware that college professors who are registered as Democrats outnumber Republican professors 12 to 1?  Only such a blind, ignorant dope as you could possibly believe that a survey of 141 colleges professors  WHO THEY HANDPICK TO SEND THE POLL TO, despite selecting a profession that is 12-1 registered Democrats could be unbiased!

Go take your **** and talk to the hand, dickhead!  You're obviously far too gullible to have an opinion worthy of refuting!

They selected themselves. 

They were part of a pool of experts to whom the surveys are issued. The principal criterion is a demonstrated expertise in the Presidency.
 

Blackvegetable » 22 Oct 2022, 1:28 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Oct 2022, 1:28 pm

They selected themselves. 

They were part of a pool of experts to whom the surveys are issued. The principal criterion is a demonstrated expertise in the Presidency.

Was it skewed like the last survey you pushed around? Experts or not. 

Blackvegetable » 22 Oct 2022, 1:28 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Oct 2022, 1:28 pm

They selected themselves. 

They were part of a pool of experts to whom the surveys are issued. The principal criterion is a demonstrated expertise in the Presidency.

So naturally, a biased lib like you is perfectly fine with surveys like this garner the biased opinions of an overwhelming majority of liberal Democrats for their questionnaire, and an under sampling of Republicans to provide you with the kind of result you like, even though has no bearing whatsoever on the reality of the opinions of the electorate, huh?  As long as they provide a vehicle for you to use so you can be the useful idiot that promotes their (and your) radical left-wing agenda, that's all that matters.

Does that about sum it up for you?
Or is it only "experts" within a highly partisan liberal occupation like college professors that should be counted, and not experts in occupations like farming, small business owners, miners, or construction workers, huh?   
 

Blackvegetable » 22 Oct 2022, 1:28 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Oct 2022, 1:28 pm

They selected themselves. 

They were part of a pool of experts to whom the surveys are issued. The principal criterion is a demonstrated expertise in the Presidency.

Oh, and exactly WHO IS IT that determines whether or not a person has "expertise" when that's defined by provenly biased liberals?

A survey is ONLY useful when it provides that criteria ON THOSE CREATING THE SURVEY AND COUNTING THE RESPONSES, when it's results show such a meager number as 141 respondents and wants you to believe that the preferences of such a tiny biased group is an indication of anything!
 

Zeets2 » 23 Oct 2022, 9:32 am » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2022, 9:32 am

Oh, and exactly WHO IS IT that determines whether or not a person has "expertise" when that's defined by provenly biased liberals?

A survey is ONLY useful when it provides that criteria ON THOSE CREATING THE SURVEY AND COUNTING THE RESPONSES, when it's results show such a meager number as 141 respondents and wants you to believe that the preferences of such a tiny biased group is an indication of anything!

That's a simple matter of credentials.

Blackvegetable » 18 Oct 2022, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2022, 11:40 am

US factory utilization last month matched the highest level in more than two decades, raising the risk that inflationary pressures will remain elevated in the near term.

 The capacity utilization rate for manufacturers rose to 80% in September, up from 79.7% a month earlier, Federal Reserve data showed Tuesday. The increase coincided with a second-straight 0.4% gain in factory output during the month.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... f=lMtIv2Vb

This is terrible.......terrible........too many americans working, producing, consuming.....

Bad Brandon!

Panic!         

Blackvegetable » 23 Oct 2022, 4:37 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2022, 4:37 pm

That's a simple matter of credentials.

Oh, and liberal professors are the only ones with "credentials"?
Did Thomas Sowell receive the opportunity to respond to that survey?  Dennis Prager? Newt Gingrich?  Pat Buchanan?
I could give you dozens more, and I guarantee you that not a single one of them was given the survey.

Can you name me a single REPUBLICAN conservative who received one of their biased polls?
 

Blackvegetable » 18 Oct 2022, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2022, 11:40 am

US factory utilization last month matched the highest level in more than two decades, raising the risk that inflationary pressures will remain elevated in the near term.

 The capacity utilization rate for manufacturers rose to 80% in September, up from 79.7% a month earlier, Federal Reserve data showed Tuesday. The increase coincided with a second-straight 0.4% gain in factory output during the month.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... f=lMtIv2Vb

This is terrible.......terrible........too many americans working, producing, consuming.....

Bad Brandon!

Do you have the numbers on changes in capacity? 

Capacity utilization can increase while capacity decreases.  

GeorgeWashington » 23 Oct 2022, 5:33 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2022, 5:33 pm

Do you have the numbers on changes in capacity? 

Capacity utilization can increase while capacity decreases.

Yes..

But capacity has been relatively flat.
 

Blackvegetable » 24 Oct 2022, 8:11 am » wrote: ↑

24 Oct 2022, 8:11 am

Yes..

But capacity has been relatively flat.
 

Your capacity to believe anything possible blinds your brain to never accept what isn't probable minding everyone speculating eternity has to exceed life evolving here as eternally separated in plain sight your body being an equal part of it.

why you insist persist relentless and ruthless pursuit character counts and priorities change to serving humanity over adapting in the moment.

Blackvegetable » 18 Oct 2022, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2022, 11:40 am

US factory utilization last month matched the highest level in more than two decades, raising the risk that inflationary pressures will remain elevated in the near term.

 The capacity utilization rate for manufacturers rose to 80% in September, up from 79.7% a month earlier, Federal Reserve data showed Tuesday. The increase coincided with a second-straight 0.4% gain in factory output during the month.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... f=lMtIv2Vb

This is terrible.......terrible........too many americans working, producing, consuming.....

Bad Brandon!

MAGA sure put a stop to that ****.

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2025, 8:45 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2025, 8:45 am

Blackvegetable » 18 Oct 2022, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2022, 11:40 am

US factory utilization last month matched the highest level in more than two decades, raising the risk that inflationary pressures will remain elevated in the near term.

 The capacity utilization rate for manufacturers rose to 80% in September, up from 79.7% a month earlier, Federal Reserve data showed Tuesday. The increase coincided with a second-straight 0.4% gain in factory output during the month.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... f=lMtIv2Vb

This is terrible.......terrible........too many americans working, producing, consuming.....

Bad Brandon!

MAGA sure put a stop to that ****.

 

Now I feel bad about teaching you how to find old threads.  You gonna spam with these old threads all day?  

*Huey » 06 Sep 2025, 8:50 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2025, 8:50 am

Now I feel bad about teaching you how to find old threads.  You gonna spam with these old threads all day?  

here is an idea to go with the rules of 5 new threads a day, any thread not used in 2 months is considered posting a new thread in the 5 limited daily. Tah Dah!

Oh yeah! no thread can be pinned more than 4 times in a month. Lets end these constant threads pinned last 2 years. But these suggestions are just my gibberish nobody believes is possible.

simple solution.