Re: Ask Loose Goose Thread

[Guest]

wow, that answers a shit ton.  You don't think going into a room uninvited and looking at naked women is assault?  Hey goose, lets me and you go to the YMCA up in MIO and just go into the womens locker room.  What will the MIO cops do?  Just curious, what do you think they do to us? Oh, and if they arrest us, why?

That's all legal now. The cops can't do a damned thing if I claim I'm a woman. You support the party that pushed that through so don't lecture me.

[Guest]

I agree. Trump stepping down would be celebrated here. Then Pence would be President. What most of the Einsteins here don't get is that I would LOVE that. Pence would actually be much more conservative than Trump and much, much more likely to work with Congress to get things done.

All of the Libs here and in real life that are gunning for Trump aren't really thinking ahead as they want his scalp. It would be the classic case of getting more than you bargained for. By actually accomplishing things Pence and Congress might avert part of the wave that seems to be coming.

If you would love for Pence to be President, why do you spend so much time supporting Trump with your tribalism?

LMAO - as if my support means a goddamned thing. I'm not deluded like you are.

[Guest]

Wade getting overturned in the next 20 years?   Maybe a 10% chance.

1%-5% that Michigan would outlaw and that's probably too high.

The federal level is lower than Michigan.

Abortions are not going to be outlawed.  

Additional restrictions?   Maybe.  
Counseling to birth and adopt?  Possibly.  
Counseling to birth and use available resources to help raise your child?  Probably.

And of course most "choice" people hate all those things too.

Oh I've stated it's #1 of all issues for personal reasons.   Haven't you noticed how that triggers GRR?

Okay. So your #1 issue is abortion, and by your own reckoning, it has a 0.5% chance of being made illegal in Michigan (erring on the high side) and even less of a chance federally. I already told you where I was going with my line of questioning, so I won't harp on this too much more. I'll just ask you one final question: given the odds of success, does it seem prudent to you to prioritize that issue more highly than any other when making voting decisions? I don't imagine that I'm giving you much if anything in the way of new information here, but just consider it from this perspective: by your own estimation, if you lived your life 200 times (in theoretical parallel and identical dimensions or something), abortion would be outlawed in the state of Michigan in precisely one of those lives. I'm sure we'll never see eye to eye on this, but it just doesn't seem like an ideal distribution of your focus from where I sit. Does the likelihood/possibility of the other things you mentioned (additional restrictions, counseling) help to make up the difference, so to speak, in your mind? (Okay, I lied earlier, I had two more questions.)

Because when you support politicians who oppose abortion, quite often you end up supporting politicians who are on the opposite side from you on issues like civil asset forfeiture and marijuana legalization.

I understand that but.....you make a bad assumption at the core of your premise.....that the goal is "outlawing abortion"....no....I recognize that's not going to happen and in reality might not really be the best outcome. Would it affect your thinking if the core goal was to limit abortions? Rather than the Dems parroted talking points to REALLY, REALLY want them to be rare?

I realize most people come to this position from religion and I'm guessing most people think that's what brought me here. I'll type up the longest form of it I've posted here knowing that it'll probably open me to more personal bullshit. But whatever.

My opposition is based on 3 "reasons" or whatever you want to call them. 2 of them happened in my life, I'll start with those. My best friend in HS, my roomie at MSU, the closest I've ever had to a brother. There were stretches where he and hung together for 300+ nights a year. He and a mutual friend were dating. A pregnancy occurred. They wrestled with it, and decided on an abortion. Keep in mind this was now close to 35 years ago. She still weeps over that child, though she had others. He never married, never had another child - and is left now and then to muse when in the mood over what might have been. They've led productive lives but they're still haunted by it.

2nd instance is more personal. My 1st wife was younger than me and kind of sheltered when we married. Had 2 kids in 3 years. 8 months after child #2 she was pregnant again. Wanted to abort. I told her I would fight tooth and nail legally doing whatever I could to save my child. Eventually this was what I was told. "I'll have the baby but if I do then I'm leaving". I agreed. She had my daughter and a couple months later walked. Having my daughter and my grandkids from her was well worth the trade. I raised all 3 alone. So go ahead an lecture me about stepping up for kids.

The 3rd reason or group of reasons is more ethereal.....what have we lost as a nation and a race by those we've aborted? How many Einsteins were among the 45 million? Curies? Science, math, music, art, inventions? Breakthroughs in medicine? What have we lost by ending all those lives? We'll never know - but I think it's indisputable that as a society we've lost progress.

And those are the reasons I'm pro-life. GRR can rant for 22 years and it won't affect me a bit because I see my daughter and her kids smile every day and I know the suffering my friends have gone through.

[WhiteBoyHatcher]

Thank you for sharing that Goose. I appreciate it and I do like to hear others' perspectives, sincerely.

[WhiteBoyHatcher]

Follow up to that - it appears that your stance on abortion drives a lot of your conservatism - is that fair?

[Guest]

Follow up to that - it appears that your stance on abortion drives a lot of your conservatism - is that fair?

Probably because in many other areas like CAF, Drugs, Social Services I would hew much closer to Libertarian and left. I firmly believe it's been a huge mistake for the Dems to make abortion on demand a litmus test for their candidates. They lose a lot of potential votes over it - look at what's happened to their shares of the Catholic/Evangelical vote. Much of the shift can be traced to the single issue.

[NigelUno]

If you would love for Pence to be President, why do you spend so much time supporting Trump with your tribalism?

LMAO - as if my support means a goddamned thing. I'm not deluded like you are.

So...why do you spend so much time supporting Trump then? Doesn't make much sense. Seems like you would do the opposite...if you want him gone (like you say).

[DWags]

Why do you think walking in on naked girls without their consent isn’t assault? Also, you’d have no problem with a guy doing that to your daughter sister mother?


You’re moral outrage has a real sliding scale.

[Guest]

Why do you think walking in on naked girls without their consent isn’t assault? Also, you’d have no problem with a guy doing that to your daughter sister mother?


You’re moral outrage has a real sliding scale.

I guess in your eyes it does. Perhaps you could link me to some of your outraged posts over bathrooms being open to all?? Or are you just outraged when Trump is involved? I think it's sad. I wouldn't do it. I'm not sure if rises to the level of assault.

Trump claimed he was working. He owned the pageant. How is thAt so different from sportswriters male or female in locker rooms when they're working?

[Guest]

LMAO - as if my support means a goddamned thing. I'm not deluded like you are.

So...why do you spend so much time supporting Trump then? Doesn't make much sense. Seems like you would do the opposite...if you want him gone (like you say).

You and others construe everything I post as "supporting Trump". You're wrong 5 0% of the time or more. Many times the posts are opposing dems or the press.

[Turtleneck]

Keep telling yourself that, especially when you vote for him again in 2020.

[DWags]

Why do you think walking in on naked girls without their consent isn’t assault? Also, you’d have no problem with a guy doing that to your daughter sister mother?


You’re moral outrage has a real sliding scale.

I guess in your eyes it does. Perhaps you could link me to some of your outraged posts over bathrooms being open to all?? Or are you just outraged when Trump is involved? I think it's sad. I wouldn't do it. I'm not sure if rises to the level of assault.

Trump claimed he was working. He owned the pageant. How is thAt so different from sportswriters male or female in locker rooms when they're working?

Nah, I think you don’t want to answer the question. So, you did. That’s pretty fucked up.

Sports writers are announced when they let them in. But you’ll say you didn’t know that.

Whatever. You’ve answered to my satisfaction. I get where you’re at.

[Travis of the Cosmos]

Okay. So your #1 issue is abortion, and by your own reckoning, it has a 0.5% chance of being made illegal in Michigan (erring on the high side) and even less of a chance federally. I already told you where I was going with my line of questioning, so I won't harp on this too much more. I'll just ask you one final question: given the odds of success, does it seem prudent to you to prioritize that issue more highly than any other when making voting decisions? I don't imagine that I'm giving you much if anything in the way of new information here, but just consider it from this perspective: by your own estimation, if you lived your life 200 times (in theoretical parallel and identical dimensions or something), abortion would be outlawed in the state of Michigan in precisely one of those lives. I'm sure we'll never see eye to eye on this, but it just doesn't seem like an ideal distribution of your focus from where I sit. Does the likelihood/possibility of the other things you mentioned (additional restrictions, counseling) help to make up the difference, so to speak, in your mind? (Okay, I lied earlier, I had two more questions.)

Because when you support politicians who oppose abortion, quite often you end up supporting politicians who are on the opposite side from you on issues like civil asset forfeiture and marijuana legalization.

I understand that but.....you make a bad assumption at the core of your premise.....that the goal is "outlawing abortion"....no....I recognize that's not going to happen and in reality might not really be the best outcome. Would it affect your thinking if the core goal was to limit abortions? Rather than the Dems parroted talking points to REALLY, REALLY want them to be rare?

I realize most people come to this position from religion and I'm guessing most people think that's what brought me here. I'll type up the longest form of it I've posted here knowing that it'll probably open me to more personal bullshit. But whatever.

My opposition is based on 3 "reasons" or whatever you want to call them. 2 of them happened in my life, I'll start with those. My best friend in HS, my roomie at MSU, the closest I've ever had to a brother. There were stretches where he and hung together for 300+ nights a year. He and a mutual friend were dating. A pregnancy occurred. They wrestled with it, and decided on an abortion. Keep in mind this was now close to 35 years ago. She still weeps over that child, though she had others. He never married, never had another child - and is left now and then to muse when in the mood over what might have been. They've led productive lives but they're still haunted by it.

2nd instance is more personal. My 1st wife was younger than me and kind of sheltered when we married. Had 2 kids in 3 years. 8 months after child #2 she was pregnant again. Wanted to abort. I told her I would fight tooth and nail legally doing whatever I could to save my child. Eventually this was what I was told. "I'll have the baby but if I do then I'm leaving". I agreed. She had my daughter and a couple months later walked. Having my daughter and my grandkids from her was well worth the trade. I raised all 3 alone. So go ahead an lecture me about stepping up for kids.

The 3rd reason or group of reasons is more ethereal.....what have we lost as a nation and a race by those we've aborted? How many Einsteins were among the 45 million? Curies? Science, math, music, art, inventions? Breakthroughs in medicine? What have we lost by ending all those lives? We'll never know - but I think it's indisputable that as a society we've lost progress.

And those are the reasons I'm pro-life. GRR can rant for 22 years and it won't affect me a bit because I see my daughter and her kids smile every day and I know the suffering my friends have gone through.

That’s all well and good that you say that, but you and I have gone into the nuts and bolts of it with you where I say something to the effect of “our first goal should be to limit abortions as much as we can by providing access to birth control of any and all forms for free as widely as possible” and you have fought me saying that that’s not good enough and you can’t agree to it.

So you see, I have no idea how you could write that first paragraph but then argue that we shouldn’t get ways to prevent pregnancy in the first place into any hand that wants them. It doesn’t fit at all.

[WhiteBoyHatcher]

God fuckin dammit, I had a good post typed out and my stupid surface keyboard touchpad ghost activated and somehow I lost it.

[DWags]

True goose how do you reconcile talking locker room, anti abortion and not allowing birth control to be given out? That’s pretty spectacular

[WhiteBoyHatcher]

Ok let me try to condense my shit and get to the point.

Outside of the abortion issue - are you a conservative or do you just really dislike the left? In my observations from your postings on here it seems like the latter but I definitely could be wrong.

If it's yes, or a little bit of the latter or a lot of the latter - why? What did the left do that pissed you off so much?

(To be honest this question is at the heart of what I'm trying to understand about what's going on in this country right now. And shut up Bob.)

[Guest]

I guess in your eyes it does. Perhaps you could link me to some of your outraged posts over bathrooms being open to all?? Or are you just outraged when Trump is involved? I think it's sad. I wouldn't do it. I'm not sure if rises to the level of assault.

Trump claimed he was working. He owned the pageant. How is thAt so different from sportswriters male or female in locker rooms when they're working?

Nah, I think you don’t want to answer the question. So, you did. That’s pretty fucked up.

Sports writers are announced when they let them in. But you’ll say you didn’t know that.

Whatever. You’ve answered to my satisfaction. I get where you’re at.

Do you know Trump wasn't announced?? Christ man he was on Howard Stern fucking around who knows how much he was embellishing??? I doubt he was worrying much about a Presdential run then. Face it, he beat Hills and you hate him for that so will immediately jump to the worst conclusion possible

[Guest]

I understand that but.....you make a bad assumption at the core of your premise.....that the goal is "outlawing abortion"....no....I recognize that's not going to happen and in reality might not really be the best outcome. Would it affect your thinking if the core goal was to limit abortions? Rather than the Dems parroted talking points to REALLY, REALLY want them to be rare?

I realize most people come to this position from religion and I'm guessing most people think that's what brought me here. I'll type up the longest form of it I've posted here knowing that it'll probably open me to more personal bullshit. But whatever.

My opposition is based on 3 "reasons" or whatever you want to call them. 2 of them happened in my life, I'll start with those. My best friend in HS, my roomie at MSU, the closest I've ever had to a brother. There were stretches where he and hung together for 300+ nights a year. He and a mutual friend were dating. A pregnancy occurred. They wrestled with it, and decided on an abortion. Keep in mind this was now close to 35 years ago. She still weeps over that child, though she had others. He never married, never had another child - and is left now and then to muse when in the mood over what might have been. They've led productive lives but they're still haunted by it.

2nd instance is more personal. My 1st wife was younger than me and kind of sheltered when we married. Had 2 kids in 3 years. 8 months after child #2 she was pregnant again. Wanted to abort. I told her I would fight tooth and nail legally doing whatever I could to save my child. Eventually this was what I was told. "I'll have the baby but if I do then I'm leaving". I agreed. She had my daughter and a couple months later walked. Having my daughter and my grandkids from her was well worth the trade. I raised all 3 alone. So go ahead an lecture me about stepping up for kids.

The 3rd reason or group of reasons is more ethereal.....what have we lost as a nation and a race by those we've aborted? How many Einsteins were among the 45 million? Curies? Science, math, music, art, inventions? Breakthroughs in medicine? What have we lost by ending all those lives? We'll never know - but I think it's indisputable that as a society we've lost progress.

And those are the reasons I'm pro-life. GRR can rant for 22 years and it won't affect me a bit because I see my daughter and her kids smile every day and I know the suffering my friends have gone through.

That’s all well and good that you say that, but you and I have gone into the nuts and bolts of it with you where I say something to the effect of “our first goal should be to limit abortions as much as we can by providing access to birth control of any and all forms for free as widely as possible” and you have fought me saying that that’s not good enough and you can’t agree to it.

So you see, I have no idea how you could write that first paragraph but then argue that we shouldn’t get ways to prevent pregnancy in the first place into any hand that wants them. It doesn’t fit at all.

I don't think I've argued against most birth control. I may have argued over forcing other people to pay for yours

[Guest]

Ok let me try to condense my shit and get to the point.

Outside of the abortion issue - are you a conservative or do you just really dislike the left? In my observations from your postings on here it seems like the latter but I definitely could be wrong.

If it's yes, or a little bit of the latter or a lot of the latter - why? What did the left do that pissed you off so much?

(To be honest this question is at the heart of what I'm trying to understand about what's going on in this country right now. And shut up Bob.)

I'll come back to this. On my tablet and I hate typing on this.

[Travis of the Cosmos]

That’s all well and good that you say that, but you and I have gone into the nuts and bolts of it with you where I say something to the effect of “our first goal should be to limit abortions as much as we can by providing access to birth control of any and all forms for free as widely as possible” and you have fought me saying that that’s not good enough and you can’t agree to it.

So you see, I have no idea how you could write that first paragraph but then argue that we shouldn’t get ways to prevent pregnancy in the first place into any hand that wants them. It doesn’t fit at all.

I don't think I've argued against most birth control.  I may have argued over forcing other people to pay for yours  

Well what the hell why not? I mean, we’re not talking about tax bills designed to get billionaires better access to planes here. If our goal is to limit abortions and better and free access to birth control might help (seems logical) then why not just give it a shot, right? Worst case is some dollars are wasted and abortions don’t go down, though that seems unlikely. Best case abortion rates drop significantly.

Note- I think your general argument was that condoms are already cheap and people can get them most places. But, honestly, let’s try to make it even easier and cheaper to not get pregnant in the first place. It just all seems so obvious to me.

Edit- while the argument that condoms are already cheap is fine, at the same time you’re the one complaining that abortion rates are too high. So obviously there’s some kind of problem there.

[WhiteBoyHatcher]

They have tablets in Mio?

(I'm just kidding brah)

[NigelUno]

So...why do you spend so much time supporting Trump then? Doesn't make much sense. Seems like you would do the opposite...if you want him gone (like you say).

You and others construe everything I post as "supporting Trump". You're wrong 5 0% of the time or more. Many times the posts are opposing dems or the press.

You want Trump gone. That's what you said. Why do you oppose anyone who also wants him gone?

You attack Trump's adversaries. You don't think that means you support Trump?

You went on a statue binge when a woman was killed by some white supremacists. Who do you think you're kidding?

[DWags]

Nah, I think you don’t want to answer the question. So, you did. That’s pretty fucked up.

Sports writers are announced when they let them in. But you’ll say you didn’t know that.

Whatever. You’ve answered to my satisfaction. I get where you’re at.

Do you know Trump wasn't announced?? Christ man he was on Howard Stern fucking around who knows how much he was embellishing??? I doubt he was worrying much about a Presdential run then. Face it, he beat Hills and you hate him for that so will immediately jump to the worst conclusion possible

Ah, I hate him because he disrespects women and he’s a racist. Two qualities that attract him to others.

[Robert J Sakimano]

Hey Goose,

What up, G?

Me? Not much. Drinking expensive coffee, about to go running.

You know I dig you. So how do you reconcile your "pro-life-at-birth" stance with what I perceive to be your support for the death penalty?

It's always been one of those things I don't understand about the right. I know I'm not overly smart, but I'm really trying to understand it.

FYI I'm not trolling.

Thanks, dude. Have a good Sunday. It's the lord's day.

Pro-Life-edly Yours,

Robert J Sakimano

[Guest]

Do you know Trump wasn't announced?? Christ man he was on Howard Stern fucking around who knows how much he was embellishing??? I doubt he was worrying much about a Presdential run then. Face it, he beat Hills and you hate him for that so will immediately jump to the worst conclusion possible

Ah, I hate him because he disrespects women and he’s a racist. Two qualities that attract him to others.

I guess.

Here's the thing that amuses me to no end, I'm pretty sure you and others don't really think about this but perhaps you do and somehow justify/reconcile it.

Trump:

When he says/does something that could in any way be construed as positive for him - he's a liar and a braggart.

When he says does something that can be spun as a negative - he's a very precise oracle of truth. No matter that it might have been 10 years ago and he was bullshitting with a friend in private or getting egged on by Howard Stern and Robin. Nope, in your mind everything he said was dead on truth and should be looked at in the worst possible light.

Now after I point that out I can have 10 more people tell me how I'm "supporting Trump".

[Guest]

Hey Goose,

What up, G?

Me? Not much. Drinking expensive coffee, about to go running.

You know I dig you. So how do you reconcile your "pro-life-at-birth" stance with what I perceive to be your support for the death penalty?

It's always been one of those things I don't understand about the right. I know I'm not overly smart, but I'm really trying to understand it.

FYI I'm not trolling.

Thanks, dude. Have a good Sunday. It's the lord's day.

Pro-Life-edly Yours,

Robert J Sakimano

I suppose we could get into a debate about executions of innocents - but that's pretty rare. So my answer in a nutshell is contained right there - those on death row had a chance and blew it - the innocent child that was aborted never had a chance.

[Guest]

You and others construe everything I post as "supporting Trump". You're wrong 5 0% of the time or more. Many times the posts are opposing dems or the press.

You want Trump gone. That's what you said. Why do you oppose anyone who also wants him gone?

You attack Trump's adversaries. You don't think that means you support Trump?

You went on a statue binge when a woman was killed by some white supremacists. Who do you think you're kidding?

Because they want him gone for political reasons not for valid reasons.
Does having a common enemy make you a friend?
Obviously I can't kid a sharp soccer ball like you.

[Travis of the Cosmos]

Hey Goose,

What up, G?

Me? Not much. Drinking expensive coffee, about to go running.

You know I dig you. So how do you reconcile your "pro-life-at-birth" stance with what I perceive to be your support for the death penalty?

It's always been one of those things I don't understand about the right. I know I'm not overly smart, but I'm really trying to understand it.

FYI I'm not trolling.

Thanks, dude. Have a good Sunday. It's the lord's day.

Pro-Life-edly Yours,

Robert J Sakimano

I suppose we could get into a debate about executions of innocents - but that's pretty rare. So my answer in a nutshell is contained right there - those on death row had a chance and blew it - the innocent child that was aborted never had a chance.

4%

[Guest]

I don't think I've argued against most birth control.  I may have argued over forcing other people to pay for yours  

Well what the hell why not? I mean, we’re not talking about tax bills designed to get billionaires better access to planes here. If our goal is to limit abortions and better and free access to birth control might help (seems logical) then why not just give it a shot, right? Worst case is some dollars are wasted and abortions don’t go down, though that seems unlikely. Best case abortion rates drop significantly.

Note- I think your general argument was that condoms are already cheap and people can get them most places. But, honestly, let’s try to make it even easier and cheaper to not get pregnant in the first place. It just all seems so obvious to me.

Edit- while the argument that condoms are already cheap is fine, at the same time you’re the one complaining that abortion rates are too high. So obviously there’s some kind of problem there.

Simple answer to "why the hell not" is that it's against some people's religious beliefs so the government supposedly shouldn't be forcing them to violate those beliefs. Simple answer is this - if you don't want to pay for your own condoms/IUDs then don't work for Hobby Lobby or the Sisters of the Poor.

[Travis of the Cosmos]

Well what the hell why not? I mean, we’re not talking about tax bills designed to get billionaires better access to planes here. If our goal is to limit abortions and better and free access to birth control might help (seems logical) then why not just give it a shot, right? Worst case is some dollars are wasted and abortions don’t go down, though that seems unlikely. Best case abortion rates drop significantly.

Note- I think your general argument was that condoms are already cheap and people can get them most places. But, honestly, let’s try to make it even easier and cheaper to not get pregnant in the first place. It just all seems so obvious to me.

Edit- while the argument that condoms are already cheap is fine, at the same time you’re the one complaining that abortion rates are too high. So obviously there’s some kind of problem there.

Simple answer to "why the hell not" is that it's against some people's religious beliefs so the government supposedly shouldn't be forcing them to violate those beliefs. Simple answer is this - if you don't want to pay for your own condoms/IUDs then don't work for Hobby Lobby or the Sisters of the Poor.

Fuck em. Seriously. Fuck em. I get that they’re on your team, but you said you want to limit abortions right? Fuck em. They want to live in a society then part of that is not always getting your way for the greater good and this is pretty reasonable.

Your answer is just not consistent. Sorry. It’s team sports you’re playing.

[Guest]

Ok let me try to condense my shit and get to the point.

Outside of the abortion issue - are you a conservative or do you just really dislike the left? In my observations from your postings on here it seems like the latter but I definitely could be wrong.

If it's yes, or a little bit of the latter or a lot of the latter - why? What did the left do that pissed you off so much?

(To be honest this question is at the heart of what I'm trying to understand about what's going on in this country right now. And shut up Bob.)

I consider myself conservative on issues so yes I think I'm a conservative with some Libertarian positions and perhaps more liberal socially than some others.

I think we can agree that all politicians are hypocrites. The left is that way on my "hot button" issues. They've lied to people for all of my life to get elected and then done the opposite in office.

Plus I have to admit that it pisses me off that the right never sticks to their party members in trouble like the left does. They're much better at damage control although the press helps there.

I don't care much for the R party since they've betrayed us on every issue but 2 - abortion and the 2nd amendment. Once they cave on one or both of those I think you'll see a new party of the right emerge.

It used to be that there were Dems that supported both of those issues, not anymore. Here's something I stumbled across ;-) yesterday - and yes the site is "Right Wing News" but the survey seems legit. Maybe you could read it and come back to talk about how only the uneducated vote R.

PS - Another myth is that the reason for the "divide" is that the Rs have moved right - the reality is that more of the movement has been on the left.

Poll Shows Voters Are Widely
Misinformed About Key Issues

Giving voice to the opinion of many liberals and Democrats, Jeff Jarvis, a journalism professor at the City University of New York, wrote that Donald Trump’s election as president was a “victory of the uneducated and uninformed.”

Conversely, Trump expressed the view of many conservatives and Republicans by writing that “the fake news media” is “the enemy of the American people.” The ratio of registered Democrats to registered Republicans among journalism/communications professors at leading U.S. universities is about 20 to 1.

Each side considers the other to be ignorant, blinded by partisanship, or simply dishonest. This conflict goes well beyond subjective beliefs but to the actual facts of key issues. So-called “fact checkers” claim to settle such disputes, but they often mislead readers by overlooking vital facts, misrepresenting the sources they cite, and reporting the opinions of selected “experts” as if they were facts.

To shed light on these matters, Just Facts commissions a professional polling firm to conduct a scientific, nationwide annual poll of people who vote “every time there is an opportunity” or in “most” elections. In other words, these are engaged citizens who regularly exercise their constitutional right to choose the politicians who govern them.

While most polls measure public opinion, this unique poll measures voters’ knowledge of issues that affect their lives in tangible ways. These include education, taxes, healthcare, the national debt, pollution, government spending, Social Security, global warming, energy, and hunger.

Each year, the poll also includes a question about a prevalent, controversial issue. This year’s question is about racial disparities in the use of deadly force by police officers. This is the driving factor behind NFL player protests during the national anthem.

Results for All Voters

For each question, voters were offered a selection of two or more answers, one of which was true. Voters also had the opportunity to say they were unsure.

On average, voters gave the correct answer 38% of the time, gave an incorrect answer 52% of the time, said they were unsure 9% of the time, and refused to answer 1% of the time. A majority of voters gave the correct answer to only five of the 24 questions. These results indicate that many voters may be casting ballots based on warped notions of reality.

The highest levels of ignorance were found on questions related to child hunger, tax burdens, landfills, hurricanes, health insurance copayments, and Social Security finances. In these cases, 25% or less of voters provided the correct answer, and in one case, only 8% of voters did.

Results by Age, Gender, and Politics

The poll also recorded voters’ ages, genders, and political party preferences. This allows the poll to pinpoint segments of society that are most and least informed about specific issues.

The results show deep partisan and demographic divides, with different groups being more or less knowledgeable depending upon the questions.

In total, the rates at which voters gave the correct answers varied from a high of 47% for Republican voters to a low of 31% for Democrat voters:

47% for Republican voters
42% for males
40% for third-party voters
39% for 35 to 64 year olds
37% for 65+ year olds
36% for undecided voters
34% for females
31% for Democrat voters
The sample size of 18 to 34 year olds was too small to produce meaningful data.

Poll Details

The poll was conducted by Conquest Communications Group, a professional polling firm located in Virginia. The responses were obtained through live telephone surveys of 700 voters across the continental United States on November 1–9, 2017.

The margin of sampling error for all voters is plus or minus 4% with at least 95% confidence. The margins of error for the subsets of voters are 6% for Democrat voters, 7% for Republican voters, 10% for third-party voters, 11% for undecided voters, 5% for males, 5% for females, 6% for 35 to 64 year olds, and 5% for 65+ year olds.

The questions and results are detailed below.

[NigelUno]

You want Trump gone. That's what you said. Why do you oppose anyone who also wants him gone?

You attack Trump's adversaries. You don't think that means you support Trump?

You went on a statue binge when a woman was killed by some white supremacists. Who do you think you're kidding?

Because they want him gone for political reasons not for valid reasons.
Does having a common enemy make you a friend?
Obviously I can't kid a sharp soccer ball like you.

Let me get this straight...

YOUR reasons for wanting to get rid of Trump are valid, but other people's are not?

I'll play along...what are the valid reasons to get rid of him?

You brought it up. Don't back down and disappear now.

I also noticed you didn't address the statue issue. That would seem like a great opportunity for you (or anyone) to recognize that Trump's comments on what happened in Charlottesville were preposterous. Instead you toed the Trump/white supremacist party line.

[Travis of the Cosmos]

I also reject the ridiculous “my tax dollars” notion that a lot of fuckin righteous assholes go rant on on both sides. Get over yourselves you fuckin idiots that pay $3k a year most of which goes to the military.

[Guest]

Because they want him gone for political reasons not for valid reasons.
Does having a common enemy make you a friend?
Obviously I can't kid a sharp soccer ball like you.

Let me get this straight...

YOUR reasons for wanting to get rid of Trump are valid, but other people's are not?

I'll play along...what are the valid reasons to get rid of him?

You brought it up. Don't back down and disappear now.

I also noticed you didn't address the statue issue. That would seem like a great opportunity for you (or anyone) to recognize that Trump's comments on what happened in Charlottesville were preposterous. Instead you toed the Trump/white supremacist party line.

lol, tough Nigel. I don't know of any valid reasons. You play along and name one with proof that rises above what other Presidents have done.

The statue "issue" is more made up bullshit. He didn't compliment the supremacists, if you can't be honest enough to acknowledge that you're not worth the time. And BTW if you want to "admit" things how about acknowledging that I was dead on right when I predicted it would not end with Confederate Generals?

[NigelUno]

Let me get this straight...

YOUR reasons for wanting to get rid of Trump are valid, but other people's are not?

I'll play along...what are the valid reasons to get rid of him?

You brought it up. Don't back down and disappear now.

I also noticed you didn't address the statue issue. That would seem like a great opportunity for you (or anyone) to recognize that Trump's comments on what happened in Charlottesville were preposterous. Instead you toed the Trump/white supremacist party line.

lol, tough Nigel. I don't know of any valid reasons. You play along and name one with proof that rises above what other Presidents have done.

The statue "issue" is more made up bullshit. He didn't compliment the supremacists, if you can't be honest enough to acknowledge that you're not worth the time. And BTW if you want to "admit" things how about acknowledging that I was dead on right when I predicted it would not end with Confederate Generals?

Goose?

The white supremacists loved that he called them "very fine people". It validated them, as does your continual emphasis on the statues...as opposed to the guys carrying torches.

It's cool that you can rationalize all that in your head.

[Guest]

Goose?

The white supremacists loved that he called them "very fine people". It validated them, as does your continual emphasis on the statues...as opposed to the guys carrying torches.

It's cool that you can rationalize all that in your head.

Except he didn't.

[Guest]

Ran across this today.

Why Can’t More Republicans Back Doug Jones? One Word: Abortion             Liberals can’t quite accept this, but to many conservatives, what Roy Moore allegedly did is hideous—but supporting abortion rights is worse.

To be sure, this is a complicated issue and there are (for many Americans) nuances. Some people believe life begins at conception, while some even support abortion under any circumstances. Somewhere in the middle, many mainstream Americans would settle for a ban on abortion after 20 weeks (five months). The majority of Americans support this ban as a sort of culture-war compromise. But when Chuck Todd asked Jones if he would “be in favor of legislation that said ban abortion after 20 weeks, or something like that?” Jones responded: “No, I’m not in favor of anything that is going to infringe on a woman’s right and her freedom to choose,” Jones said. “That’s just the position that I’ve had for many years, it’s the position I continue to have.”

It should be noted that Jones wasn’t under political duress from his left flank when he made this confession. He said this more than a month after winning the Democratic nomination in Alabama.

Jones very clearly stakes out an extreme position on what many see as a definitive life or death issue. What is more, it is a threshold issue for the very kinds of voters who might see Roy Moore’s behavior as unacceptable. This is not to say that Jones can’t win, but it is to say that he would be in a much better position to make Republicans “comfortable” if he weren’t so radical on this hot-button issue.

It seems to me that there should be a party for the person who cares about defending the unborn—and protecting the refuge and the immigrant. There should be a party for the person who wants to say “Merry Christmas” at the Wal-Mart, but also believes that our culture has become too commercialized. Whether you’re for defending unborn children, underage waitresses, or refugees, these are all issues that people of faith and compassion might band together on in defense of the vulnerable against the powerful.  But there is no one political party (or movement) that is consistent on these issues. In fact, politically speaking, they are almost mutually exclusive.  

It wasn’t always this way. Writing about a time when many liberals were pro-life, Princeton Professor Robert George yearns for a time when liberals “saw no contradiction between their commitment to liberalism and their devotion to the pro-life cause. On the contrary, they understood their pro-life convictions to be part and parcel of what it meant to be a liberal. They were ‘for the little guy’ and the unborn child was ‘the littlest guy of all.’” (Before Roe v. Wade became the liberal litmus test, Democrats like Jesse Jackson, Ted Kennedy, and Al Gore could get away with being pro-life.)

[Turtleneck]

From the Moore thread.

And here is the answer to so much...from the mouth of the Alabama governor, Kay Ivey,

"I'm going to cast my ballot on December the 12th, and I do believe the nominee of the party is the one I'll vote for," Ivey said. "I believe in the Republican Party, what we stand for, and most important, we need to have a Republican in the United States Senate to vote on things like the Supreme Court justices, other appointments the Senate has to confirm and make major decisions. So that's what I plan to do, vote for Republican nominee Roy Moore."
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/gov_kay_ivey_to_vote_for_roy_m.html

I agree. It comes down to justices who would be willing to overturn Roe v. Wade. That is what was most likely on the governor's mind when she made that comment.

[Robert J Sakimano]

Ah, I hate him because he disrespects women and he’s a racist. Two qualities that attract him to others.

I guess.

Here's the thing that amuses me to no end, I'm pretty sure you and others don't really think about this but perhaps you do and somehow justify/reconcile it.

Trump:

When he says/does something that could in any way be construed as positive for him - he's a liar and a braggart.

When he says does something that can be spun as a negative - he's a very precise oracle of truth. No matter that it might have been 10 years ago and he was bullshitting with a friend in private or getting egged on by Howard Stern and Robin. Nope, in your mind everything he said was dead on truth and should be looked at in the worst possible light.

Now after I point that out I can have 10 more people tell me how I'm "supporting Trump".

when I see/hear/witness misogynists, racists, bigots and sexual predators, I assume that's what they are.

It makes me thankful I'm not religious because I sleep perfectly well at night not having to justify my acceptance of someone so immoral.

[Robert J Sakimano]

Hey Goose,

What up, G?

Me? Not much. Drinking expensive coffee, about to go running.

You know I dig you. So how do you reconcile your "pro-life-at-birth" stance with what I perceive to be your support for the death penalty?

It's always been one of those things I don't understand about the right. I know I'm not overly smart, but I'm really trying to understand it.

FYI I'm not trolling.

Thanks, dude. Have a good Sunday. It's the lord's day.

Pro-Life-edly Yours,

Robert J Sakimano

I suppose we could get into a debate about executions of innocents - but that's pretty rare. So my answer in a nutshell is contained right there - those on death row had a chance and blew it - the innocent child that was aborted never had a chance.

I see it like those people on death row are a living, breathing human life. And just like the rest of us, they have moms, dads, sisters, brothers, maybe children, etc who will miss them and whose life will be changed forever when the 'christian' government murders them.

So, again, I simply can't fathom supporting someone taking the life of another human. And I'll never understand those who do.

[Sponsored content]