No kidding!!

[chaos]

[Necrosis]

Is that like when you and Lurkingforboys follow each other around and dock your weenies together to talk about Trump?

meltdown.

[LurkerNoMore]

There you go.

I am not sure what you mean by this.  Because it agrees with the statement I made.

[LurkerNoMore]

Is that like when you and Lurkingforboys follow each other around and dock your weenies together to talk about Trump?

Dear GetBig,
 
Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay,

Signed
GAYoas.

[chaos]

Dear GetBig,
 
Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS,

Signed
LurkingforBOYS

Fixed, Faggotforboys.

[LurkerNoMore]

Fixed, Faggotforboys.

TDS is MAGA for FACTS.

Your constant gayness is noted again.  You sound like someone that has been molested by numerous relatives and has a favorite.  Creepy ass gay vibes you give off.

[Dos Equis]

Again, are you dumb? the questionairre is clearly indicated in the paper. Are you unable to do a search? what do you think they just made shit up? I realize that's the world you live in but it's not how intelligent folks operate

I asked the question about someone's opinion, not a validated questionairre used to conduct political research as it relates to a paper.

What a dumb comparison, it's apples to oranges.

Back to the drawing board.

I say this with all sincerity:  you really have a problem engaging in discussions that involve logic and analytical thinking.  I always feel like I'm talking to a high school kid with you.  Especially your writing, which is atrocious. 

In any event, you posted a link that references a study that is based on conservative views.  The story you linked does not contain the actual questionnaire, nor does it define conservative views.  I was simply asking what definition of "conservative views" was used.  I get that you don't understand why this question is important, but for anyone else reading, the reason I asked the question is that the sample size is very small, it involves people in a foreign country, and we don't know whether those "conservative views" are the same views held by Americans.  Maybe they are, maybe they are not.  But it's a foundational question.

[chaos]

I say this with all sincerity:  you really have a problem engaging in discussions that involve logic and analytical thinking.  I always feel like I'm talking to a high school kid with you.  Especially your writing, which is atrocious. 

You're like a special ed teacher, you keep trying but you know it's going nowhere.

[Necrosis]

I say this with all sincerity:  you really have a problem engaging in discussions that involve logic and analytical thinking.  I always feel like I'm talking to a high school kid with you.  Especially your writing, which is atrocious. 

In any event, you posted a link that references a study that is based on conservative views.  The story you linked does not contain the actual questionnaire, nor does it define conservative views.  I was simply asking what definition of "conservative views" was used.  I get that you don't understand why this question is important, but for anyone else reading, the reason I asked the question is that the sample size is very small, it involves people in a foreign country, and we don't know whether those "conservative views" are the same views held by Americans.  Maybe they are, maybe they are not.  But it's a foundational question.

Lol. I feel like I am talking to someone about 3 standard deviations away from myself, which I reckon is about accurate. son, you think with your personal attacks and slander I am going to engage sincerely with you and answer your questions reasonably? lol.

I get why the question is important. I have already given you the means to investigate it yourself. It's an extremely weak criticism that is meritless. I indicated why.

Since you clearly can't piece it together let someone who knows more stuff help

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000893#bb0345



You can go to the methods and see what tests they used- you will then have to read up on the tests. However, it has been used quite often and mirrors numerous other tests, questionairres etc. There is a brief description there but thats not the point of the test. In the discussion there is more information.

It's simply a fact, it's required to understand complexity. I am not saying this shit because I want it to be true, it's simply true. There are negatives that come with that like emotional lability etc. It doesn't mean anyone conservative is stupid. I would also suggest that the smartest folks are neither left or right and absolutely do not ossify into political categories but keep a dynamic, iterative flow wrt positions never being held down yet never not being moored.

I doubt you understand what I am saying as your life is the opposite. Not that thats a bad thing.

[Necrosis]

You're like a special ed teacher, you keep trying but you know it's going nowhere.

Is he? is that how you see it?

how is your angular cheilitis from the beetus you got when you have his dick in your mouth?

serious question

[chaos]

Is he? is that how you see it?

how is your angular cheilitis from the beetus you got when you have his dick in your mouth?

serious question

Heads up, I see you quoted chaos, surely you meant to quote Lurkingforboys. I expect you will fix the error at the earliest practicable juncture. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

[Dos Equis]

Lol. I feel like I am talking to someone about 3 standard deviations away from myself, which I reckon is about accurate. son, you think with your personal attacks and slander I am going to engage sincerely with you and answer your questions reasonably? lol.

I get why the question is important. I have already given you the means to investigate it yourself. It's an extremely weak criticism that is meritless. I indicated why.

Since you clearly can't piece it together let someone who knows more stuff help

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000893#bb0345



You can go to the methods and see what tests they used- you will then have to read up on the tests. However, it has been used quite often and mirrors numerous other tests, questionairres etc. There is a brief description there but thats not the point of the test. In the discussion there is more information.

It's simply a fact, it's required to understand complexity. I am not saying this shit because I want it to be true, it's simply true. There are negatives that come with that like emotional lability etc. It doesn't mean anyone conservative is stupid. I would also suggest that the smartest folks are neither left or right and absolutely do not ossify into political categories but keep a dynamic, iterative flow wrt positions never being held down yet never not being moored.

I doubt you understand what I am saying as your life is the opposite. Not that thats a bad thing.

I don't take you seriously.  You're not smart enough.  You're not funny enough.  You're just an internet troll, who also happens to be a simpleton. 

But I digress . . .  Thank you for providing the link.  I do not see the questionnaire in the link.  Where is the questionnaire?  You said "the questionairre [sic] is clearly indicated in the paper."  No it isn't.  At least I don't see it.  It is referenced in the link you just provided, but I don't see the actual questionnaire. 

It does have this excerpt, which again is too vague to know the precise conservative views used as part of the study's foundation, and whether those views are parallel to American conservative views:

For example, the Political Ideologies Questionnaire (POLID; Ulrich, 2021; see below) used in this study consists of four scales: economic libertarianism, conservatism, socialism, and liberalism. Economic libertarianism emphasizes individual and market freedom, viewing merit-based inequalities as justified (see also e.g., Duckitt, 2001). Conservatism is rooted in societal cohesion through shared culture and tradition, advocating for stability and security (see also e.g., Jost et al., 2003). Socialism focuses on reducing inequalities by addressing exploitation of disadvantaged groups, promoting equality of outcome (see also e.g., Lipset, 1981). Liberalism is characterized by valuing individual autonomy and freedom (see also e.g., Jost et al., 2009). Importantly, the multi-dimensional political orientations of different conceptions, as exemplified in POLID (Ulrich, 2021), do not necessarily align closely (neither conceptually nor empirically) with the singular left-right dimension. Sociocultural and economical conservative orientations are typically associated with the right pole, while sociocultural and economical liberal orientations align with the left pole (Jedinger & Burger, 2022). In conclusion, the single-dimensional conception and the multi-dimensional conceptions differ substantially concerning the theoretical approach for political orientations. Depending on the survey setting or research question, researchers can use the one or the other conception, or a combination of both.

But I can see that you cannot keep up.  Not surprised.  It's really funny how you try to sound smart, but end up exposing yourself.  Dumbest genius ever.   

[LurkerNoMore]

Heads up, I see you quoted chaos, surely you meant to quote Lurkingforboys. I expect you will fix the error at the earliest practicable juncture. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

No, pretty sure he meant you just from the unchecked gayness alone.  No one else on this board gives off queer vibes like you do GAYoas.

[AbrahamG]

Lol. I feel like I am talking to someone about 3 standard deviations away from myself, which I reckon is about accurate. son, you think with your personal attacks and slander I am going to engage sincerely with you and answer your questions reasonably? lol.

I get why the question is important. I have already given you the means to investigate it yourself. It's an extremely weak criticism that is meritless. I indicated why.

Since you clearly can't piece it together let someone who knows more stuff help

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000893#bb0345



You can go to the methods and see what tests they used- you will then have to read up on the tests. However, it has been used quite often and mirrors numerous other tests, questionairres etc. There is a brief description there but thats not the point of the test. In the discussion there is more information.

It's simply a fact, it's required to understand complexity. I am not saying this shit because I want it to be true, it's simply true. There are negatives that come with that like emotional lability etc. It doesn't mean anyone conservative is stupid. I would also suggest that the smartest folks are neither left or right and absolutely do not ossify into political categories but keep a dynamic, iterative flow wrt positions never being held down yet never not being moored.

I doubt you understand what I am saying as your life is the opposite. Not that thats a bad thing.

Shit dude.  I don't even think Lurker owns Chaos that badly.