|
Dirk Pitt posted:Local shithead on AM 1520 in OKC wants armed police in elementary schools. And the answer to too many guns is MORE GUNS!!!
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:12 |
|
|
Twisted Perspective posted:And the answer to too many guns is MORE GUNS!!! AND ALL THE MASS SHOOTINGS IN RECENT AMERICAN HISTORY HAVE HAPPENED AT GUN FREE PLACES!!! And: THERE IS NO SUCH CLASSIFICATION AS AN "ASSAULT RIFLE" THAT IS MEDIA HOCUS POCUS TRYING TO DISARM 'MERICA According to same shithead. The shock jocks are out in full force today. Rush was also rambling on about something about how a knife attack in China with no fatalities is the exact same as 20 first grade children being pulverized by a M16 look-a-like.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 19:19
|
|
|
Butt Soup Barnes posted:IIRC it was found that all the other networks had the same audio gap in their transcription for a while, so it's more likely that the transcribing service made the error and all of the networks pulled from the same source. Are you sure about this? I pretty clearly remember that people on this very board only noticed the gap in the transcript because other networks didn't have it. There was even a page up pretty quickly that compared Fox News's transcript with one of the others and highlighted the differences for you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 19:25
|
|
|
Twisted Perspective posted:I'll give it a try. It was in the election thread so it may take some time. Holy poo poo. This is seriously damning evidence. The statistical likelihood of that type of recurring pattern is infinitesimally small.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 19:29
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:Are you sure about this? I pretty clearly remember that people on this very board only noticed the gap in the transcript because other networks didn't have it. There was even a page up pretty quickly that compared Fox News's transcript with one of the others and highlighted the differences for you. No, I'm not sure (hence the IIRC). But what I think I remember was from the D&D thread of the debate, I'll go back and see if I can find it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
Twisted Perspective posted:I'll give it a try. It was in the election thread so it may take some time. I read that, but I can't quite figure out how they spotted it. It's just the fact that the larger the district, the greater Romney's vote advantage? vvv I saw that bit, but how do you determine that? Did they do a recount after the fact, or what? LaserShark fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Dec 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 19:55
|
|
|
LaserShark posted:I read that, but I can't quite figure out how they spotted it. It's just the fact that the larger the district, the greater Romney's vote advantage? All the other candidates had votes deducted from their total and added to Romney's after their ballots were cast. As you can imagine, that should be impossible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 19:56
|
|
|
colonelslime posted:Holy poo poo. This is seriously damning evidence. The statistical likelihood of that type of recurring pattern is infinitesimally small. It would be if the geographic distribution of voters were random, but it very much is not. It is entirely reasonable that rural voters (in the small districts) may have preferred Santorum over Romney while more urban districts backed Romney at slightly higher rates. This could be due to anything from simply different backgrounds to differences in campaign event locations. He claims that he tried to find correlation between income, ruralness, race, etc but didn't find it for anything but precinct size. I really don't buy that because precinct size will pretty clearly track how rural the area is, which would then likely cause at least an income correlation. Twisted Perspective posted:All the other candidates had votes deducted from their total and added to Romney's after their ballots were cast. No, it is a proportion thing, the axes are percentages. The total number of votes given to each candidate is always increasing. If anything statistical is at play it looks like a nice example of the Law of Large Numbers
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 20:01
|
|
|
LaserShark posted:I read that, but I can't quite figure out how they spotted it. It's just the fact that the larger the district, the greater Romney's vote advantage? It has to do with the statistical improbability of smooth proportionality. There should be no correlation between the size of a voting district and the proportion of votes that went to Romney, and away from Santorum. Like they said, the much more common trend-line for this stuff is the one for Gingrich, where a candidate will get more or less a steady proportion of the vote, with some deviations up or down. The type of smooth trend line could easily be indicative of a computer algorithm systematically switching votes from computerized terminals in a way that would be much more subtle than stuffing a ballot box, or just taking a large chunk of votes and switching them. That on its own would have been exceedingly odd, bu not impossible, but combined with the same trend line appearing in every state controlled by a Republican governor, it indicates something is up. Reality just isn't that clean and predictable, especially in cases where human agency is variable. Edit: If you look at the original piece from UK progressive, the NSA guy who compiled this stuff finds a surprisingly robust trend across multiple states and over multiple elections. It's true that it could just be down to voter demographics, but a continuous trend upwards, always of 8-10%. He even points out that the trend, when it appeared in actual elections, showed a systematic decrease for the democratic candidates from smallest (rural) district, to larger urban ones. If it is a case of the rural areas being more hardline conservative, then you wouldn't expect the same trend to appear for the election replacing Giffords, for example. Political Whores fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Dec 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 20:06
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:It would be if the geographic distribution of voters were random, but it very much is not. It is entirely reasonable that rural voters (in the small districts) may have preferred Santorum over Romney while more urban districts backed Romney at slightly higher rates. This could be due to anything from simply different backgrounds to differences in campaign event locations. While I confess I don't know much about statistics the end result is exactly that, according to the article: quote:For once, the Tea Party is correct: there is fraud afoot. But it is not dead people voting, it’s not non-citizens voting or people trying to impersonate other voters. It’s not voter fraud, it is election fraud. The election fraud going on is this: votes are being stolen by manipulating electronic voting machines to take votes from one or more candidates to benefit whomever someone (the vote counter?) has decided should win. This lucky candidate is always a Republican. State after state, case after case, the Republicans are clearly committing widespread, systematic election fraud. Can you explain how this is not the case when experts from all over the world seem to agree that it is? Edit: Nevermind, Colonelslime explained it very well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 20:09
|
|
|
Twisted Perspective posted:While I confess I don't know much about statistics the end result is exactly that, according to the article: Is there enough information here to warrant a new thread on the subject? Because this is fascinating.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 21:08
|
|
|
I can't find the post I made about this already but the evidence sucks. It's much more likely that the district size to Romney relation was due to normal demographic things than that there was "cheating to the extent a district was large". The initial analysis was ad hoc and cherry-picked specific districts to "disprove" the obvious confounds. Maybe something new has been added but that summary seems like additional nonsense on top of a flimsy base of nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 21:15
|
|
|
pangstrom posted:I can't find the post I made about this already but the evidence sucks. It's much more likely that the district size to Romney relation was due to normal demographic things than that there was "cheating to the extent a district was large". The initial analysis was ad hoc and cherry-picked specific districts to "disprove" the obvious confounds. Maybe something new has been added but that summary seems like additional nonsense on top of a flimsy base of nonsense. Quite possible, I was only going from the reported findings, I didn't take the time to look at the nitty gritty of it. Thinking about it, if there was strong proof of this, it would have made more of a splash by now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 21:34
|
|
|
colonelslime posted:Quite possible, I was only going from the reported findings, I didn't take the time to look at the nitty gritty of it. Thinking about it, if there was strong proof of this, it would have made more of a splash by now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 21:51
|
|
|
These people have no shame,no whatsoever:
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 21:53
|
|
|
Why has nobody been prosecuted for that other fraud stuff? That is terrifying and frankly, to finally use the term correctly, unamerican. Jesus Christ I wish we were better than that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 22:04
|
|
|
Sean Archer posted:These people have no shame,no whatsoever:
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
Sean Archer posted:These people have no shame,no whatsoever: The only way this makes any sense is if the Detroit teachers ran away from a school shooting, leaving children to fend for themselves, in order to attend a political rally. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 23:18
|
|
|
Just posting about the Steve Sternberg survey- apparently Fox News average viewer is 65 years old. A great number, I can't seem to find anything beyond the hollywoodreporter article and then two dozen websites parroting it: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/live-feed/fox-news-oldest-cable-audience-54230 Is there a link floating out there to the actual survey? Should this number be taken with a grain of salt, or can we extrapolate more data from this? I'm trying to draw a better picture of the American political demographics and wondering how age really plays into it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 23:47
|
|
|
Sean Archer posted:These people have no shame,no whatsoever: I want to remove the brain of the person who thought this was a good idea and study it for the rest of time. I want to know the timeline of how this image came to be. Was this person watching the coverage and heard about the story of the teacher who died in Newtown and the Eureka moment just sprung into their minds? "Of course! I can use this tragedy to discredit liberals!" Someone thought this was a good idea, and I'm fully aware that many more will agree with not only the message, but the medium as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 23:59
|
|
|
Conservatives love it when teachers die. Also nice job choosing to use black women to represent lazy entitled liberals. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
Sean Archer posted:These people have no shame,no whatsoever: There is no occupation in the US which receives more undeserved bullshit than a public school teacher.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 00:28
|
|
|
Kiwi Bigtree posted:There is no occupation in the US which receives more undeserved bullshit than a public school teacher. I think "President of the United States (D)" is getting pretty close. But agreed. The Liberal Logic 101 series is one of the worst conservative meme I've seen, it's pure strawman and idiocy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 00:35
|
|
|
A Intimate Rimjobs posted:The only way this makes any sense is if the Detroit teachers ran away from a school shooting, leaving children to fend for themselves, in order to attend a political rally. I thought the same thing. Let's see. If the teachers are on strike there are no classes that day, therefore no classroom shootings so...yeah. You're right. I just.. drat. There's so much I want to write about this stupid thing but there's no real jumping off point. The entire equivalency is broken so those no way to build a thesis. Or a first sentence. Leofish posted:I want to know the timeline of how this image came to be. When was Publisher released? Start there. Leofish posted:I want to remove the brain of the person who thought this was a good idea and study it for the rest of time. It would take the rest of time just to find the brain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 00:47
|
|
|
Butt Soup Barnes posted:IIRC it was found that all the other networks had the same audio gap in their transcription for a while, so it's more likely that the transcribing service made the error and all of the networks pulled from the same source. I would be interested in any citation attesting to this. I've been looking and see nothing that refers to this in reference to anyone but Fox News.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:I would be interested in any citation attesting to this. I've been looking and see nothing that refers to this in reference to anyone but Fox News. My memory probably isn't considered a valid source, but I definitely remember this coming up when the transcripts were first posted and a lot of sites including CBS and I think ABC all had that missing gap. It wasn't just Fox News, it was whatever service these news organizations subscribed to that gave them the transcripts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:17
|
|
|
Incorrect Username posted:But agreed. The Liberal Logic 101 series is one of the worst conservative meme I've seen, it's pure strawman and idiocy. How come nobody's done a Liberal Logic 101 from a genuine leftist perspective. Aside from the fact it's stupid and a waste of time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:21
|
|
|
Ballz posted:My memory probably isn't considered a valid source, but I definitely remember this coming up when the transcripts were first posted and a lot of sites including CBS and I think ABC all had that missing gap. It wasn't just Fox News, it was whatever service these news organizations subscribed to that gave them the transcripts. 95% certain this isn't right, I remember Fox News transcripts being compared to other news sites as it was happening, and that is how the audio gap was found. Google searches for CBS and ABC Romney transcription gaps actually only find results for Fox News that apply. Pretty sure the gap was only in Fox News's transcript.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:21
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:95% certain this isn't right, I remember Fox News transcripts being compared to other news sites as it was happening, and that is how the audio gap was found. Google searches for CBS and ABC Romney transcription gaps actually only find results for Fox News that apply. Pretty sure the gap was only in Fox News's transcript. That's exactly how I remember it, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
Twisted Perspective posted:And the answer to too many guns is MORE GUNS!!! Well, for every 100 people in america, they own 90 guns grouped.  90% of america owns at least one gun. Also, I guess the email got through, they stopped interviewing kids. The media are vultures lately. Edit: I forgot to mention the graph represents legal ownership. Who knows how many unregistered there are out there. CatCannons fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:26
|
|
|
You're reading that wrong. For every 100 people, there are 90 guns. The reality is that a small part of the populace own a shitload of guns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:36
|
|
|
CatCannons posted:90% of america owns at least one gun. It's actually more like roughly 30% of America owns guns, and gun owners have 3 or so guns on average.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
Twisted Perspective posted:Are you suggesting that the glorification of violence in American culture does not have an effect on the mentally unstable? No. I can't fathom how you insinuated that from my post.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:39
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:95% certain this isn't right, I remember Fox News transcripts being compared to other news sites as it was happening, and that is how the audio gap was found. Google searches for CBS and ABC Romney transcription gaps actually only find results for Fox News that apply. Pretty sure the gap was only in Fox News's transcript. This is driving me nuts, we talked about it on this very forum when it first came out, and I remember a couple of non-Fox sites being linked showing the same gap in the transcript (for a while I think it was only the Washington Post that had a complete transcript). But I can't find ANY previous conversation about this. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:39
|
|
|
Ok, looks like the whole thing starts on page 64 here(probably need archives):Independence posted:Let the scrubbing commence: Doesn't get much play till page 68, on page 69 it looks like we get an explanation of what is causing confusion right now. Other news stations did have an [audio gap], but they still included Romney's answer on gun control. Fox News had the [audio gap] and cut out his answer on gun control. Both the New York Times and NPR didn't have an [audio gap] at all from the very beginning. While the [audio gap] gap was cross network the removal of Romney's answer was unique to fox news! Fuck You And Diebold fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:43
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:It's actually more like roughly 30% of America owns guns, and gun owners have 3 or so guns on average. Yeah, I worded it wrong, but still it is a lot of guns. Fox news has been kind of weak on this story. They must realize their base is shrinking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:44
|
|
|
Happy_Misanthrope posted:No. I can't fathom how you insinuated that from my post. Then I'm happy to apologise. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:51
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:Doesn't get much play till page 68, on page 69 it looks like we get an explanation of what is causing confusion right now. Other news stations did have an [audio gap], but they still included Romney's answer on gun control. Fox News had the [audio gap] and cut out his answer on gun control. Both the New York Times and NPR didn't have an [audio gap] at all from, the very beginning. While the [audio gap] gap was cross network the removal of Romney's answer was unique to fox news! Ah there it is. Thanks for finding/clarifying what happened.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
Sean Archer posted:These people have no shame,no whatsoever: White lady: hero Black ladies: zeroes
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 02:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:12 |
|
|
Sean Archer posted:These people have no shame,no whatsoever: "Children were murdered by a crazed gunman therefore teacher's unions are bad" is more like something that should be on a "conservative logic" site. Hell, literally everything on that site is a strawman attack that shows they really don't understand liberals at all. Spacedad fucked around with this message at 06:22 on Dec 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 06:14
|
|
