I didn’t want to put the additional information outside of the graph because the graph is so damned big to begin with.
Rest assured, no data points were harmed in the editing of the graph.
Thank you.
We now return you to your regular Bar-B-Q Pit thread already in progress.
Are we talking about the same thread? The one where I posted some quotes from the article, then ASKED if it was true? The one where my big ‘sack of snarkapples’ was my comment that we should stick to the science and not over-hype it, because in the end it will wind up hurting the environmental movement’s credibility?
I’m not sure how that qualifies as ‘nincompoopitude’. Nor am I really sure what I was supposed to defend, since it seems to be general consensus that in fact Gore did over-state the case in several areas, and in fact a couple of posters said that global warming was being overhyped, and approved of that because it would scare people into taking action. I’ve been reading the debate with interest, but haven’t really had anything else to say.
I don’t recall ever saying I was a better person than you. Why, just tonight I ate a live puppy. I’m still picking its cute little entrails out of my teeth. All I did was express annoyance that you’ve seemingly fallen into a pattern of dropping into threads for no other reason than to leave a condescending jab at your enemies. It gets old. But hey, whatever torques your nut.
Sorry, got here late, but…
… Nailed it in one.
Well, after all the Political Compass thing, It looks at first as if I might be forced to concede that there is a leftward lean, however, I think it might actually be the case that the centre of the political compass isn’t really the centre at all, except perhaps theoretically. Maybe the whole world has a leftie slant, and everything else just inherits it.
Easily pleased, are they?
Which of course depends on whose theory you are applying.
Well, yes - but the point is that the geometric centre of all extant political views (or all possible political views) may not coincide with the average of all those political views, so it would be quite possible for the whole world to have a liberal bias, and for the board to simply reflect that.
“Near total control” means… what? The fact is, the GOP only had a meaningful majority in the Senate for 2 of those years. And who the fuck are you to decide who should be more happier about life or even if they are more happier about life?
Yeah, because that is the only thing that the government has done in the past 60 years. :rolleyes:
Eh. It’s called politics. Sounds like you’re pissed that your side doesn’t know how to play the game well.
You have an interesting definition of “gutted”. Exactly how many abortions did it stop?
You’re passionate about your cause, and that’s great… for you. But if you have no respect for the other side, then you’re just a partisan hack. That’s what this thread is about.
Maybe you missed a bunch of legislation the GOP passed when it lacked “meaningful control” of the Senate. Like two enormous tax cuts, the Patriot Act, and a bunch of other stuff.
And who the fuck am I? Just some guy named Vinnie in his bathrobe. 
I’m just applying that ancient human norm that if you get the things you want, you should be happier than if you didn’t. I don’t see that that’s extremely complicated.
OK then, what major Dem accomplishments from the 1947-2007 period is the GOP particularly unhappy about? ISTM that so many of those accomplishments that the GOP fought against, tooth and nail, are now accepted as good things even by most Republicans.
No, I was pointing out that your claim that the GOP couldn’t really do much because they didn’t have a 60-vote supermajority was by and large false; that it only seems to work one way. Yeah, the Dems don’t play hardball on every little thing the way today’s GOP does; hell, even the GOP never played that sorta hardball before. I’m not pissed about it, so much as hoping and praying that the Dems learn to play hardball right back.
Wow, it didn’t stop all abortions overnight? Golly. It just provides the basis for substantially gutting abortion rights in upcoming cases. If they can’t see that and at least feel some hope as a result, that’s their problem and not mine.
To the extent that the other side is for what Bush is for, and against what Bush is against, with only a couple of tribal/nativist exceptions, I don’t think the other side deserves respect. When they stand up to Bush on the war, on global warming, on warrantless wiretapping, on stuff like that, I’ll respect them.
Until then, it’s far from hackery to say: they’re just plain wrong.
Sometimes, one side really is just plain wrong. This is that time.
Thanks. But just to be clear, I was not defending conservative political positions, just explaining that one can hardly expect them to think that their entire political platform has been enacted in the last 6 years.
Well, there you have it. They’re just plain wrong.
Some of us don’t view politics like a sport where you route for one side and hiss at the other. As long as you’re convinced that you’re team is “right” and the other team is “wrong”, there really is not point debating with you. Same goes for partisans on the right (no pun intended). Some of us prefer to look at issues individually, and not worry about whether it’s something that is supported by the right or the left.
Let’s not forget that what we’re talking about here is how we treat posters on this board. It’s really that simple. If you can’t respect the people you’re debating with, then you’re not debating-- you’re jeering. Which is exactly what this thread is about. Some of us would like this board to be something other than FreeRepublic meets Democratic Underground. Silly us.
That’s all I have to say on this subject.
Happy 4th, all.
Cuts both ways, doesn’t it? What Democrats running today clamor for pre-1981 tax rates?
Good point! What do these minor accomplishments matter compared to the Dems brutal injustice towards the well-off!
It’s gotten so bad that the local Ron Paul supporters are reduced to spray painting their campaign slogans on used cardboard boxes. The telephone polls look like a ‘will work for food’ convention today. Someone needs to do something for these poor oppressed bastards.
That clamor you hear is for pre-2001 budget deficits.
Except that the board, at least by casual observation, seems to be about 90% Americans.
Maybe it does. I’m just having a hard time seeing it in Russia, much of the U.S., the Far East, the Middle East etc…
I’ve always meant to ask you - given the username Mangetout, are you sure you’re not Michael Moore? 
To be sure, the board’s leftward tilt doesn’t especially concern me, except that 1) more conservatives makes for better debates, 2) One Scooter Libby* Pit thread at a time is probably enough, and 3) the preponderance of Accurate and Virtuous thinking here tends to lead to nasty letdowns when the outer world makes its presence known, as in the 2004 election. There’s a lot of (over?)confidence in Dem/Left circles now, but not a lot has been won just yet.
*For those whose intense curiosity about the outcome of the 2007 Rat’s Ass Awards is killing them, let it only be said that the entire Scooter Libby debacle is steadily climbing the charts, though still trailing Paris Hilton and Barry Bonds.
No kidding. This is, in fact, as I said earlier, about how the country is run.
Feel free to explain how you get “rooting for a side” out of that, John.
“Some of us prefer to look at issues individually, and” see if any patterns emerge. And oh boy, have they ever.
There’s a reason why I start a lot of threads in the Pit rather than GD these days: I start to post in GD, then I imagine a poster asking me, “what’s the debate?” and, lacking an answer, I open it in the Pit instead.
I respect honest arguments, even when a poster I disrespect is making them. (It happens every now and then. I’m open to pleasant surprises.) I have little respect for when posters just throw stuff at the screen in the apparent hope that something they say will eventually stick. I notice over time who does almost exclusively the latter, and very little of the former. That’s all I’ll say about respect.
I’m unfamiliar with Democratic Underground, but I’ve seen what passes for argument amongst the Freepers, or even RedState, for that matter. Anyone who brings that crap here, deserves what they get.
And the same to you. How do you like the fireworks?
If by “the whole world” you mean North America and Europe, maybe. Except for the Israel-hating and blame-America-first attitude, I doubt that most Middle Eastern countries would be on the left’s side on issues like abortion and gay rights.
I dunno what the ‘consensus’ is on Gore, but here’s what you said there, based on an op-ed by a shill from a right-wing glurge tank:
Not ‘overstated the case in several areas’ as you soften it for our consumption here, but “radical claims…which are not backed up by science.” “Exaggerations.” “Over-exaggeration of the consequences.” “Mak[ing] shit up just to grab attention and scare people.”
Let the record reflect your actual words.
ETA: As the stuff in the quote box shows, you weren’t ASKING about whether Gore had overstated anything. You said he was the “chief culprit” and all the rest. No question-mark, no “is he?” but rather “he is.”
Sure, but they’re not strongly represented here anyway, or perhaps it would be more correct to say the SDMB isn’t a cross section that includes them.