Liberal Forum

*rippy38 » 20 Jul 2024, 10:38 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:38 am

It's the entire reply, oaf.

nod

Empty assertion.


The rules must be different for.....uhhhh....you know....@*DrippyVaginas
 

*Huey » 20 Jul 2024, 10:38 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:38 am

The answer to your question is in your post.  Acknowledge you are answered.

No it isn't..

The information necessary to arrive at the answer is.


Now answer the question, Little RunnyQuimm...

 

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 10:41 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:41 am

Empty assertion.

The rules must be different for.....uhhhh....you know....@*DrippyVaginas

I accept your concession.

 
 

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 10:42 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:42 am

No it isn't..

The information necessary to arrive at the answer is.

Now answer the question, Little RunnyQuimm...

I did.  You already posted it.  Stop lying.

*rippy38 » 20 Jul 2024, 10:43 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:43 am

I accept your concession.

Take the L and slither along.

*Huey » 20 Jul 2024, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:44 am

I did.  You already posted it.  Stop lying.

No, I didn't,  LittleRunnyQuimm..

Answer the question 
 

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:45 am

Take the L and slither along.

Once again, it has been shown that you would rather run like a little bitch from debate than actually attempt to refute the points presented.

The L is all yours, coward.

 
 

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 10:46 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:46 am

No, I didn't,  LittleRunnyQuimm..

Answer the question

Is at your link.

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 9:05 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 9:05 am

https://qzg.wvf.mybluehost.me/wp-conten ... r-2024.pdf

In 2024, Republican Abraham Lincoln was ranked the greatest American President for the third time, while Republican Donald Trump was ranked last for the second time. Democrat Joe Biden, president at the time of this survey, was ranked 13th, tied with Federalist John Adams.[12][13]

How the **** did Tiny miss this?

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-presiden ... elow-biden

New presidential rankings place Obama in top 10, Reagan and Trump below Biden

Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Trump were more likely to be ranked higher by conservatives or Republicans, with Reagan being ranked an average of 5th by Republicans respondents, Bush 19th and Trump 41st. Among Democrat respondents, Reagan was rated an average of 18th, Bush 33rd and Trump 45th.

 A similar partisan divide was noticeable for Barack Obama and President Biden, who ranked an average of 6th and 13th, respectively, among Democrat respondents, and 15th and 30th by Republicans. Bill Clinton, a Democrat, was ranked higher by Republican respondents (10th) than he was by Democrats (12th).

And to think that I predicted Grifty to be the worst POTUS ever, in 2017.

Typical narcissists. He still doesn't know that Americans have valid opinions also. There are many "experts" and professors in America who support Trump as well. But of course, they don't count. Only your experts count. Idiot.



In fact, here are 150 of them. Your article has 127. I guess you lose. nan nanny nan nan...You lose! Nan nanny nan na.

He's one of 150 academics and other writers who have put their names on a letter of support for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/201 ... nald-trump

But wait! There is more. 103 more...that makes 280 compared to your 127. You lose again. 

I have identified 103 such professors who offer their public support of Trump through blogs, essays, op-ed pieces, public lectures, tweets, YouTube videos, and even a couple of trade books. These are public intellectuals who intervene beyond the classroom and laboratory to promote a political agenda that is supportive of Trump. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48735060

*rippy38 » 20 Jul 2024, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:48 am

Once again, it has been shown that you would rather run like a little bitch from debate than actually attempt to refute the points presented.

The L is all yours, coward.

Once again, you've proven a witless liar and hypocrite. 

You cannot even find anything worth reading in the gibberish I strike through....and you can't distinguish **** from brylcreem.

 

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:52 am

Once again, you've proven a witless liar and hypocrite. 

You cannot even find anything worth reading in the gibberish I strike through....and you can't distinguish **** from brylcreem.

Again... what you ran from verses addressing...

"Your survey does not even say how many republicans and how many dems responded.  Less than 30% of invitees returned useable responses."

Now run and hide again, coward.

Apparently, that's the only thing you're good at.

 
 
 

*Vegas » 20 Jul 2024, 10:51 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:51 am

Typical narcissists. He still doesn't know that Americans have valid opinions also. There are many "experts" and professors in America who support Trump as well. But of course, they don't count. Only your experts count. Idiot.

In fact, here are 150 of them. Your article has 127. I guess you lose. nan nanny nan nan...You lose! Nan nanny nan na.

But wait! There is more. 103 more...that makes 280 compared to your 127. You lose again.

This is painfully stupid.

The kind of **** you'd expect from an innumerate who couldn't possibly come up with an example of Survivorship bias.

The first group is there EXACTLY because they like Grifty....I bet I can find 20 frauds and you would struggle to find anyone with whom you are familiar.

And then you copy and paste some anonymous crap.

Cretin.
 

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 10:58 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:58 am

This is painfully stupid.

The kind of **** you'd expect from an innumerate who couldn't possibly come up with an example of Survivorship bias.

The first group is there EXACTLY because they like Grifty....I bet I can find 20 frauds and you would struggle to find anyone with whom you are familiar.

And then you copy and paste some anonymous crap.

Cretin.

Your Ls are piling up veggie.

Maybe more strike throughs will help?

 

 

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 10:58 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:58 am

This is painfully stupid.

 

No evidence..again. 

The kind of **** you'd expect from an innumerate who couldn't possibly come up with an example of Survivorship bias.
 

What number is larger: 127 or 280?

The first group is there EXACTLY because they like Grifty....I bet I can find 20 frauds and you would struggle to find anyone with whom you are familiar.

Nope. Nothing of the sorts. But continue lying if it makes you feel better. 

And then you copy and paste some anonymous crap.

WTF are you talking about? It is no more anonymous than your ****. It was cited. God man. 

 

*rippy38 » 20 Jul 2024, 10:56 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:56 am

Again... what you ran from verses addressing...👇

"Your survey does not even say how many republicans and how many dems responded.  Less than 30% of invitees returned useable responses."

Now run and hide again, coward.

Apparently, that's the only thing you're good at.

"Your survey does not even say how many republicans and how many dems responded

it isn't relevant.

Less than 30% of invitees returned useable responses."

Again, irrelevant. 

There were 154 responses...

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 11:16 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 11:16 am

it isn't relevant.

Again, irrelevant. 

There were 154 responses...

Yeah, we know that.  

What we don’t know is the breakdown of dems to pubs.
 

*Vegas » 20 Jul 2024, 10:51 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:51 am

Typical narcissists. He still doesn't know that Americans have valid opinions also. There are many "experts" and professors in America who support Trump as well. But of course, they don't count. Only your experts count. Idiot.

In fact, here are 150 of them. Your article has 127. I guess you lose. nan nanny nan nan...You lose! Nan nanny nan na.

But wait! There is more. 103 more...that makes 280 compared to your 127. You lose again.

You're such a **** loser.

the letter -- a brief, one-sentence statement backing the candidate -- to establish that there are some ideas behind Trump's candidacy.The letter reads, "Given our choices in the presidential election, we believe that Donald J. Trump is the candidate most likely to restore the promise of America, and we urge you to support him as we do."It also features former politicians with scholarly credentials such as Newt Gingrich and Bill Bennett, and others such as Peter Thiel, the PayPal co-founder and Facebook board member who bankrolled former wrestler Hulk Hogan's lawsuit against Gawker Media, and Charles C. Johnson, a right-wing blogger known for aggressive trolling on Twitter before he was banned from the website.

 Joshua Dunn, chair of the department of political science at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, said the list of names is probably so broad because of the difficulty of finding university-based scholars to back a candidate who has become toxic even to many in his own party. Dunn, who co-wrote a book about conservatives in academe, said conservative faculty members are typically pro-free trade, pro-free market and skeptical of populist movements, whereas Trump has run a populist campaign espousing protectionist principles.

 "You're going to have trouble rounding up many conservative faculty members," he said.

 Dunn said even many who have signed the letter may not be terribly enthusiastic about Trump.

 "Instead they're afraid of a Clinton presidency, so they kind of regard him as the least worst option for this election," he said.
 
 

*Huey » 20 Jul 2024, 11:23 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 11:23 am

Yeah, we know that.  

What we don’t know is the breakdown of dems to pubs.

Tell me why you think it matters. 

*rippy38 » 20 Jul 2024, 10:59 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 10:59 am

Your Ls are piling up veggie.

Maybe more strike throughs will help?

I didn't mean to suggest that you aren't. 



 

Blackvegetable » 20 Jul 2024, 11:29 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2024, 11:29 am

I didn't mean to suggest that you aren't.

I see you've now resorted to the nonsensical reply strategy.

Your concession has been accepted... again.